PLEASE READ!!!

***** ALL users will have to request a password reset BEFORE you will be able to log into the forum. See the thread in the forum issues section for further instructions. If you have issues with this, email us at admin@urbanohio.com. *****

Author Topic: Cincinnati: Mayor John Cranley  (Read 4775 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline GCrites80s

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 8000
  • 1492 or 4,192?
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #90 on: December 13, 2012, 10:06:30 AM »
Replace Obama with "streetcar" here:


Offline Quimbob

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 3871
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #91 on: December 14, 2012, 03:44:09 PM »
Cranley's budget numbers analysed by City Bleat

"So how viable are Cranley’s ideas? In a memo, Dohoney’s office responded."

http://www.citybeat.com/cincinnati/blog-4264-fact_check_cranleys_very_easy_budget_plan.html

Offline subocincy

  • Rhodes Tower 629'
  • ***
  • Posts: 597
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #92 on: December 14, 2012, 04:44:04 PM »
^ Wasn't there a considerable crime drop across the country in the 90s? I am not sure Qualls can own that considering she was a weak mayor. On the other hand, if crime shot up during her tenure, it would probably get thrown in her face - so I suppose she might as well take credit.
Just want to know why you consider Qualls a weak mayor--wasn't she one of the most popular and progressive Cincinnati mayors of recent times?   :? 

Offline Quimbob

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 3871
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #93 on: December 14, 2012, 04:52:31 PM »
^the way she achieved mayorhship made her a "weak mayor". That is - she was not elected directly & didn't have the powers a mayor has now in Cincinnati.

Offline JohnClevesSymmes

  • One SeaGate 411'
  • **
  • Posts: 438
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #94 on: December 14, 2012, 06:06:29 PM »
^the way she achieved mayorhship made her a "weak mayor". That is - she was not elected directly & didn't have the powers a mayor has now in Cincinnati.

Correct, that is what I meant. We had a "weak mayor system" where the position was largely ceremonial.

Offline natininja

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 5364
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #95 on: December 14, 2012, 06:18:27 PM »
LOL, stop hating on Qualls!

Offline CincyGuy45202

  • Key Tower 947'
  • ****
  • Posts: 723
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #96 on: December 16, 2012, 07:53:12 AM »
She was definitely very popular. But her position was less strong than the one shell be running for now.

Offline JohnClevesSymmes

  • One SeaGate 411'
  • **
  • Posts: 438
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #97 on: December 16, 2012, 08:31:00 AM »
I remember her being popular but I am a bit too young to remember what made her so popular (aside from the things that make her popular now). Does anyone recall specific moments or aspects of her agenda that contributed to her popularity at the time? She first ran for council in 1987 and placed 14th. In 1989 she placed 10th and in 1991 she made it on coming in 8th. In 1993 she was number 1 which made her mayor. Is that rise entirely due to her amazing campaigning ability and general like-ability, or was she front and center on some issues that I can't remember?

Offline Quimbob

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 3871
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #98 on: December 16, 2012, 06:26:07 PM »
Her smackdowns on Tom Luken (councilmember) were entertaining.
Looks like the Dean paid his bills.

Offline Quimbob

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 3871
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #99 on: December 17, 2012, 06:51:50 PM »
John "Class" Cranley exploits Connecticut tragedy for his mayoral campaign
http://cincinnati.com/blogs/politics/2012/12/17/cranley-keep-guns-away-from-the-mentally-ill/
Nate Livingston calls him out.....

Offline ryanlammi

  • Global Moderator
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4606
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #100 on: December 17, 2012, 07:15:35 PM »
Does anyone on this board support Cranley? I haven't heard one positive about him.

Offline jmecklenborg

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 13557
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #101 on: December 17, 2012, 07:40:02 PM »
He's not a good dude.  He went to my high school and was the golden boy.  The administration loved him.  He's one of those guys. 

Offline CincyGuy45202

  • Key Tower 947'
  • ****
  • Posts: 723
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #102 on: December 18, 2012, 10:22:44 PM »
I am not a fan. Have had to deal with him on random occasions for work, my company uses his firm, I don't really trust him. There's always something very insincere about him.

Offline dmerkow

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 3320
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #103 on: January 02, 2013, 07:27:04 PM »
He caused the 2001 riots.

Offline neilworms

  • One World Trade Center 1,776'
  • ****
  • Posts: 1416
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #104 on: January 03, 2013, 04:46:10 PM »
Quote
I remember her being popular but I am a bit too young to remember what made her so popular (aside from the things that make her popular now). Does anyone recall specific moments or aspects of her agenda that contributed to her popularity at the time? She first ran for council in 1987 and placed 14th. In 1989 she placed 10th and in 1991 she made it on coming in 8th. In 1993 she was number 1 which made her mayor. Is that rise entirely due to her amazing campaigning ability and general like-ability, or was she front and center on some issues that I can't remember?

