Speaker 1: Here's your Channel nine. First one to weather orcast. We
Speaker 1: got a partly cloudy day, rising humidity is what they're saying,
Speaker 1: and a high at eighty seven cloud and a slight
Speaker 1: chance rain every night down is sixty nine. Got a
Speaker 1: good chance of rain tomorrow, low and maybe some storms
Speaker 1: eighty two. The high tomorrow, scattered showers overnight with cloudy
Speaker 1: skis at a low of sixty eight, and then more
Speaker 1: showers and storms are expected on Friday. Friday's high seventy eight.
Speaker 1: It's seventy four right now. It's hyper traffic from the.
Speaker 2: UCF Traffic Center. Amillians of Americans are living with Alzheimer's
Speaker 2: or other dementias. Find answers from leading brain help experts
Speaker 2: and do you see help? Learn more at U seehelp
Speaker 2: dot com. Eastbound two to seventy five, crews continue to
Speaker 2: work with an accident. Before you get to forty two,
Speaker 2: they are over on the right hand side. Traffic is backing.
Speaker 2: I'm close to seven forty seven southbound seventy fives slows
Speaker 2: through Lachmann northbounds running heavy from Buttermilk into town. Chuck
Speaker 2: Ingram on fifty five kars station.
Speaker 1: Hey thirty here fifty five KR City Talk Station and
Speaker 1: not Happy Wednesday Invitational listener Lunch today Mattree Brewery, Summit
Speaker 1: Park location. Looking forward to that. Love the fellowship at
Speaker 1: listener lunch and if you haven't been to one, maybe
Speaker 1: come up to the show up today and welcoming back
Speaker 1: to the fifty five KRC Morning Show. One of the
Speaker 1: more prominent figures behind the signature drive to save Hyde
Speaker 1: Park Square, John Zinser, Welcome back to the fifty five
Speaker 1: KRC Morning Show and a big congratulations see you and
Speaker 1: all the signature gatherers for really hitting a home run
Speaker 1: and getting way more than was needed to get on
Speaker 1: the ballot this November.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Brian, and I'm no more significant than all
Speaker 3: three hundred for the people who are out there more
Speaker 3: than three hundred collecting signatures. I really appreciate it having
Speaker 3: us back.
Speaker 1: And as you mentioned last time, you were on folks
Speaker 1: from all kinds of neighborhoods throughout the city of Cincinnati.
Speaker 1: We're backing this because you know, as I mentioned before,
Speaker 1: I think it's there. But for the grace of God,
Speaker 1: go iy. It happened to bond Hill, it happened to
Speaker 1: Hyde Park. Since the city Council, you know, modifying the
Speaker 1: zoning rules to help well connected developers do what they
Speaker 1: want in the face of what their own constituents wanted.
Speaker 1: I mean, I just I get so irked by this
Speaker 1: John that they absolutely flat out refused to listen to
Speaker 1: the throngs that showed up in opposition to this hotel
Speaker 1: and apartment and underground parking. I mean, it's described as
Speaker 1: a boutique hotel. It's not like that's going to solve
Speaker 1: the homeless problem or the housing shorts in the city
Speaker 1: of Cincinnati. Plus, I mean when you look at the
Speaker 1: designs and the drawing of it, yes, it is about
Speaker 1: the size in many cases. Inspite what council Member Mika
Speaker 1: Owens said.
Speaker 3: About it, I'm with you. We're really proud of the
Speaker 3: twenty two different neighborhoods that were represented in the among
Speaker 3: the collectors, the circulators of petitions, and we had signatures
Speaker 3: from all over the city. And you're word that may
Speaker 3: be a really good one, right there is. People are irked,
Speaker 3: people would like to be heard. We gave City Council
Speaker 3: chance after chance after chance, starting in January at the
Speaker 3: Planning Commission and Staff meeting, more than seven hundred emails,
Speaker 3: sixty people speaking against, four people speaking for That was
Speaker 3: a really good chance where we could have just said,
Speaker 3: you know what, this isn't the right way to go,
Speaker 3: let's do something else. They didn't. Here's the really good
Speaker 3: news today though, we are giving City Council yet another chance.
Speaker 3: They have a wonderful second opportunity today to begin the process.
Speaker 3: They could excuse me, repeal the decision from April twenty third,
Speaker 3: and everything could get started. We want the smart development.
Speaker 3: We're open to the developer engaging with us and sticking
Speaker 3: to the zoning, and that could happen. All City Council
Speaker 3: has to do is repeal their decision. They have that
Speaker 3: opportunity now, and if they don't, and I have to say,
Speaker 3: I really wonder I don't have a crystal ball. I'm
Speaker 3: not going to try to predict what city Council would do.
Speaker 3: We are ready and waiting to go into a ballot drive.
Speaker 3: I feel very comfortable that we can motivate the same
Speaker 3: kind of response we got for the signatures, to turn
Speaker 3: out voters and have people say you have to listen
Speaker 3: to the neighborhoods. You have to listen to the people.
