FakeCinEnquirer Posted August 6, 2014 Share Posted August 6, 2014 And since nobody has mentioned this so far, this is all Cranley's fault Lol. Ironically, Greg Hartmann and Chris Monzel have united Chris Seelbach and John Cranley And before anyone else says it, I blame the streetcar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram23 Posted August 6, 2014 Share Posted August 6, 2014 I would go in the opposite direction. We should have a county-wide (or multi-county) Arts & Culture tax that supports all of these organizations. Elected leaders should not be arbitrarily deciding which institutions are worthy of our dollars. If we did it right, we could even have a portion of the tax dedicated to capital expenditures and the rest going to operating expenses, replacing the existing property tax levies that go to the Zoo and Union Terminal. So you want to replace the property tax levies with a regressive sales tax? The problem is that cultural assets in general provide a benefit to the entire region. Making property owners in Hamilton County carry the entire burden is not ideal. A sales tax at least spreads around the burden of funding to people who live throughout the region. Ideally, there would be a metro-area property tax but the people in butler county who believe their world would exist without Cincinnati carrying most of the region's burdens would never go for such a thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy_James Posted August 6, 2014 Share Posted August 6, 2014 I would go in the opposite direction. We should have a county-wide (or multi-county) Arts & Culture tax that supports all of these organizations. Elected leaders should not be arbitrarily deciding which institutions are worthy of our dollars. If we did it right, we could even have a portion of the tax dedicated to capital expenditures and the rest going to operating expenses, replacing the existing property tax levies that go to the Zoo and Union Terminal. So you want to replace the property tax levies with a regressive sales tax? Regressive yes, but it at least captures some dollars from the region, instead of just Hamilton County. How many people living in KY or Butler County go to the zoo? Lots. EDIT: Written while Ram23 was responding. Sorry for the duplicate ideas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
natininja Posted August 6, 2014 Share Posted August 6, 2014 I understand that, but to me it means there should be a mix. I don't know what the ideal mix would be, but 100% regressive seems like a bad idea. Ideally, of course, there would be a regional property tax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quimbob Posted August 6, 2014 Share Posted August 6, 2014 There's a lot more to be considered, like how much private funding will stay in place, but has anybody decided how they will vote on Monzel's stump of a tax? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryanlammi Posted August 6, 2014 Share Posted August 6, 2014 A part of me wants to vote no in the hope that a more comprehensive plan will come soon after. But I will probably vote in favor (depending on the exact language, which no one has seen yet). I would much prefer a 0.25% increase that lasts forever. Use the cultural icons task force to determine who receives funding. It wouldn't have to be restricted to Music Hall/Union Terminal. It could be used for the Art Museum, Freedom Center, Sign Museum, Cincinnati Zoo, a new cultural museum yet to exist, etc. Appoint members from both the City and County (but don't allow politicians to actually be members of the task force). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quimbob Posted August 6, 2014 Share Posted August 6, 2014 https://feeneyforoffice.us/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
natininja Posted August 6, 2014 Share Posted August 6, 2014 I can't vote on it, but I think I'd vote No. It's not like the building is going to fall down if this one vote fails. There'll be more time to get a better plan on the ballot. Hype it up as abhorrent and use it in a campaign to attack Monzel. Plus, the failure might bring more private donations, which would be nice. Raised ticket prices would be not-so-nice, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jmecklenborg Posted August 6, 2014 Share Posted August 6, 2014 The issue nobody's bringing up is how would a permanent "culture" tax be divided between various institutions? As-is, the zoo and museum center each have their own property taxes which are proportionate to their needs. Who or what would decide how much from a permanent sales tax goes to each institution? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryanlammi Posted August 6, 2014 Share Posted August 6, 2014 Let a Cultural Icons Task Force identify that funding. Perhaps putting limits on which organizations qualify for funding, how much an individual organization can receive in a 10-year period, and limiting it to capital projects only (not simply subsidizing the cash flow of a failing organization) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim uber Posted August 6, 2014 Share Posted August 6, 2014 I will vote no and vote against monzel. People exactly like him give engineers the reputation they have. They're everybody's parent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taestell Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 I would go in the opposite direction. We should have a county-wide (or multi-county) Arts & Culture tax that supports all of these organizations. Elected leaders should not be arbitrarily deciding which institutions are worthy of our dollars. If we did it right, we could