I think everybody actually agrees here. You're just talking around each other.

 

The 3C's are undoubtedly net givers to the state in terms of tax dollars and GDP. Many studies have confirmed that urban areas subsidize rural areas, which need more infrastructure to support the same number of people. OSU benefits the entire state, but disproportionately benefits Columbus, just like UC benefits Cincinnati more and without OU Southeast Ohio would be in even worse shape. Without state government Columbus would not be what it is today, just like Cleveland and Cincy wouldn't be what they are today without the lake or the river. None of those things are things that we control. I'm pretty sure no one can deny that? Some states have one big city. We have three. We all benefit when they do well.

As Jake has mentioned before, 2,000 tech bros making $120k/year can really flip an area, that's what Cincy needs to focus on and same with Columbus (which they are) and Cleveland (which they are). Columbus is obviously doing great even when government changes, so they have a great economic base.

 

There is a trailer park next to a bike trail that I have frequented for years.  Suddenly the whole place it seems has switched populations from hardscrabble whites to Mexicans who speak little English.  I doubt that the whites have left Ohio (they certainly didn't move to Mexico).  So the population is going up but the new residents are basically totally invisible.  The kids ride barely-working old garage sale bikes on the bike trail, not the $3,000 carbon bikes that tech bros would. 

^ yeah thats another big problem, ohio lags in immigration.

 

 

I think everybody actually agrees here. You're just talking around each other.

 

The 3C's are undoubtedly net givers to the state in terms of tax dollars and GDP. Many studies have confirmed that urban areas subsidize rural areas, which need more infrastructure to support the same number of people. OSU benefits the entire state, but disproportionately benefits Columbus, just like UC benefits Cinccinnati more and without OU Southeast Ohio would be in even worse shape. Without state government Columbus would not be what it is today, just like Cleveland and Cincy wouldn't be what they are today without the lake or the river. None of those things are things that we control. I'm pretty sure no one can deny that? Some states have one big city. We have three. We all benefit when they do well.

 

 

^ thank you. and not only 3c’s but three red headed step sisters in akron, dayton and toledo and then a healthy mix of smaller cities and villages and rural areas from there. that variety has been an incredible strength of the state and has kept a healthy political split between rural, suburban and urban political interests.

 

unfortunately, these days suburbanism has taken over and there is way too much duplication of services dragging the state like an anchor, which is not an efficient way to confront a global economy.

I think everybody actually agrees here. You're just talking around each other.

 

The 3C's are undoubtedly net givers to the state in terms of tax dollars and GDP. Many studies have confirmed that urban areas subsidize rural areas, which need more infrastructure to support the same number of people. OSU benefits the entire state, but disproportionately benefits Columbus, just like UC benefits Cincinnati more and without OU Southeast Ohio would be in even worse shape. Without state government Columbus would not be what it is today, just like Cleveland and Cincy wouldn't be what they are today without the lake or the river. None of those things are things that we control. I'm pretty sure no one can deny that? Some states have one big city. We have three. We all benefit when they do well.

 

Yes, all well put. I don't blame the bristling by Columbus people when others complain about state-supported institutions being disproportionately located there.

I think overall there is no doubt that Columbus benefits a bit from being the State Capital, as Cincy benefits from having NIOSH and other government jobs, the FBI, etc. and same with Cleveland.

 

Maybe there is a slight advantage to Columbus and you could claim that the rest of the state helps with some portion of the Columbus economy more than Cincy or Cleveland, but the thing is that Columbus is a big city, and has tons of other industries to stand out on it's own. If you moved the capitol from Columbus to Cincinnati, how much would that hurt Columbus and how much would it gain for Cincy? I have no idea and I don't think any of us do anyways, and it's all a moot point.

 

Clearly looking at all state capitols across the USA, some are doing well, and some aren't. I think Columbus is a case of doing really well on it's own seperate from the Government and the state jobs added on top just are icing on the cake. I think Cincy people need to focus on the things we need to focus on which I believe we are.