Earliest I heard of her, it was in regards to work she did in Northside to make it the community it is today.  Though this is just vague memories and rumor, can anyone confirm that?

Offline jmecklenborg

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 13557
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #105 on: January 03, 2013, 10:55:29 PM »
I just looked at Cranley's facebook profile for the first time.  Tons of photos of him in the company of country club-type situations.  Also his wife is quite obviously from a very wealthy family as well.  What's really disturbing about the guy is the way he advertises his "concern" for human rights, etc., so disingenuously. 

Offline Ram23

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 5314
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #106 on: January 04, 2013, 07:04:37 AM »
^ He really is a caricature of the term “bleeding heart liberal elite.”

Offline FakeCinEnquirer

  • Burj Khalifa 2,722'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1303
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #107 on: January 04, 2013, 07:08:38 AM »
His only campaign issue is "I'm anti-streetcar".  He's literally basing his entire campaign on one issue and hoping 700wlw/Smitherman/Enquirer go to bat for him

Offline Quimbob

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 3871
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #108 on: January 04, 2013, 07:18:30 AM »
Quote
I remember her being popular but I am a bit too young to remember what made her so popular (aside from the things that make her popular now). Does anyone recall specific moments or aspects of her agenda that contributed to her popularity at the time? She first ran for council in 1987 and placed 14th. In 1989 she placed 10th and in 1991 she made it on coming in 8th. In 1993 she was number 1 which made her mayor. Is that rise entirely due to her amazing campaigning ability and general like-ability, or was she front and center on some issues that I can't remember?

Earliest I heard of her, it was in regards to work she did in Northside to make it the community it is today.  Though this is just vague memories and rumor, can anyone confirm that?
Not sure of the timeline anymore. The neighborhood got 'facelift' funding from the city. The north end of the business district got cleaned up but the second half of the funding didn't come through so the southern half kept limping along.
There was the decades long battle to stop the "Colerain Connector"
I forget if she was involved in those issues in Northside.
She started an environmental organization. I forget the name.

Offline CincyCapell

  • One SeaGate 411'
  • **
  • Posts: 306
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #109 on: January 04, 2013, 08:40:47 AM »
Biased Barry Horstman and his magical hair piece strikes again. He is the Cincinnati's version of Tokyo Rose, Lord Haw Haw and Axis Sally all rolled into one. Cranley might as well put Horstman and the rest of the Enquirer's so-called "journalists" on his campaign payroll or employ them as his PR agents, because that's what they essentially are. Cranley gets nothing but positive PR from the Enquirer and has never once been asked a tough question by the Enquirer, such as how he plans to serve as Mayor when he was forced to resign from City Council after the Ohio Ethics Commission ruled that his conflicts of interests as a developer would prevent him from working in City Government. Cranley is still a developer and still has those same conflicts of interest:

http://www.naacpcincinnati.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=421&Itemid=42

Cranley's constant criticism of spending on the streetcar makes him the biggest hypocrite in Cincinnati. John Cranley's Incline Village has been the recipient of millions of City Taxpayer funds, including $3.3 million from the Neighborhood Stabilization Program 2, $1.8 million from the Cincinnati Community Reinvestment Area LEED tax exception, as well as $1.7 million City HOME loan, among other City funds. Cranley's development is also directly benefiting from the $60+ Million rebuilding of the Waldvogel Viaduct, which City Taxpayers are funding. At his law firm, attorney/lobbyist John Cranley orchestrated the $35 Million renovation of the Vernon Manor in a project that used TIF and City bond financing at the People of Cincinnati's expense.

John Cranley's pet projects dwarf the amount that will be spent on the streetcar, and now he wants to cry about the City spending on a project that was approved by the voters TWICE, when none of the projects that he's benefiting from ever got put to a vote? John Cranley is a rank hypocrite.
« Last Edit: January 04, 2013, 08:43:08 AM by CincyCapell »

Offline CincyCapell

  • One SeaGate 411'
  • **
  • Posts: 306
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #110 on: January 04, 2013, 08:51:17 AM »
Furthermore, Cranley's Incline Village development, which has cost City Taxpayers millions of dollars, is a boondoggle in the truest sense. The one business to open there, the Bayou Fish House, has already gone bust:

http://westside.fox19.com/news/restaurants/95366-bayou-fish-house-closed-price-hill

The Incline Public House was to have opened in Autumn 2012, and so far there's no sign that this establishment will open its doors anytime soon:

Incline Public House to open in Price Hill by October

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/newintown/2012/07/13/incline-public-house-to-open-in-price-hill-by-october/

John Cranley is long on promises and short on delivery.

