Foraker

Ohio funds schools primarily through local property taxes. So industrial and affluent areas can more easily fund its schools than more residential or poor or rural areas. Also , Ohio school levies are for a fixed amount, not a fixed rate, and have to be renewed by voters every three years. Makes it very hard to keep up with cost increases, and voters get tired of being asked for money all the time -- even if they are only being asked to vote for the status quo. I too would like to know how other states fund their schools.

There is a Second Sole in Lyndhurst and they do have group runs. http://www.secondsoleohio.com/lyndhurst.htm I thought that there was a group that met at Shaker Lakes one day a week as well, but I can't find the link now. Maybe someone else knows about it. Since the question has been asked, there also are a number of other running clubs in Northeast Ohio. Second Sole in Rocky River http://www.2ndsole.com/ Cleveland West Road Runners http://www.cwrrc.org/ Cleveland Hash House Harriers (running and drinking club - lots of fun for the young) http://www.clevelandhash.com/ Cleveland Southeast Running Club http://www.southeastrunningclub.org/ Northeast Running Club http://www.northeastrunningclub.org/

Widening the road would not be a good idea, even if it could be done. CH can't afford to maintain the lane-miles it already has. They can't afford more lanes (well, unless they raise taxes. Ha!). What they could do, however, would be to eliminate the on-street parking near the intersection, which might make enough room for a turn lane. The buildings on both sides are pretty close to Cedar already, so you probably couldn't add a lane anyway unless you knocked down the building across from Melt. The parking lot diagonally across from Melt serves a Rite-Aid and a closed Hollywood Video at one end of a not-very-busy strip mall (seems totally out of place for the Heights). Overall there probably is plenty of parking in the area. Hopefully Melt is so busy that it really reenergizes the whole neighborhood, leading to more new businesses and eventually perhaps a city parking garage in that neighborhood. That's a long way off, if ever. It will be hard to choose between Melt and Mr. Brisket... nice to have such tough choices though.

Quote from: KJP in the 3-C thread: In answer to a question posed on another thread about how much of this is offset by fines, I found this on the patrol's FAQ site: http://statepatrol.ohio.gov/FAQ.stm The most recent annual report online (2006), however, says that 34% of the Patrol's revenue comes from "fees and fines" lumped together. Here's how they break down the fines: http://statepatrol.ohio.gov/doc/2006annualreport.pdf See page 14. Rough estimate is about $1.4 million. So the fine revenue seems like a pretty small proportion of the overall budget.

In answer to a question posed on another thread about how much of this is offset by fines, I found this on the patrol's FAQ site: "Ohio State Highway Patrol operations are funded primarily through license plates and driver license fees, so the Patrol receives no benefit from traffic fine money. While the state of Ohio receives some fine money, the majority is retained by the municipality and/or county in which the offense occurred." http://statepatrol.ohio.gov/FAQ.stm The most recent annual report online (2006), however, says that 34% of the Patrol's revenue comes from "fees and fines" lumped together. Here's how they break down the fines: "We collected $449,937 in OVI fines from 165 county and municipal courts, and received $63,000 through the Immobilization Act. Revenue from drug fine money totaled $225,171, and $715,912 in forfeited funds was received through the efforts of our criminal patrol teams." http://statepatrol.ohio.gov/doc/2006annualreport.pdf See page 14. Rough estimate is about $1.4 million. So the fine revenue seems like a pretty small proportion of the overall budget.

While I would agree that the health insurance reform laws aren't that great, they are a start. If he wants to repeal the entire thing, does that mean he opposes everything in the law? Does he oppose prohibiting insurance companies from denying coverage for pre-existing conditions? I would be against that. It seems to me that there are plenty of "fixes" that need to be made, but the law will require more careful study to figure out what fixes really need to be made. At our business, our insurance premiums have gone up 15-20% each year for the past ten years. That is simply unsustainable. At some point we will have to stop offering an insurance benefit. Even if some new insurance plan cost 20% more than my current plan (ouch), if the costs would level off we'd at least be able to plan for it.

CH is a great place to live. As for taxes, yes they are high, but not that high. One of my coworkers is always touting the benefits of living in Solon, which has a strong industrial base, and its low taxes. This person cannot understand why anyone would want to pay CH taxes. But how high are they? According to this 2008 data, the median home prices in these communities were very different Solon - $270,000 CH - $124,750 http://www.cleveland.com/datacentral/index.ssf/2009/01/median_home_sales_prices_fall.html So the median taxes generally will be Solon ($1,270 per $100k): $3,429 CH ($1,944 per $100k): $2,425 (source: Cleveland Plain Dealer link to http://b2.caspio.com/dp.asp) If you bought a similarly-priced home in CH, the taxes for a $270,000 home in CH would be $5,248, about 50% higher than in Solon. The tradeoffs include older homes in CH, a shorter commute to downtown from CH, smaller lots in CH, more walkable neighborhoods in CH, more racial and economic diversity in CH -- ultimately you have to decide what your priorities are. I have never feared for my safety in the Heights area, have heard lots of good and bad about the schools, and in my experience the politics are decidedly left-leaning but not exclusively so. I frequently hear that the police presence is too great rather than too little, and I think that is a credit to the city not a detriment that others might see.