 

As Jake has mentioned before, 2,000 tech bros making $120k/year can really flip an area, that's what Cincy needs to focus on and same with Columbus (which they are) and Cleveland (which they are). Columbus is obviously doing great even when government changes, so they have a great economic base.

 

The fact that Cincinnati is doing well economically and even managed to turn around its population decline shows that, for Ohio cities, it wasn't Columbus- and still isn't Columbus- that determines their destinies.  The other 2-Cs had different histories and made different choices than Columbus.  While it's convenient to blame all those problems on the capital, Cleveland and to a lesser-extent Cincinnati suffered from very similar problems that many other cities have in the region.  I actually think the best thing Columbus ever did was annex during the 1950s-1970s.  These were the very worst times for urban cores, and even Columbus lost population in the core during that time.  Annexation allowed it to coast through those lean urban times, maintaining the tax money coffers and keeping services going.  It also never gained the stigma of population decline.  In the Midwest, there is a pretty stark difference between those cities that were able to annex, and those that couldn't.  Indianapolis, Madison, Omaha, Lincoln, Des Moines, Ann Arbor, Kansas City, etc. all are doing well, and none of them have been hemmed in by their suburbs.  The older cities that were just have fundamentally different problems to address. 

I think everybody actually agrees here. You're just talking around each other.

 

The 3C's are undoubtedly net givers to the state in terms of tax dollars and GDP. Many studies have confirmed that urban areas subsidize rural areas, which need more infrastructure to support the same number of people. OSU benefits the entire state, but disproportionately benefits Columbus, just like UC benefits Cincinnati more and without OU Southeast Ohio would be in even worse shape. Without state government Columbus would not be what it is today, just like Cleveland and Cincy wouldn't be what they are today without the lake or the river. None of those things are things that we control. I'm pretty sure no one can deny that? Some states have one big city. We have three. We all benefit when they do well.

 

Yes, all well put. I don't blame the bristling by Columbus people when others complain about state-supported institutions being disproportionately located there.

 

I think it's because there is a perception of a double-standard.  People talk about OSU, but none of the other state schools.  People talk about government jobs in Columbus, but not government jobs anywhere else.  That kind of thing irks me to no end, honestly, and I find that to be a dishonest discussion.  Not necessarily saying from you, but there are some people who really push that narrative for whatever reason.

 

 

 

 

The other 2-Cs had different histories and made different choices than Columbus. 

 

I don't think that these cities made too many conscious choices that determined their respective destinies.  The fact is that no matter of seismic importance has appeared on a Cincinnati ballot since the 1940s, back when Ohio law made it difficult for its cities to sell municipal bonds, and we lost the region's airport to Boone County, KY.  As has been discussed on this site many times, a superregional airport serving Cincinnati and Dayton would have changed everything.  But merely having a Hamilton County airport serving Cincinnati would have as well. 

Twice, people have said more money flows to OSU than CSU.  Not a single link provided.

 

https://www.ohiohighered.org/content/fy2018_operating_budget

 

OSU received $384 million from the state, CSU $75 million.

 

It was claimed that OSU provides no significant benefit to the rest of the state outside of the local area, with, you guessed it, no facts presented!

 

That was not claimed.  The claim was that the benefits are disproportional, which is quite different (and in my opinion, should be obvious).

 

You have claimed that funding per-capita would be more meaningful than per-student.  You provide no study making this argument or why it's better.  Nor do you even provide a link to per-capita numbers.

 

I cannot think of why I would need to prove that an important metric of the impact of funding to a region would be to measure it per capita.

 

Do I really need to provide per capita numbers for you?  Let's assume for argument's sake that the Cleveland and Columbus metro areas (a "good enough" approximation of the population of the respective local economies) are the same size.  Even so, with the numbers I gave you above, Columbus is receiving over 5 times as much funding for its large public university than Cleveland.  This is obviously going to have a larger impact on the local economy.  If you need a link, create a link back to the first sentence of this paragraph and reread it.