Speaker 3: You can't just listen to the developers.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and this concept really, this voter initiative, the citizen
Speaker 1: initiative to have control over their lives. I think it
Speaker 1: just it transcends development. I mean, you're taking a stand
Speaker 1: against the council who won't listen. I don't care what
Speaker 1: issue it is. I mean there was no question, go ahead.
Speaker 3: Yeah, you and I touched on this once before. I
Speaker 3: believe in a twenty twenty four Plan on Engagement for
Speaker 3: the City, ten glossy pages, beautifully produced, the words neighborhood
Speaker 3: council and community council don't appear once. This administration and
Speaker 3: this iteration of city council is very clear that they
Speaker 3: know what we need and they don't need to hear
Speaker 3: from us. Yeah, they really want our vote, they really
Speaker 3: don't want our voice. Is how it feels. And that's
Speaker 3: what this is really about. And that's why I have
Speaker 3: such comfort about November. If it comes to that again,
Speaker 3: I think city councils should do the right thing and
Speaker 3: repeal this right now. But if they don't, I think
Speaker 3: citizens are going to show up. And if I ask
Speaker 3: you the question, hey, do you want to say in
Speaker 3: what goes on in your neighborhood or do you want
Speaker 3: a developer to make a little bit more money. I
Speaker 3: think I'll get the right answer to that most times.
Speaker 1: Joh with our question. And you know what, this is
Speaker 1: kind of like it's supposed to be. And I think
Speaker 1: council and the mayor of lost the concept of representative democracy.
Speaker 1: The citizens of the city of Cincinnati didn't elect this
Speaker 1: group to be dictators and control exclusively the direction of
Speaker 1: the city. They're there to represent the will of the citizenry,
Speaker 1: which differs from neighborhood to neighborhood. That's what irked me
Speaker 1: about the connected communities thing. They shoved down everythy so
Speaker 1: they didn't listen to any local communities about that. Embrace
Speaker 1: the concept. Others outright wanted to reject it, but they
Speaker 1: all wanted control locally. And all the communities are different
Speaker 1: in many respects. I mean the Hyde Park is a
Speaker 1: great illustration of that. You're not the same as Bond Hill.
Speaker 1: You guys have different needs and different ones and different
Speaker 1: desires by the citizens. But again it's the citizen who
Speaker 1: should control. Conceptually, the direction of the city goes well, and.
Speaker 3: It's specifically neighborhood by neighborhood as you're saying, we have
Speaker 3: fifty two fantastic neighborhoods across the city, and many of
Speaker 3: them were represented in this effort, from Mount Washington all
Speaker 3: the way to Salor Park. They showed up because they
Speaker 3: agree with what you're saying. Of we should get a say,
Speaker 3: and it's not just being you know, don't. I don't
Speaker 3: want to split a hair here. I know City Council listened,
Speaker 3: but I know we weren't heard. And I've seen plenty
Speaker 3: of op eds and plenty of Reddit pieces that say, oh,
Speaker 3: they just don't like the answer. Oh, Hyde Park, it's
Speaker 3: just another nimby thing. This is anything but not in
Speaker 3: my backyard. This is not in our city. We want
Speaker 3: a representative government that not only listens or shows up
Speaker 3: and sits in the room while we're talking, but communicates
Speaker 3: and engages. And that's what we're asking from the developer
Speaker 3: as well. City Hall and the developer, in my opinion,
Speaker 3: have engaged in this in a very similar manner. They
Speaker 3: want to do what they want to do. They have
Speaker 3: not engaged in real dialogue. We certainly sat down with
Speaker 3: many different council members at different times. Some of them
Speaker 3: took the time to come out to the square, etc.
Speaker 3: But we were not heard. The way to do this
Speaker 3: was to stop it and say no, we have we're
Speaker 3: not giving the PD, We're not giving planned development just
Speaker 3: because somebody asks for it, and we really want to
Speaker 3: see that change. And again, city Council has the opportunity.
Speaker 3: We don't have to wait until November to move forward
Speaker 3: with this development. We are good for smart development and
Speaker 3: the zoning is fine. The local zoning could work. We
Speaker 3: have had other developers say I could make money within
Speaker 3: the local zoning. Sure they could make more money. Why
Speaker 3: don't we just let them build one hundred stories and
Speaker 3: see how much money they could make off of that.
Speaker 3: So our goal right now, I would encourage city Council
Speaker 3: to hear us do the repeal, do the right thing.
Speaker 3: That would help the developer to get started on the process.
Speaker 3: It would help the citizens to both feel heard and
Speaker 3: know that the current zoning is being respected and that
Speaker 3: there'll be some engagement from day one. We've only asked
Speaker 3: for one thing, that zoning be respected and we engage
Speaker 3: with the developer in the process. That's all we've asked for.