If I were the union, I might want the managers making substantially more than me to at least take equal cuts in pay and benefits. But what exactly was offered to the union or what the union has offered is not public. Presumably there are negotiations and both sides have made offers/demands. Let's not be so quick to say that it is the unions that are "strangling RTA to death" without more information.

You are correct, Kasich has said that the federal government should give the $400 million to another state, Ohio doesn't want to upgrade its rail lines.

Ha! As if fuel is only purchased for use on roadways. Here's an idea -- change the constitution so that roadway maintenance costs must be borne entirely by fuel taxes, registration fees and user fees!

Excellent! :clap: :clap:

Hey RTA! JMasek! Any insights?

If every decision in life was based on time alone, then you might be right. But there are other advantages to rail that you are overlooking, and I suggest that they are enough to overcome some of the inconvenience of limiting yourself to a train schedule and limited route. My plumber charges me a lot more, but let's just say I can sit at a desk and do work for $100 an hour. Preparing tax returns, insurance contracts, legal documents, reviewing medical charts, sales reports, whatever. I can drive from Cleveland to visit clients in Cincinnati in about 4 hours. That's $400 down the drain, plus wear and tear and car insurance and gas, etc. After the meeting, I get to drive home again, arriving thoroughly exhausted and having accomplished nothing outside of however long that meeting lasted. (I've actually done it, and I don't enjoy it one bit.) Now, if I have to stop for dinner or bad weather or an accident, the trip takes even more time, and if traffic is heavy I might not be delayed but more stressed. Going to the meeting costs me $800 plus the cost of the car and any tolls or parking costs that I have to pay, and I didn't get any work done while I was driving. The eight-hour round trip isn't much of a "day off." Or, after the 3C is online, I can catch a bus down to the station ($2, one hour lost, -$100), hop on the train for four (+$400) or five (+$500) hours, and take a taxi to the client (-$100) before returning on the same route. Where, maybe instead of working the entire time I can have a nice dinner, a drink, catch up on sportscenter or take a nap. I may not arrive home completely fresh, but I would feel a lot better than if I had driven, and I would have gotten something else accomplished (sportscenter!) (no, the $400-$500 of work done) other than just the meeting. (I've actually done this too in England. The trains weren't very plush, but as nice as the few Amtrak trains I've ridden.) When I drive, I get to come home and then have to spend those four or five hours doing that work that I could have done on the train. So even if the cost of the train and connecting transportation washes out the money I made working on the train, I now have more time to spend with friends or family, or to do additional work. I gain "time" which I never have enough of, so the trip is very much worth it even if it doesn't seem to be as convenient or takes a little longer. When train service has been introduced in other states where their residents were also only used to driving, there was low number of passengers at first that increased over time. I am not aware of any new service being added in a state and then the number of passengers decreased over time. Ohioans may be used to their cars now but when they experience the advantages of train travel it seems like it will become popular here too. Just because Ohioans are used to driving the 3Cs doesn't mean that Ohioans will continue to only drive the 3Cs. Granted, not everyone wants to stick to a schedule, but some Ohioans want the option and have been asking for it for a long time. We are glad to see it coming to fruition. If you prefer the independence of your own car, you should be glad that we are taking ourselves off the highway, and that you'll have another option should you need it.

So what is the status of this modified plan?

Does anyone know why the RTA trains have to slow down so much on their way to/from downtown over those bridges? Is it a bridge issue or a rail issue or what? And if there is a problem, is funding being sought to remedy the situation?

Annexation won't solve E. Cleveland's problems, it just makes those problems someone else's. Adding E. Cleveland's problems to those of the City of Cleveland doesn't seem likely to get those problems any more attention. With current thinking and rethinking on regionalism, perhaps the greater Cleveland community can provide some assistance to E. Cleveland with police/fire/garbage collection/road maintenance/etc. -- whatever services become more regional rather than under the control of individual suburbs. Ultimately though I think we need a local leader in E. Cleveland to pursue solutions to its problems. The new mayor of East Cleveland seems to provide a bit of hope. He's young, optimistic, well-educated, and with some experience in government outside of E. Cleveland and its past corruption scandals. I hope he succeeds. One advantage E. Cleveland has over Cleveland Hts. is the existence of a business base. Granted, much of the housing in E. Cleveland probably needs serious investment for rehab, and large tracts may need to be bulldozed and rebuilt, but it could happen. It just won't happen overnight.