 

You then claim that CWRU provides a greater benefit to Ohio than OSU- yep, with no corresponding evidence.

 

http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/20180605/blogs03/163991/case-western-reserve-ohio-state-are-nih-powerhouses

 

Regardless of the overall impact of each university, in terms of ROI of our state tax dollars, you can't beat CWRU since it is a private university.  Cleveland residents are heavily funding Ohio State but Columbus residents are not heavily funding CWRU.

 

I swear to god, humans suck. 

 

You're human, too.

The other 2-Cs had different histories and made different choices than Columbus. 

 

I don't think that these cities made too many conscious choices that determined their respective destinies.  The fact is that no matter of seismic importance has appeared on a Cincinnati ballot since the 1940s, back when Ohio law made it difficult for its cities to sell municipal bonds, and we lost the region's airport to Boone County, KY.  As has been discussed on this site many times, a superregional airport serving Cincinnati and Dayton would have changed everything.  But merely having a Hamilton County airport serving Cincinnati would have as well. 

 

Let's look at some of the big decisions that cities have made in Ohio over the years...

 

Canals -- state built them.  state maintained them.

Railroads -- private investors built them and still own them.  Very, very little railroad infrastructure has been built over the past 150 years by municipalities, the Cincinnati Southern being the great anomaly.

Water - everyone's got water

Sewer - everyone's got sewers

Electric - everyone's got electricity -- Hamilton actually built and owns a hydro plant on the Ohio River, so that is unusual

Airports - everyone's got an airport, mostly funded by the feds

Universities - everyone's got one or two, but their particular trajectories were not determined by their respective cities

Rail Public Transit - Cincinnati attempted to build a rapid transit system with city dollars; Cleveland has a system that was partly built by investors

Electric Buses - for reasons unknown Dayton still has its electric trolleybuses

Expressways -- everyone's got them; overwhelmingly funded by federal gasoline tax

Gas streetlights -- Cincinnati still has a bunch of them, for unknown reasons

Annexation -- Columbus keeps annexing, Cincinnati and Cleveland can't

Waterfront redevelopment -- Cleveland and Cincinnati have largely redeveloped their industrial waterfronts.  Columbus never had industry on the Scioto. 

 

 

Am I missing anything?  My point is that there aren't many conscious decisions that cities can make regarding their respective trajectories.  People are unwilling to accept that a lot of stuff, good or bad, happens by chance. 

 

 

 

 

"Annexation -- Columbus keeps annexing, Cincinnati and Cleveland can't"

 

Why not? I'm not saying its not true---and there hasn't been any CLE annexations in ages--but wondering if there is a some legal (or other) reason why this is the case. Thanks.

What land would Cleveland annex? They're completely hemmed in by other municipalities, and I doubt any of them are willing to merge with Cleveland any time soon.

"Annexation -- Columbus keeps annexing, Cincinnati and Cleveland can't"

 

Why not? I'm not saying its not true---and there hasn't been any CLE annexations in ages--but wondering if there is a some legal (or other) reason why this is the case. Thanks.

 

Because voters in both cities involved in an annexation would have to approve it. The only municipality's voters who might approve it are in East Cleveland, but would Cleveland voters? Especially without some serious infrastructure financing incentives from the state and/or feds.

"Annexation -- Columbus keeps annexing, Cincinnati and Cleveland can't"

 

Why not? I'm not saying its not true---and there hasn't been any CLE annexations in ages--but wondering if there is a some legal (or other) reason why this is the case. Thanks.

 

 

Columbus annexations have slowed almost to a halt since the late '90s. Pretty sure it's been less than 20 square miles since then. Annexation is only for very specific situations these days.

