Gérald Checco, CTM Plan Chair
November 19, 2025
Thank you for your patience with this lengthy update—complex topics require detailed responses.
As chair of the Plan Committee for Clifton Town Meeting (CTM,) I’d like to clarify some inaccuracies and misinformation that have been circulating on social media.
• There is no active project to replace the gaslights.
The recommendation is to install 1-2 prototypes, reversible, and get more community input. See below to understand the Plan process.
• The present draft is a compilation of ideas gathered during various Plan meetings.
Ideas in the draft come from committee meetings, public engagement, responses of surveys, coordination with other stakeholders.
• The assessment and review phase of the draft Plan has not started.
The main goal of the draft is to have a document that people can react to. Many items will be amended, some eliminated and some added.
• More community engagement is needed and will take place.
All items in the draft, in all topics require further discussion
The Process
Our planning process has been highly transparent and inclusive, beginning 10 months ago and involving 29 community meetings (three per month), reaching out to 626 residents. Announcements of meetings have been made broadly, using our mailing system and on social media.
The Plan has been shaped by several subcommittees focusing on Environment, Development, Transportation, Community, and History. Each group has contributed considerable effort. Progress updates have consistently appeared at every board meeting agenda since the project started, accompanied by regular articles in the Clifton Chronicle, all providing opportunities for public input and questions regarding the Plan.
Each committee operated independently and offered various suggestions that were added to the suggestions gathered at public meetings and responses from individuals. City Planning staff also connected with organizations such as the Business Association, churches, schools, CCAC, and multiple city departments (i.e. CTM is not the only participant.)
Where are we in the process?
We are now finalizing the public input for the draft document. What we have now is only the public input, discussion with other stakeholders and the committees’ work. Once complete, the Plan will undergo review, amendment, and approval. It is expected that CTM will opine officially on the Plan in March, but timelines have slipped before to allow more community input. Then the Planning Commission and City Council will vote on adopting the Plan. It’s crucial for everyone involved or interested to thoroughly examine every aspect, ask tough questions, and suggest improvements.
The Plan gives us a platform to explore difficult topics, and no idea was ignored.
• Portal for the Plan
• Engagement Boards
• Draft Plan Goals and Objectives
The Environmental Committee and the environmental input received
The Environment Committee presented their observations and concerns, emphasizing climate resilience and neighborhood-specific solutions. They recommended a range of initiatives involving urban forestry, hillside management, transportation improvements, and sustainable development.
The concept is to retrofit the gaslights, not eliminating them but only changing the mantle, which has already changed several times over the years, because of the type of gas used and the development of mantle technology. This concept originated not only within the committee but also through broader community engagement, including at CTM board meetings and other forums. This topic is currently under review in several historic cities, Boston being a notable example, as advances in technology now allow for comprehensive evaluation of possible solutions. The 1200 gaslights in Cincinnati contribute a significant amount of CO2 and methane emissions, presenting an issue that warrants thorough analysis.
CTM leadership proposes the installation of a select number of retrofitted, easily reversible gaslights and recommends their evaluation through scientific surveys. Forming opinions without tangible case studies or examples is counterproductive to informed decision-making.
Conclusion
As chair of the Clifton Plan, I would like to commend the many many volunteers who have participated and the extraordinary job that City Planner Gibbs has done to lead us through this effort. The concerns of people about the gaslights provide a great opportunity for more engagement, on all items in the Plan. City staff will now lead us through the review and finalization process.