What better way to stabilize your income tax revenue than to build housing to increase the population.

11 minutes ago, Mendo said:

What better way to stabilize your income tax revenue than to build housing to increase the population.

 

Of course we should do that. The issue is, it isn't where cities in Ohio get their revenue. It is employment based. This is why Shaker Heights has such drastically high taxes and why Beachwood has low taxes. Schools get most of the property tax, counties get the sales tax, cities get income tax. City of employment gets dibs on income tax before city of residence, unless the city in question makes a law like Lakewood has, where you don't get full credit for taxes paid to employment city.

Edited June 2, 20205 yr by mu2010

39 minutes ago, NYC Boomerang said:

No.  I gave real facts such as 67.5% of Cleveland's budget comes from municipal income taxes.  The article theorizes that the metro Cleveland area will benefit because it has cheaper and bigger houses than larger metros.  It does not site any trends as far as peoples' behavior.  But if you all want to ignore the fact of Cleveland's revenue source, by all means, go for it.  It's pretty safe to say the unemployment rate is skyrocketing and the work from home movement is gaining lots of traction.  This all equals much less revenue for the city of Cleveland because of how its revenue sources are structured and because of its overall high poverty.  Sorry if this isn't what you want to hear.

 

No one is arguing that this won't hurt Cleveland's budget. It is true that municipal income taxes are particularly susceptible to downturns. But that's not the ONLY argument you're making. You're saying that this will make people turn away from the city long-term. That's where you lack evidence. We don't know yet, but the data we do have (yes, from Zillow, but also from other sources that have been shared on this site) seem to point to the opposite. There has been no change in trends when it comes to where people want to live. People are still looking for more urban locations, and they are looking for cheaper cities. Maybe that'll change. Maybe it won't. But you haven't provided any evidence to support your position that it will.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2020/03/31/when-will-your-city-feel-the-fiscal-impact-of-covid-19/

 

Read the article.

1 minute ago, NYC Boomerang said:

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2020/03/31/when-will-your-city-feel-the-fiscal-impact-of-covid-19/

 

Read the article.

 

Your article states this:

 

"Unfortunately, the potential impact on most local budgets is largely unknown"

 

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2020/03/31/when-will-your-city-feel-the-fiscal-impact-of-covid-19/

2 minutes ago, NYC Boomerang said:

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2020/03/31/when-will-your-city-feel-the-fiscal-impact-of-covid-19/

 

Read the article.

 

What are you trying to argue? We all know that OH cities rely heavily on income taxes. So do a lot of the large suburbs with big employers. It's a statewide thing. It doesn't provide any evidence that people will turn away from Cleveland.

The results indicate an uneven geography of fiscal impact, with many heartland cities likely to be hit harder and more quickly than others.

 

Cities in the U.S. generate the majority of their revenue by designing their own tax and fee structures within the limits imposed by their states (e.g., property tax limits, debt limits, constraints on access to some tax sources).

 

a city’s tax structure accounts for 70% to 75% of what it can spend to meet the health, safety, and welfare needs of its residents and visitors.   

 

After less than a month of shelter-at-home edicts, it’s clear that retail sales have plummeted and unemployment is skyrocketing. A city that generates the majority of its revenue from sales or income taxes will be hit hard and immediately when it experiences such consumer declines and job losses.

 

Did you see the chart in the article?  This analysis reveals that many of the most fiscally impacted cities in the shorter term are in America’s heartland. For example, 76% of Columbus, Ohio’s general fund comes from income taxes, and 16% of regional employment is in highly vulnerable industries. Cities in Ohio rely heavily on the flat income tax, which correlates immediately to changes in employment.

 

This is a key way to remedy issues... States should also allow their local governments to modify tax structures so they are in line with their underlying economic bases. Flexibility to collect a better mix of sales, income, and property taxes will offer cities the tools they need to respond in the short and long term as economic conditions and the needs of their residents change. This flexibility will be especially important in the months ahead, as state revenues and aid to cities begin to take a hit.

3 minutes ago, Enginerd said:

Frank Jackson sucks at A LOT of things, but he has been extremely conservative with his budget expenditures. It may help now, only time will tell.