 

jonoh81's site goes into this, but it looks like the image link needs fixed:

 

Columbus’ Shrinking Annexation

http://allcolumbusdata.com/?p=4675

 

 

^And there is no motivation for Cincinnati to annex anything.  The shape of the city as-is a big reason why it gets by with a significantly lower tax burden than Columbus or Cleveland.  Ohio set things up back in the 40s with its silly earnings tax rule to favor business over residents.  Cincinnati's shape has the region's #1 and #2 employment centers in it, plus the giant railroad yard, plus all of the river-related industry that can't physically move. 

 

Downtown and UC/hospitals pay for everything else.  Annexing unincorporated areas like Colerain or Green Twp make no sense because Cincinnati is already getting the earnings tax from any and all township residents who work in Cincinnati. They only gain earnings tax from people who currently reside AND work in those townships, and there aren't many high-paying professional jobs out there.  Its mostly gas station/Taco Bell.  Manager at Lens Crafters is about as good as it gets. 

Cities have figured out by now that annexing areas with a bunch of 3-5 acre lots with one house on them is a net negative. A property that's 5 acres but worth only $150,000 (or less) like you see in parts of Columbus annexed before the '70s only takes. That's only $30,000 an acre and maybe 3-4 residents. Plus you wind up with rusty '78 Novas that haven't run since 1990 and home-built sheds all over the place.

"Annexation -- Columbus keeps annexing, Cincinnati and Cleveland can't"

 

Why not? I'm not saying its not true---and there hasn't been any CLE annexations in ages--but wondering if there is a some legal (or other) reason why this is the case. Thanks.

 

 

Columbus annexations have slowed almost to a halt since the late '90s. Pretty sure it's been less than 20 square miles since then. Annexation is only for very specific situations these days.

 

jonoh81's site goes into this, but it looks like the image link needs fixed:

 

Columbus’ Shrinking Annexation

http://allcolumbusdata.com/?p=4675

 

 

 

20 Square miles is still a lot of city.  Cleveland is only 80 total.

Right, but are malls and horse tracks as good as true urbanism?

^And there is no motivation for Cincinnati to annex anything.  The shape of the city as-is a big reason why it gets by with a significantly lower tax burden than Columbus or Cleveland.  Ohio set things up back in the 40s with its silly earnings tax rule to favor business over residents.  Cincinnati's shape has the region's #1 and #2 employment centers in it, plus the giant railroad yard, plus all of the river-related industry that can't physically move. 

 

Downtown and UC/hospitals pay for everything else.  Annexing unincorporated areas like Colerain or Green Twp make no sense because Cincinnati is already getting the earnings tax from any and all township residents who work in Cincinnati. They only gain earnings tax from people who currently reside AND work in those townships, and there aren't many high-paying professional jobs out there.  Its mostly gas station/Taco Bell.  Manager at Lens Crafters is about as good as it gets. 

 

I am sure they would annex Blue Ash if given the opportunity. But to your point, it is why Norwood is an island in the middle of the city.

I am sure they would annex Blue Ash if given the opportunity. But to your point, it is why Norwood is an island in the middle of the city.

 

 

Correct.  Blue Ash is a golden goose, as is Mason. 

 

What is totally crazy about Cincinnati's history is that Blue Ash very well would have been annexed if the Blue Ash Airport had become the city's main airport.  But that area would of course not become the area's prime suburban office area if the airport land had not been sold off piecemeal starting around 1970.  There was also the pesky matter of the lightly-used freight railroad running right through the proposed airfield...that lightly-used line is still lightly-used today.  So I guess they would have had to put it in a trench and then bridge it with the runways. 

 

 

 

Right, but are malls and horse tracks as good as true urbanism?

 

The Tax revenue generated around them that allows cities, like Columbus to pay for infrastructure in the inner city may be in small spurts!

Cleveland is also engaging in revenue-sharing agreements when it extends water lines to new suburban developments or when a major employer leaves Cleveland for the suburbs (aka Eaton).

Cincinnati's biggest impediment to the regional model is the city pension. They cant offload it because OPERS does not want it but they cant move new employees to OPERS because it would cause the current system to become insolvent. The county and anyone outside the city would never let their employees go to the city pension system because of the riskiness of it so it is a huge albatross that keeps things from getting done.