even have a portion of the tax dedicated to capital expenditures and the rest going to operating expenses, replacing the existing property tax levies that go to the Zoo and Union Terminal. So you want to replace the property tax levies with a regressive sales tax? No, it could be a multi-county property tax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brutus_buckeye Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 And since nobody has mentioned this so far, this is all Cranley's fault Huh? ??? Just being a little sarcastic that's all. It seems Cranley gets blamed for a lot of things around here. I figured I would just add another one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ManorBorn Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 Let a Cultural Icons Task Force identify that funding. Perhaps putting limits on which organizations qualify for funding, how much an individual organization can receive in a 10-year period, and limiting it to capital projects only (not simply subsidizing the cash flow of a failing organization) Pretty much how they do it in Utah: five counties and about a dozen municipalities have arts and parks taxes. But they do cover operations in addition to capital projects. I'm not sure how the board gets appointed, but there haven't been any major complaints about how funds have been awarded. http://www.co.weber.ut.us/ramp/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taestell Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 Just being a little sarcastic that's all. It seems Cranley gets blamed for a lot of things around here. I figured I would just add another one. Well, that's because Cranley has screwed up a lot of things since he got in office. We was, however, on the right side of this Union Terminal & Music Hall issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Civvik Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 I think this issue has opened up a reality that many people don't think about: A lot of people in the region, maybe even a majority, wouldn't really care if these two buildings fell over. They aren't integral to their daily experience like the Reds or widening a highway. This is primarily why I'm ambivalent about this tax. It's entirely sentimental in an age where I feel we should be putting all our resources into repopulating the core, adding transit options, and using the port authority to add employers. Greater Cincinnati just has such deep structural problems: a tiny, impoverished city boundary, antagonistic county, no transit, dozens of fiefdom local governments. Sometimes I think that the burst of growth in OTR and the triumph of the streetcar has given a magnified sense of momentum to the region. They are great gains, but I feel like now is the time to just keep our heads down and focused on the big guns: more urban housing, more urban employers, more transit, making the redevelopment agencies as strong as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryanlammi Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 Some strong words directed to County Commissioners City to County: We are not second class citizens An hour after Hamilton County commissioners dropped Music Hall from a building renovation plan because it's not the county's responsibility, Cincinnati Mayor John Cranley and some council members publicly chastised commissioners and offered this geography lesson to them: Music Hall is in the county. And they weren't polite about it.. "As mayor I am deeply offended that we are being treated like second class citizens in our own county," Cranley said. "We have done our part." He added: "I will not stand for anyone to attack the city when the city is the one who has historically stood up to protect these buildings. We are part of Hamilton County and Hamilton County commissioners are supposed to represent us as part of the county." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy_James Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 "As mayor I am deeply offended that we are being treated like second class citizens in our own county," Cranley said. "We have done our part." He added: "I will not stand for anyone to attack the city when the city is the one who has historically stood up to protect these buildings. We are part of Hamilton County and Hamilton County commissioners are supposed to represent us as part of the county." First thing Cranley has said that I agree with. Hopefully this broadens his scope a bit. He's been focused on "the neighborhoods" vs OTR and the CBD, but the real issue is between Cincinnati and the rest of Hamilton County. Having a pit bull for a mayor might not be so bad if he can leave OTR/CBD alone and go after the many issues that Cincinnati has with its county (Music Hall, SORTA/Metro funding, etc.) instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebillshark Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 http://bizjournals.com/cincinnati/blog/2014/08/commentary-the-curious-case-of-greg-hartmann-and.html From the article: "But something else changed for Hartmann in the last week. It’s just not clear what. His change in opinion and tone was just too drastic." Think he got a phone call from the Koch brothers or something? www.cincinnatiideas.