I would certainly be in favor or converting I-90 through downtown into a partial boulevard through Tremont and across the river, and reroute I-90 over 490/77. But I don't see any way for that to happen at this point in the planning process. ODOT is simply replacing a bridge, not reconsidering how to move (through-) traffic through the city. Maybe in 50 years, the next time they think about replacing the bridge, our children can be prepared to move in that direction.

I had an idea that I wanted to toss out to the board and RTA. If we want more mass transit riders, how can we make the experience better? One way would be to improve the transit stops, and I'm thinking particularly of bus stops at the moment, since we're likely stuck with bus transportation for many years. RTA can't afford to improve every bus stop in the city, but perhaps could partner with various neighborhoods, businesses, and/or municipalities to make upgrades. I'm particularly thinking of building or incorporating coffee/sandwich/news shops into bus stops or very near bus stops, while providing a larger and more comfortable waiting area, and perhaps ultimately encouraging more development around the stops. All this might require some significant investment, which cities seem reluctant to do when bus routes change, such as due to drops in revenue at RTA.... But some stops probably never change. Won't there always be several stops near the Cedar-Lee intersection, for example? We can't know everything that will happen in the future, but perhaps looking back to the past would be instructive. Is there a way to map transit stops, say in Lakewood or Cleveland Heights or any other neighborhood over time? Say a snapshot from 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2010? I suspect we would find that some stops have been around for a long time. Maybe RTA (or some enterprising student) could identify those stops that have been around forever or only moved minimum distance, and then work with cities to build some kind of "improved" bus waiting area/station with a coffee/sandwich/news stand and additional covered seating. What do you think?

I would agree, insofar as high speed intercity rail. We do need to build up commuter rail, and yet we also need to get started on intercity rail so that the groundwork is laid for high speed rail at a later date. Also, in the current state of all things rail, improving the rail infrastructure will have the side benefit of improving freight traffic. The more freight we can move by rail the fewer intercity trucks we need.

I was in your shoes just a few years ago. Check out Century Cycles, they were very helpful and have three locations around Cleveland. I ended up buying a Surly Cross-Check -- great bike but I spent closer to $1,000. http://centurycycles.com/

The state of Ohio has a wonderful formula that says if rehabbing a school building costs more than x% of the cost to build new, then you have to build new if you want funding from the state. That's probably what is happening here. Particularly in the lower grades (kindergarten through second grade), a lower student-teacher ratio is a must. Younger kids just cannot sit still that long and have very short attention spans. That means they need extra attention to keep them in their seats and continually reminded to focus on tasks. In some classes that is tough for one teacher to do with ten kids, much less 15 or 20. Try coaching five-year-olds sometime. I couldn't. The things I looked for in a school for my kids included small class sizes and parent involvement in the school and their kids' education. As a result, I often see other parents at the school and know most of the parents of my kids' classmates very well. This makes for a community working together, rather than relying on the school to take care of it for us. I also prefer a small school. Even if I don't have kids in third grade, all the third-grade teachers know who my kid is. Everyone keeps an eye on everyone. If you have small classes in a large school, only the teachers that actually have your kid in class would know who each kid is. I think kids can get away with more in that environment (and if they can, they will). Quality schools means higher property values, so even if I didn't have kids in school I would want smaller classes and smaller schools, even if it meant less "efficiency." I'm willing to pay higher taxes to get quality rather than lowest cost. I hope we don't get so carried away with "efficiency" that we forget we're not making widgets, we're building citizens. Citizens who will be paying the taxes that support society (roadways, fire, police, courts, etc.) and caring for us once we're retired and elderly.

As a start we should change the gas tax to a percentage so that it adjusts with inflation, say 9%, rather than a flat $0.17 per gallon. That shouldn't be as politically difficult.

Now let's work on capturing the methane given off at the sewage treatment plant....

I have always flown Continental whenever I could. Primarily to support the local company and their direct flights. I guess I took them for granted. I recently had to travel across the country on business, via three different airlines -- Continental was clearly the cream of the crop. Thank you, thank you Continental! Without Continental's amazing service, I would never want to fly again.

I disagree with any implication that this was purely a political ploy to keep a Democrat in the governor's office. It is a good investment for the region to get Ohio into the loop, because it links a significant population (3C's plus cities along the way, Dayton, Springfield, Mansfield, and potential connections to Youngstown and Pittsburgh, Toledo, Erie, Buffalo, etc.) to the Chicago hub. Plus if limited train service converts more people to positive views of rail travel, there will be even more political will behind further rail improvements that would lead to true high-speed rail lines. Strickland will be long gone before any of that comes to pass.