 

 I agree with this. Cleveland's budget is currently in better shape than most realize. They have the resources to last through an 18mo long recession w/out layoffs or cuts in services.

Edited June 2, 20205 yr by Clefan98

An inner ring suburb/city merger would be the death of inner ring neighborhoods. Im sure the surrounding counties would love it though. 

55 minutes ago, JSC216 said:

An inner ring suburb/city merger would be the death of inner ring neighborhoods. Im sure the surrounding counties would love it though. 

 

Good point.  I didn't even think of this one.

 

Quite honestly I would rather see Collinwood secede than Euclid merge in, and I live in the former.

1 hour ago, JSC216 said:

An inner ring suburb/city merger would be the death of inner ring neighborhoods. Im sure the surrounding counties would love it though. 

 

You're going to have to elaborate on this. 

4 hours ago, NYC Boomerang said:

The results indicate an uneven geography of fiscal impact, with many heartland cities likely to be hit harder and more quickly than others.

 

Cities in the U.S. generate the majority of their revenue by designing their own tax and fee structures within the limits imposed by their states (e.g., property tax limits, debt limits, constraints on access to some tax sources).

 

a city’s tax structure accounts for 70% to 75% of what it can spend to meet the health, safety, and welfare needs of its residents and visitors.   

 

After less than a month of shelter-at-home edicts, it’s clear that retail sales have plummeted and unemployment is skyrocketing. A city that generates the majority of its revenue from sales or income taxes will be hit hard and immediately when it experiences such consumer declines and job losses.

 

Did you see the chart in the article?  This analysis reveals that many of the most fiscally impacted cities in the shorter term are in America’s heartland. For example, 76% of Columbus, Ohio’s general fund comes from income taxes, and 16% of regional employment is in highly vulnerable industries. Cities in Ohio rely heavily on the flat income tax, which correlates immediately to changes in employment.

 

This is a key way to remedy issues... States should also allow their local governments to modify tax structures so they are in line with their underlying economic bases. Flexibility to collect a better mix of sales, income, and property taxes will offer cities the tools they need to respond in the short and long term as economic conditions and the needs of their residents change. This flexibility will be especially important in the months ahead, as state revenues and aid to cities begin to take a hit.

 

And no one has denied this. But it doesn't support your point that people will flee Cleveland. Cincinnati is going to have the same issues. Columbus too. And Dayton, Toledo, Akron, Canton. And many of our large suburbs that collect income taxes too. They've face this problem before, during the last recession. But people didn't flee the cities. Actually, people flocked to the cities and that trend has continued through present day. So how do you get the idea that this is going to cause people to flee Cleveland for the burbs? None of your data leads to that conclusion. 

LOL pruning was done.  I went to respond to a notification on a post and the post was not there. 

1 hour ago, JSC216 said:

An inner ring suburb/city merger would be the death of inner ring neighborhoods.

 

Why? The Cleveland neighborhood I live in is doing as well, if not better, than most inner ring neighborhoods. There's absolutely no reason (other than inherit ignorance and bias) that the success of certain Cleveland neighborhoods can't be replicated city-wide, and in the inner rings.

Edited June 2, 20205 yr by Clefan98

11 minutes ago, DEPACincy said:

 

And no one has denied this. But it doesn't support your point that people will flee Cleveland. Cincinnati is going to have the same issues. Columbus too. And Dayton, Toledo, Akron, Canton. And many of our large suburbs that collect income taxes too. They've face this problem before, during the last recession. But people didn't flee the cities. Actually, people flocked to the cities and that trend has continued through present day. So how do you get the idea that this is going to cause people to flee Cleveland for the burbs? None of your data leads to that conclusion. 