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urbanpioneer Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 Most likely, Hartmann was threatened with the prospect of a Tea Party challenger when he runs for re-election. He was very lucky last time, having "run" unopposed. And lucky too that Ham. Co. Dems haven't shown much interest in fielding good commissioner candidates. Tim Burke needs a wake-up call, cattle prod, something. He's been asleep at the wheel. This move by Monzel and Hartmann creates an opportunity, as there was bi-partisan support for the original icon tax levy proposal. Unfortunately it'll probably be a missed opportunity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryanlammi Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 A pretty fierce rebuttal from the Cultural Facilities Task Force to Chris Monzel's proposal. Let's Save Cincinnati’s Icons! August 7, 2014 Statement of the Cultural Facilities Task Force on the Monzel Plan The Cultural Facilities Task Force finds Commissioner Monzel’s “Plan”, which excludes Music Hall and fails to completely address the needs of Union Terminal, to be the worst possible outcome of Wednesday’s meeting. The Cultural Facilities Task Force presented a fully vetted and viable plan to permanently fix Union Terminal and Music Hall. Bob McDonald, as chair of the Task Force, met with Commissioner Monzel multiple times where he never offered any suggestions. Had he given us his ideas earlier, like Commissioner Portune did, we could have built them into the plan. From the little we know about the Monzel Plan, we believe it is inadequate. The Monzel Plan was impulsively devised overnight just hours before the deadline. The Monzel Plan is in conflict with the County’s own consultants, county administration’s advice, the Tax Levy Review Committee and also direct communications with Commissioners in advance of their vote. Furthermore, the Cultural Facilities Task Force believes this is a poorly conceived and incomplete plan for restoring Union Terminal. Commissioner Monzel needs to resolve the following potential problems: ·Will this permanently restore Union Terminal? ·What is the bonding capacity? ·What is the construction timeline? ·How does “pay-as-you-go” financing impact the project timeline? ·Does this delay the construction, increasing construction costs? ·What is the impact on Historic Tax Credits? ·What is the status of the city of Cincinnati’s commitment? ·What is the status of the $40 million in philanthropic commitments to this plan? The Cultural Facilities Task Force plan addressed all of the above issues. We look forward to hearing from Commissioner Monzel about how his plan will address these potential problems. The best solutions are comprehensive. The Cultural Facilities Task Force compromised of civic and corporate leaders volunteered significant time, worked in good faith for nine months and our work was literally dismissed overnight. We, the Cultural Facilities Task Force, proposed a comprehensive plan and continue to work toward the complete restoration and repair of Music Hall and Union Terminal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cygnus Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 Per the Enquirer's Criticism grows over Union Terminal levy: The commissioners fired back by warning their critics to get behind the levy for Union Terminal or risk missing out on $170 million in taxpayer support for that building's renovation. "I understand they're criticizing us for not rubber-stamping their proposal, but that would not have been responsible for county taxpayers," said Commissioner Greg Hartmann, who voted for the Union Terminal plan with fellow Republican Chris Monzel. "I'd suggest for them to let the emotion come out of this a little if they want to pass this ballot initiative," Hartmann told the Enquirer. "I'd recommend a different approach." Cont "It's just fate, as usual, keeping its bargain and screwing us in the fine print..." - John Crichton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryanlammi Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 FYI, Landsman is considering challenging Monzel after the terrible PR move he just had with the Icon Tax. You can discuss in a new thread I just created for Hamilton County Commissioners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Civvik Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 Most likely, Hartmann was threatened with the prospect of a Tea Party challenger when he runs for re-election. He was very lucky last time, having "run" unopposed. And lucky too that Ham. Co. Dems haven't shown much interest in fielding good commissioner candidates. Tim Burke needs a wake-up call, cattle prod, something. He's been asleep at the wheel. This move by Monzel and Hartmann creates an opportunity, as there was bi-partisan support for the original icon tax levy proposal. Unfortunately it'll probably be a missed opportunity. You know there was a lot of political momentum behind saving the streetcar. That same momentum and spirit could go a long way towards fielding a challenger candidate in the next county election. It's been made very clear by the county that they are in it for the suburbs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quimbob Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 After Monzel masterminded his 'compromise' he still doesn't know how he will vote on it. what a gasbag liar... http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/blog/2014/08/the-union-terminal-tax-a-plan-designed-to-fail.html?page=all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebillshark Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 After Monzel masterminded his 'compromise' he still doesn't know how he will vote on it. what a gasbag liar... http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/blog/2014/08/the-union-terminal-tax-a-plan-designed-to-fail.html?page=all From article: "When it comes to his plan, Monzel says the financial details can be worked out after the voters