Offline subocincy

  • Rhodes Tower 629'
  • ***
  • Posts: 597
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #111 on: January 13, 2013, 05:46:42 AM »
This morning, the Enquirer reached a new low with its biased fluff-piece on Cranley--I really didn't know whether to laugh, cry, or gag.

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20130112/EDIT03/301120123/IN-DEPTH-John-Cranley-feisty-faithful

(The fact that this trash is being featured in the large and popular Sunday paper is also disturbing.)

Offline Neville

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1985
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #112 on: January 13, 2013, 09:53:08 AM »
Nice fluff piece indeed. And while tough questions are mentioned (like where all the money would come from for his "Marshall Plan") they aren't directly stated/asked. For example - why does the Enquirer not mention the city's homicide rate is at (at least) a 10-year low?

Offline Quimbob

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 3871
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #113 on: January 13, 2013, 05:22:00 PM »
looks like the only positive comments are from a guy on Cranley's payroll.

Offline GCrites80s

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 8000
  • 1492 or 4,192?
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #114 on: January 14, 2013, 10:18:54 AM »
Nice fluff piece indeed. And while tough questions are mentioned (like where all the money would come from for his "Marshall Plan") they aren't directly stated/asked. For example - why does the Enquirer not mention the city's homicide rate is at (at least) a 10-year low?

Hiding current information that doesn't support their hypotheses is a popular trick these days.

Offline FakeCinEnquirer

  • Burj Khalifa 2,722'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1303
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #115 on: January 15, 2013, 09:43:37 AM »
Carl Weiser ‏@cweiser
“@ryan_mcgoron: @janeprendergast @cweiser is a Republican going to run for mayor?”///Possibly @greghartmann, per reporter @SharonCoolidge

Should Hartmann run, I'd have to think he takes a lot of Cranley's support(and takes his media endorsement from Enquirer and 700wlw)

Offline jmecklenborg

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 13557
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #116 on: January 15, 2013, 09:57:51 AM »
The problem with Cranley is for all his weaseling he picked the completely wrong strategy for his political career.  He decided to be a Luken in a city and especially a country that is moving rapidly away from that.  By being so spectacularly old-fashioned he painted himself into a corner and I really don't see obvious places for him to go except perhaps county commissioner. 

Fact is the only thing he has going for him is that he knows how to use the media to promote himself.  But when people meet him in person he's an exceptionally strange and off-putting person.  He's the kind of guy who you know will tirelessly work to be "the boss" and if he's your boss you know he'd delight in firing you.  People don't invite such people into their homes. 

This is the complete opposite of Roxanne Qualls, who the media doesn't like, but who got to where she is by getting to know individuals and organizations.   

Offline natininja

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 5364
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #117 on: January 17, 2013, 12:49:25 PM »
Quote
The project also sought to "stand the test of time" through the use of quality materials and quality designs – and by honoring the neighborhood's architectural history.

"These are people who understand what it is to build a great urban environment," said Vice Mayor Roxanne Qualls. "This is a model that, quite frankly, I hope we can replicate in other neighborhoods."
http://www.building-cincinnati.com/2013/01/second-phase-of-stetson-square-breaks.html

This is exactly what bothers me about both Qualls and Mallory. They are willing to go to bat for developers who want to build crap. Stetson Square is not the worst of new construction in the city. Not even the worst of new construction in Corryville. But it's not something I want to see replicated anywhere, and the praise is completely unnecessary, unwarranted, and untrue.

4 to 8 years of Qualls will mean 4 to 8 years of the status quo, when it comes to demolitions and ugly/boring infill.
« Last Edit: January 17, 2013, 12:49:54 PM by natininja »

Offline Quimbob

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 3871
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #118 on: January 17, 2013, 01:36:11 PM »
^Actually Qualls fights against boring infill type stuff but it's private investment (for the most part) and she is not, as some people paint her out to be, an overbearing commie tyrant. She's fairly serious about personal property rights.
I could say build your own but I understand few people can - it takes $$$$$.
Qualls understands that.
I'm sure Cranley & Hartman will have much grander visions.

Offline natininja

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 5364
Re: Mayor John Cranley
« Reply #119 on: January 17, 2013, 03:00:27 PM »
At the very least she doesn't need to hype it up as something it's not.