Ok like I've said, because Cleveland, in particular, as outlined in the Brookings study, is highly dependent on municipal income taxes, most of which come from non-residents... Cleveland will be more impacted than most suburbs and other cities with higher residential populations.  As work from home gains employment share, and those people don't come to Cleveland to work, their income taxes will stop flowing to Cleveland.  I DO NOT WANT this to happen.  I want the best for Cleveland.  But I am raising this as an impending issue that needs to be dealt with through tax reform / regionalism.  Why will people move out of Cleveland?  Affluent / high taxpayers I believe will now be more likely than before to prefer a less dense, single family setting versus a more dense multi-family setting.  Pandemics can have this affect.  I also said that suburbs will have issues as well but Cleveland is so dependent on non-residents, that work from home and budget crunches which will impact city services drastically eventually will have a big negative impact.

3 minutes ago, NYC Boomerang said:

Ok like I've said, because Cleveland, in particular, as outlined in the Brookings study, is highly dependent on municipal income taxes, most of which come from non-residents... Cleveland will be more impacted than most suburbs and other cities with higher residential populations.  As work from home gains employment share, and those people don't come to Cleveland to work, their income taxes will stop flowing to Cleveland.  I DO NOT WANT this to happen.  I want the best for Cleveland.  But I am raising this as an impending issue that needs to be dealt with through tax reform / regionalism.  Why will people move out of Cleveland?  Affluent / high taxpayers I believe will now be more likely than before to prefer a less dense, single family setting versus a more dense multi-family setting.  Pandemics can have this affect.  I also said that suburbs will have issues as well but Cleveland is so dependent on non-residents, that work from home and budget crunches which will impact city services drastically eventually will have a big negative impact.

 

It's a good thing that Downtown, UC and Ohio city has more units going up than the rest of the county does combined. The demographics are shifting, but you're not hearing that either.

1 minute ago, Clefan98 said:

 

It's a good thing that Downtown, UC and Ohio city has more units going up than the rest of the county does combined. The demographics are shifting, but you're not hearing that either.

 

The question underlying this thread is what impact will the events of this year have on that?

1 minute ago, Clefan98 said:

 

It's a good thing that Downtown, UC and Ohio city has more units going up than the rest of the county does combined. The demographics are shifting, but you're not hearing that either.

It seems like you've got a lot on the line with Cleveland real estate.  The market never goes down does it?  And the world never changes... or has it?  Let's not take things so personally.  It's ok if you don't like what's happening to the progress that has been made in the city.  I don't like it either.  But the Great Recession wreaked havoc on Cleveland and this is so much worse.

Not sure where this would go, as we don't have a "disturbance" thread.   Walmart in Macedonia just closed for the day.

4 minutes ago, NYC Boomerang said:

It seems like you've got a lot on the line with Cleveland real estate.  The market never goes down does it?  And the world never changes... or has it?  Let's not take things so personally.  It's ok if you don't like what's happening to the progress that has been made in the city.  I don't like it either.  But the Great Recession wreaked havoc on Cleveland and this is so much worse.

 

Nothing I stated was untrue. Does it sting that more units are going up in Cleveland than in all the suburbs combined? You can pull permits and do the research as i've done.

 

Now you're resorting to playing the 'what if' game? Nice style.

Edited June 2, 20205 yr by Clefan98

26 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

The question underlying this thread is what impact will the events of this year have on that?

 

No argument here and I agree that Cleveland (along with every other city/town/suburb) will be negatively affected by this. Case in point, I listed about 10 local suburbs that have had to make serious cuts and layoffs already. Maybe we should be discussing if they will survive this - it's more appropriate given the current layoffs and cuts.

 

Nobody knows the future, but others on here are so sure Cleveland won't survive they actually created a thread about it. How silly is that?

Edited June 2, 20205 yr by Clefan98

22 minutes ago, Clefan98 said:

 

Nothing I stated was untrue. Does it sting that more units are going up in Cleveland than in all the suburbs combined? You can pull permits and do the research as i've done.

 

Now you're resorting to playing the 'what if' game? Nice style.

No it doesn't sting.  I made a lot of money on Cleveland real estate last year.  Glad I'm not invested in it now.  Sounds like you are.  I wish you the best.  New buildings without residents look pretty on the outside.  No doubt.  Unless the windows are bashed in.

Edited June 2, 20205 yr by NYC Boomerang

The conclusions being reached in this thread are something else.