decide whether they’re willing to pay for the repairs." Who the heck is even going to write up the ballot language for this thing if Monzel is so disinterested in the plan named after him? Will this be COAST proposing a tax increase? I guess that wouldn't bother them since they seem to have no concept of irony to begin with. If the COAST plan passes, it requires 40 million of city money. Could Cranley and council refuse and wait for the original actually feasible plan to pass? Would voters then look at a second ballot initiative and get confused saying "Didn't we already raise taxes to do this?" As Wetterich noted on Twitter, there are some deep pocket heavy hitters on the Save our Icons committee including a Lindner and a Farmer. What are the consequences within the Republican Party for Monzel and Hartmann for that? I've noticed Chairman Alex has been mostly quiet on Twitter, he is usually eager to repeat COAST talking points. www.cincinnatiideas.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IAGuy39 Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Yeah, I don't think those are the right people to p*** off. Should be some real sit down entertainment coming up. I assume if they get a nice candidate in there, there will be some heavy hitters on it. Did you see the Biz Courier article by Chris Wetterich. He did the math and had a great article about it. Basically, what they proposed will cost $20 million less for the county than it would have the original. Obviously, a plan designed to fail. Monzel is already saying, "We will see if the people really want to save the icon". What a bunch of garbage. I see already that COAST is going against Landsmann, saying something to the effect on twitter "We can't wait to tell the rest of the county about your support for the Cincinnati Streetcar". This should get interesting and maybe now, the interests of the majority will trump the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taestell Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 The CEOs of P&G, Kroger, and Cintas, as well as leaders from the region's most important foundations and universities, are all pi$$ed off at Monzel right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jmecklenborg Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 The CEOs of P&G, Kroger, and Cintas, as well as leaders from the region's most important foundations and universities, are all pi$$ed off at Monzel right now. And ironically he's actually more vulnerable to being unseated now than he would have been if he had simply let the tax be placed on the ballot as originally planned. The difference is that he'd be unseated by a Democrat rather than a Tea Partier to be named later. And that's the crazy thing about these tea party challengers and the mere threat of tea party challengers -- they keep opening the door for Democrats to take seats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old edale Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 I get that the Tea Party claims to be concerned with 'fiscal responsibility' and keeping taxes low and what not- that explains their opposition to the tax hike, and I get that. What I don't understand is how a group that is OBSESSED with restricting the government, organizing to have their voices heard after feeling ignored from the political process (haha!) would support having politicians decide for the voters. In spite of overwhelming support, to still not even give the voters the OPTION of voting on it is deplorable, in my opinion. The arrogance of assuming to know better than the average voter and the 'protect you from yourselves' attitude is positively sickening. Anyone who claims to value liberty (there's a Don't Tread on Me flag hanging in Monzel's office) should be outraged by this type of behavior. Put it on the ballot and then make your case for why it should be defeated if you're against it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jmecklenborg Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 I get that the Tea Party claims to be concerned with 'fiscal responsibility' and keeping taxes low and what not- that explains their opposition to the tax hike, and I get that. What I don't understand is how a group that is OBSESSED with restricting the government, organizing to have their voices heard after feeling ignored from the political process (haha!) would support having politicians decide for the voters. In spite of overwhelming support, to still not even give the voters the OPTION of voting on it is deplorable, in my opinion. The arrogance of assuming to know better than the average voter and the 'protect you from yourselves' attitude is positively sickening. Anyone who claims to value liberty (there's a Don't Tread on Me flag hanging in Monzel's office) should be outraged by this type of behavior. Put it on the ballot and then make your case for why it should be defeated if you're against it. Meanwhile they were fighting for unnecessary votes on the streetcar -- twice. Mark Miller of COAST had a website for many years called www.wedemandavote.com. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quimbob Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 Sigman talks about implementing Monzel's hack http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/blog/2014/08/exclusive-how-hamilton-county-s-top-executive.html?page=all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quimbob Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 Cranley gripes about Monzel's notaplan He also talks about how Hartmann 'broke a deal' yeah, kinda like Cranely never broke a deal... Interesting that I can agree with the turd & still call him a hypocrite. http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2014/08/12/cranley-blasts-commissioners-for-ignoring-business.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