Speaker 3: And eighteen four hundred plus people said, yeah, we should
Speaker 3: even vote on that rather than this just going through.
Speaker 1: Amen to that. Well, I think illustrative of the attitude
Speaker 1: of council when I asked, I believe about repealing it,
Speaker 1: because the various council members were asked about that, why
Speaker 1: just throw in the t O and just repeal the
Speaker 1: variance of the zoning. Council member Mika Owens quoted as
Speaker 1: saying the following, we are leaving all options open. There's
Speaker 1: where the sailing part comes in. During tough decisions, I
Speaker 1: have centered myself in my values. The high park development
Speaker 1: required me to critically to do it critically centering values
Speaker 1: around accessible housing for all, support for small businesses, and
Speaker 1: more spaces for the people of our city to gather
Speaker 1: in community. Whatever the hell that's supposed to mean. This
Speaker 1: referendum is not about the height. This referendum is on
Speaker 1: development as a whole. I will always to stand behind
Speaker 1: projects that share my values for collective and collaborative growth
Speaker 1: for the people of the city of Cincinnati. I mean,
Speaker 1: it's all about what she wants.
Speaker 3: Apparently I hear those two minds in there. That last
Speaker 3: line about collective and collaborative. There was nothing collective or
Speaker 3: collaborative about this process either. The developer or city council.
Speaker 3: The other piece that's in there. There's nothing in here
Speaker 3: about housing that actually is going to work for the community,
Speaker 3: that what we actually need in this city. This is
Speaker 3: a this is a money making, profit driven piece for
Speaker 3: the developer, and that is fine. I want developers to
Speaker 3: make a good, solid profit. That makes great sense, but
Speaker 3: it shouldn't be quoaked in, oh, we're getting city housing.
Speaker 3: Now you're getting a hotel, and you're getting stuff that's
Speaker 3: going to be beyond the price range of the vast
Speaker 3: majority of citizens of this city. That's not answering the
Speaker 3: issue of the moment.
Speaker 1: It isn't well. Her values for collective and collaborative growth
Speaker 1: apparently don't mean collaborating collaborating with the citizen ry. Johnson's
Speaker 1: or is you pointed out?
Speaker 3: Those are two bad choices of words and those pieces.
Speaker 3: Have you ever been to Hyde Park Square, for say,
Speaker 3: the Farmer's Market on Sunday or even just a regular
Speaker 3: summer weeknight. There are people in the square all the time.
Speaker 3: It is one of the most livable community places in
Speaker 3: this city, and it's a real treasure. And this would
Speaker 3: quite simply change that forever. It would be a complete
Speaker 3: change in how people could live there. We would actually
Speaker 3: lose what I think she's saying. She's very much for
Speaker 3: of places where people can gather.
Speaker 1: Well, let's hope they do the right thing. Actually, I
Speaker 1: believe repealing the zoning variants and going back to the
Speaker 1: square one will probably help them in their re election
Speaker 1: efforts in November. But let them sink or swim on
Speaker 1: the weight of their own decision making.
Speaker 3: I'm not a political expert, but I can't imagine any
Speaker 3: of their political directors are going, oh, yeah, this is
Speaker 3: a great issue for us. For the seven people who
Speaker 3: voted the way they did. I don't think they want
Speaker 3: to be going looking for getting re elected with us
Speaker 3: walking around behind them saying you voted the wrong way
Speaker 3: on this, and that all those people from all those
Speaker 3: neighborhoods with them. I really hope they will help us,
Speaker 3: help the developer and help themselves by doing the right
Speaker 3: thing and.
Speaker 1: Repealing Well, it's a good campaign for Corey Bowman. I
Speaker 1: don't care how you feel one way or another about
Speaker 1: Corey Bowman, but he has at least that issue to
Speaker 1: run on the current circumstances. John's Inzer, I'm really impressed
Speaker 1: by you and the team and the hard work that
Speaker 1: you put into this, making a stand for the right
Speaker 1: thing and standing up to a councilor who obviously is
Speaker 1: not listening. This is a true showing of representative democracy
Speaker 1: and action and the people wanting the representatives to do
Speaker 1: what they want and go in the direction they want.
Speaker 1: So great illustration of what can be done when you
Speaker 1: put some effort behind it. John, keep up the great work,
Speaker 1: and let's hope they repeal it, but if not, we're
Speaker 1: off with the polls in November.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Brian. It is a great team and we
Speaker 3: really appreciate your support.
Speaker 1: I'm happy to be here to let people know about
Speaker 1: it and talk about it, because again you can tell
Speaker 1: by my agitated voice that it really really irked me
Speaker 1: to know end John, good luck. We'll talk again before November.
Speaker 1: If they don't repeal it, I'm certain of that.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Brian.
Speaker 1: Thank you eight forty two fifty five krs the talk
Speaker 1: station don't go away.
Speaker 3: I happy right back for your information.