9 minutes ago, Clefan98 said:

 

No argument here and I agree that Cleveland (along with every other city/town/suburb) will be negatively affected by this. Case in point, I listed about 10 local suburbs that have had to make serious cuts and layoffs already. Maybe we should be discussing if they will survive this - it's more appropriate given the current layoffs and cuts.

 

Nobody knows the future, but others on here are so sure Cleveland won't survive they actually created a thread about it. How silly is that?

 

No question Cleveland will survive, and while a couple of suburbs that have substandard leadership might default, they won't be merged unwillingly if the state has anything to say about it, and they do.

One of the potential growth areas for people moving into the city was older folks.   Indeed, they are how some landlords fill up their subsidized housing in an attempt to avoid having teens in their buildings.   There's two factors that provide a stumbling block here, COVID and crime.   Both perception more than reality.  The impact of density may be overstated with the virus, but I don't think anyone is saying it is irrelevant.    As for crime, again it's perception, but the fact is the city has substandard leadership and an undermanned police department that is perceived as hamstrung.  

Again that p word, but when someone is considering lifestyle changes it looms bigger than reality sometimes.

49 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

No question Cleveland will survive, and while a couple of suburbs that have substandard leadership might default, they won't be merged unwillingly if the state has anything to say about it, and they do.

One of the potential growth areas for people moving into the city was older folks.   Indeed, they are how some landlords fill up their subsidized housing in an attempt to avoid having teens in their buildings.   There's two factors that provide a stumbling block here, COVID and crime.   Both perception more than reality.  The impact of density may be overstated with the virus, but I don't think anyone is saying it is irrelevant.    As for crime, again it's perception, but the fact is the city has substandard leadership and an undermanned police department that is perceived as hamstrung.  

Again that p word, but when someone is considering lifestyle changes it looms bigger than reality sometimes.

 

I think you see these perceptions coming from the older locals who have never left the area. And I get it, you all saw what white flight did to the city and I'm sure those memories are still as fresh as can be. The differences now is simply in the attitudes of younger generations. Nobody born after 1990 really cares about the prior negative perceptions. Old sayings like "mistake on the lake" don't even register with us. As a kid living over an hour away my only memories of Cleveland were driving in to go see the Tribe crush dingers at the Jake. Kids younger than me have positive impressions because of the all winning during the LeBron years.

 

The other interesting point to mention is the choices on where all of these out of staters are relocating to. The majority are picking the city over the suburbs according to my friends in the industry, because urban living is what they're used to. My street has been filled with 6 digit earners and virtually all of them moved here from DC, Chicago, NY, Detroit and so forth.

 

Most of my newish friends from out-of-state think Cleveland is heaven on earth. Weird, right? To your point though, perception matters. The good news is Cleveland's national and regional perceptions are at a 50yr high.

 

E rocc, me and you live in the same city but our neighborhoods and experiences couldn't be more different. Even though we don't always agree, I respect your insight on city topic discussions.  

Edited June 2, 20205 yr by Clefan98

1 hour ago, NYC Boomerang said:

Ok like I've said, because Cleveland, in particular, as outlined in the Brookings study, is highly dependent on municipal income taxes, most of which come from non-residents... 

 

And so are basically all the Ohio cities and many others in the Midwest and Northeast. We all agree on that. 

 

1 hour ago, NYC Boomerang said:

As work from home gains employment share, and those people don't come to Cleveland to work, their income taxes will stop flowing to Cleveland.

 

This might happen. It might not. We don't know what will happen to work from home share. We also don't know how courts will rule on where the income tax money should go. It's something worth thinking about, but you've already made up your mind it seems. You've presented no data backing this claim. 

 

1 hour ago, NYC Boomerang said:

Why will people move out of Cleveland?  Affluent / high taxpayers I believe will now be more likely than before to prefer a less dense, single family setting versus a more dense multi-family setting.

 

Again, as has been pointed out to you, there's zero evidence of this. You're free to speculate, but, so far, the data don't show this happening. In fact, the only data presented show the opposite. 