osogato Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 This sounds like an interesting article, but I'm not a Business Courier subscriber. Can anyone who is post a quick summary of the article? Thanks! http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/print-edition/2014/08/29/is-the-icon-tax-plan-terminal.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Cincinnati_Kid Posted October 21, 2014 Share Posted October 21, 2014 County commissioners expected to vote soon on Union Terminal partnership Oct 21, 2014, 3:00pm EDT Chris Wetterich Staff reporter- Cincinnati Business Courier Hamilton County commissioners could vote Wednesday on a resolution endorsing the idea of a public-private partnership between the county and the Cincinnati Museum Center to rehabilitate historic Union Terminal. The partnership would make the Museum Center responsible for any cost overruns incurred in the $213 million project. It also would deliver the revenue from the 0.25 percentage point sales tax increase being voted upon in the Nov. 4 election to the museum center. http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2014/10/21/county-commissioners-expected-to-vote-soon-on.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Cincinnati_Kid Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 Commissioners spar over Union Terminal plan Oct 22, 2014, 3:04pm EDT Chris Wetterich Staff reporter- Cincinnati Business Courier Hamilton County commissioners approved a resolution on Wednesday telling voters that the county intends to enter into a public-private partnership with the Cincinnati Museum Center if the public approves a sales tax increase on Nov. 4 to fix Union Terminal, the center's home. Commissioners voted 2-1 to approve the resolution, with Commissioner Todd Portune, a Democrat, dissenting from his two Republican colleagues. http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2014/10/22/commissioners-spar-over-union-terminal-plan.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Cincinnati_Kid Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Two weeks before vote, many questions remain about Union Terminal rehab plan Oct 23, 2014, 6:38am EDT Chris Wetterich Staff reporter- Cincinnati Business Courier While all of the specifics were not expected before the election, major blanks remain to be filled in about the plan to fund Union Terminal's restoration even if voters agree to increase Hamilton County's sales tax on Nov. 4. Voters will decide whether the tax should be increased for five years from 6.75 percent to 7 percent. http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2014/10/23/two-weeks-before-vote-many-questions-remain-about.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Cincinnati_Kid Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Way to go Hamilton County voters! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabbit Hash Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 A bit of faith has been restored. Hamilton County voters approve a tax on themselves to support rail (in a way). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taestell Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 Museum Center cuts jobs before renovation Museum Center officials said they’d hoped to avoid serious cuts, but concluded they would lose as much as $6 million a year in ticket sales, parking and retail because so many exhibits will close during construction. If you're not a member of the Museum Center, you should really consider joining now and supporting them. They are going to struggle while this renovation is going on so it's really important that the region supports them during this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wally Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 We have a family membership, so we are doing our part to contribute. However, I must say that I'm a bit irked that there was absolutely no mention from them that 2/3rds of the building would be closed starting this summer when we renewed our membership back in December. And it's not just me that feels this way. If you look on their Facebook page, frustrated folks as recent as mid-April were posting messages saying they renewed their membership and were never made aware of what was closing and how long they'd be closed for. They now have a message on their membership page online about the upcoming closures but I think this is a very recent addition to their site. I understand that memberships play an important role in the financial model and I know that the article says that construction would have dragged on for an additional year by keeping more parts of the museum open, so I guess the significant closures is the decision they chose to move forward with. I honestly haven't decided if we are going to renew for 2017 or not just yet. We take our kids at least once a month to the Museum Center, and surprisingly, our kids tend to enjoy the Cincinnati History Museum and Natural History Museum just as much as the Childrens Museum. By only having one museum option for the next two years, we may potentially look into a membership at the Newport Aquarium, Entrainment Junction, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old edale Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 Anyone know if they are going to update the exhibits? The last time I went to the natural history museum, many of the exhibits looked really tired and dated. I