 

I'm not sure what you're actually trying to do here. All the things you've said that have actual facts behind them, we've all agreed on. We've simply pointed out that you are making logical leaps that aren't yet supported by data. You then ignore that and accuse everyone else of having a bias. Then you make a snide joke about broken windows, which was completely classless. Really showing your true colors. 

2 hours ago, DEPACincy said:

 

And so are basically all the Ohio cities and many others in the Midwest and Northeast. We all agree on that. 

 

 

This might happen. It might not. We don't know what will happen to work from home share. We also don't know how courts will rule on where the income tax money should go. It's something worth thinking about, but you've already made up your mind it seems. You've presented no data backing this claim. 

 

 

Again, as has been pointed out to you, there's zero evidence of this. You're free to speculate, but, so far, the data don't show this happening. In fact, the only data presented show the opposite. 

 

I'm not sure what you're actually trying to do here. All the things you've said that have actual facts behind them, we've all agreed on. We've simply pointed out that you are making logical leaps that aren't yet supported by data. You then ignore that and accuse everyone else of having a bias. Then you make a snide joke about broken windows, which was completely classless. Really showing your true colors. 

Not all Ohio cities depend on income taxes from non-residents to the extent that Cleveland does.  

 

I have presented a case for upcoming issues for Cleveland.  It's hard to present data for a world that changed two months ago.  If this forum is just about talking about the past then that seems pretty boring to me.  Are we only allowed to talk about what has already happened and is clearly discernible?  Why don't you present facts refuting the issues that likely will come from unprecedented unemployment and movement of the physical work environment and all out rioting?  

 

Show me the post-COVID post riot post recession facts.  Let's keep an open mind and see how things shake out.  But the outlook for Cleveland and many places has soured since February.  I fear that they have soured more for Cleveland than other places. 

 

I only think those in this forum who refuse to look at the world around them and consider the potential impacts carry a bias.  As far as I can tell, there are only two.  If you are ok with broken windows then you should go and open up a business on Euclid.  

Columbus is unique because of its size. 
 

41% of employees who work in Columbus live in Columbus. 
 

21% of employees who work in Cleveland live in Cleveland.

7 minutes ago, JSC216 said:

Columbus is unique because of its size. 
 

41% of employees who work in Columbus live in Columbus. 
 

21% of employees who work in Cleveland live in Cleveland.

Yet budget cuts have hit the Cleveland area suburbs first. 

5 hours ago, Clefan98 said:

 

Why? The Cleveland neighborhood I live in is doing as well, if not better, than most inner ring neighborhoods. There's absolutely no reason (other than inherit ignorance and bias) that the success of certain Cleveland neighborhoods can't be replicated city-wide, and in the inner rings.

Really? Absolutely no reason? While some families are staying, especially those who can afford private schools, the city is still struggling at keeping and attracting families to the city. Also the families they are attracting are urban minded, not your average family in the metropolitan area. Merging would mean worse schools, way worse police and response times, worse city services including snow plowing, and less overall focus on the community. There are more reasons than that but that’s a start. 

13 minutes ago, JSC216 said:

Columbus is unique because of its size. 
 

41% of employees who work in Columbus live in Columbus. 
 

21% of employees who work in Cleveland live in Cleveland.

 

An interesting stat would be the percentage of people that live in Cleveland but work elsewhere. I would end paying more to Cleveland if I worked from home permanently, though it'd be less overall.

 

Edited June 3, 20205 yr by Mendo

2 minutes ago, Clefan98 said:

Yet budget cuts have hit the Cleveland area suburbs first. 

This was a comparison of Cleveland vs Columbus and how they face different challenges. 

2 minutes ago, Mendo said:

 

An interesting stat would be the percentage of people that live in Cleveland but work elsewhere. I would end paying more to Cleveland if I worked from home permanently, though it'd be less overall.

 

Good point. I know a lot of people in that current situation.
 

My company's Cle area suburban office has recently closed down, so now all of my income tax goes to the city. Overall I'm paying a half point less - I'll take it. 

With the topic title I expected a discussion on the virus/civil unrest. Like, "don't wear contact lenses to a protest". Or, "there is a curfew in effect for the CBD until whenever date". Not a discussion about future tax revenues.