don't think anything had really been updated from how I remembered it being as a kid, which is (sadly) a long time ago. The whole upper portion about health was straight out of the early 90s, and really should be in a children's museum, not a museum of natural history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jmecklenborg Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 Anyone know if they are going to update the exhibits? The last time I went to the natural history museum, many of the exhibits looked really tired and dated. I don't think anything had really been updated from how I remembered it being as a kid, which is (sadly) a long time ago. The whole upper portion about health was straight out of the early 90s, and really should be in a children's museum, not a museum of natural history. They didn't bring the old naked Indian lady dioramas over from the old Natural History Museum. The highlight of any field trip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wally Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 Anyone know if they are going to update the exhibits? The last time I went to the natural history museum, many of the exhibits looked really tired and dated. I don't think anything had really been updated from how I remembered it being as a kid, which is (sadly) a long time ago. The whole upper portion about health was straight out of the early 90s, and really should be in a children's museum, not a museum of natural history. I believe the renovations currently underway only cover renovations to the building. Any updates to the exhibits would come from private donations or grants. I'd have to imagine the Museum Center is planning to update the exhibits when they reopen in 2.5 years. Like you said, a lot of it is quite dated and is definitely showing its age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taestell Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 I would be shocked if they just put the exact same exhibits in place when the build renovation is complete. But @327Wally[/member] is also correct that the building renovation tax does not provide them with any money for updating the exhibits. Hopefully the renovated building will help them attract some more private donations to help them modernize their exhibits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshknut Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 I really hope they get some funding to modernize their exhibits. I remember when I was a kid and those exhibits were new...I'm almost 33 now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilworms Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 They really need to make the history museum better too much emphasis on world war 2 not enough on the golden age of the city and the fact it was the countries largest German American community... Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jmecklenborg Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 I don't find ethnic histories interesting without actual objects to look at. I don't want to watch videos -- I can do that on my phone out in the parking lot. The history museum emphasized the 1930s-50s because when it was created, they had tons of retired WWII vets donating their time. Also, many vets traveled away and returned via Union Terminal. The most conspicuous part of the city's contribution to the war was the B-29 engine which enabled the bombing of Japan. They don't have one of those engines on display. There is a LOT more they could have in the museum that they don't: -WAY more Crosley stuff -All of the famous Kenner toys, including the Star Wars stuff -A collection of Baldwin Pianos -A collection of machine tools manufactured by Cincinnati Milacron and others -A collection of stuff from the defunct breweries -A cicada exhibit -A King Records exhibit -A much more elaborate history of the built city, with models, drawings, etc. of big 20th century projects and ongoing projects like The Banks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old edale Posted May 6, 2016 Share Posted May 6, 2016 ^ Yes, I agree with all of that. I love the Cincinnati History Museum, and I think the miniature model of the city and the steamboat area are really cool. But there is SO much more that could be covered, and I agree that the emphasis on WWII is a little odd. I think the best 'city museum' I've been to is Pittsburgh's Heinz History Museum. It covers all aspects of Pittsburgh's history and development, and has sections devoted to local sports, media coverage, business development, art, notable individuals from the city, and a huge section on Andrew Carnegie. It's a really great museum. I love these type of museums, and I think Cincy is lucky to have one. When I was traveling to Cleveland last summer, I was really looking forward to checking out their city history museum, but I was told that such a thing didn't really exist. There is the Western Reserve museum (I think that's what it's called), but I was told it's small and mostly devoted to vintage cars. We are lucky to have a museum that tells our city's history, and I can think of no better place for such a museum to exist than Union Terminal. I'm so glad the building is getting renovated, and I hope the exhibits will similarly be refurbished and modernized. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwulsin Posted September 8, 2016 Share Posted September 8, 2016 Enquirer article has a few renderings of interior renovations: http://www.cincinnati.com/story/entertainment/2016/09/08/see-inside-union-terminal-renovation-plans/89970090/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now