Is much of this talk recently really about population trends, or other things at this point?  Much seems really tangential at best. Just sayin'.

"Annexation -- Columbus keeps annexing, Cincinnati and Cleveland can't"

 

Why not? I'm not saying its not true---and there hasn't been any CLE annexations in ages--but wondering if there is a some legal (or other) reason why this is the case. Thanks.

 

 

Columbus annexations have slowed almost to a halt since the late '90s. Pretty sure it's been less than 20 square miles since then. Annexation is only for very specific situations these days.

 

jonoh81's site goes into this, but it looks like the image link needs fixed:

 

Columbus’ Shrinking Annexation

http://allcolumbusdata.com/?p=4675

 

An updated annexation image can be found on the Demographics page. 

So the 1990 number is 10 sq. mi. Does that mean that between 1980 and 1900 the city grew by 10 or does it mean that from 1990 to 2000 it grew by 10? I don't know your policy on hotlinking images.

 

Also, strangely my burial plot is next to Mayor Sensenbrenner's so he and I will have a lot of time to talk about these things at some point

So the 1990 number is 10 sq. mi. Does that mean that between 1980 and 1900 the city grew by 10 or does it mean that from 1990 to 2000 it grew by 10? I don't know your policy on hotlinking images.

 

Also, strangely my burial plot is next to Mayor Sensenbrenner's so he and I will have a lot of time to talk about these things at some point

 

The numbers are the totals added to each previous decade. So 1990 includes the 1980s.

I was so confident that this year Painesville would eclipse the Cincinnati suburb of Springdale and achieve 1st place on Ohio's diversity index (what's 2/10 of a point, anyway? They probably cheated--lol), but alas it didn't happen. But although Ohio doesn't have a great record on diversity, 75.8 is still way above the overall national score of 64.3. Wait until next year! (for the full 200 results, click the link and fill in the relevant options)

 

https://ohio.hometownlocator.com/census/sorted-demographics.cfm

 

Cleveland gained wooster to it's CSA.

Columbus stayed the same.

Cincinnati did not absorb Dayton.

 

Next revision should be in 2023.

 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Bulletin-18-04.pdf

^did summit and portage become part of Cleveland MSA?

^did summit and portage become part of Cleveland MSA?

 

No.  The only MSA change was Cincinnati adding another small Indiana county, and is now 16 counties.

Which county did Cincinnati add?

 

^ It looks like it was Union County.

http://allcolumbusdata.com/?p=5767

 

An update on foreign-born population in all major Ohio cities for 2017, and a comparison to other cities nationally.

http://allcolumbusdata.com/?p=5767

 

An update on foreign-born population in all major Ohio cities for 2017, and a comparison to other cities nationally.

 

It's interesting what's going on in Chicago. They seem to be losing a lot of everything lately.

I saw some interesting MSA/CSA news over on SSP that I thought might spark some discussion here. The Feds changed and updated the MSA and CSA boundaries, and that has led to two changes for Ohio's big cities:

 

1) Cincinnati MSA adds Franklin County, Indiana (22,000 people)

 

2) Cleveland CSA adds the Wooster Micropolitan Area (116,000 people)

 

It's notable that Cincinnati and Dayton have not been combined into a single CSA, and Cleveland and Akron have not been combined into a single MSA, either. Columbus experienced no changes at either the CSA or MSA level.

I've never even heard of Franklin County, IN.  Aside from I-74, it looks like I've been there 1-2 times in my life. 

http://allcolumbusdata.com/?p=5781

 

Columbus-centered, but here are the updated numbers for all racial demographics for all major Midwest cities for 2017.

I've never even heard of Franklin County, IN.  Aside from I-74, it looks like I've been there 1-2 times in my life. 

 

Where is Franklin County? Is that Batesville?

Only a portion of Batesville is in Franklin County. Most of it is in Ripley. Franklin is pretty empty; the largest town is Brookville, which is only 2600 people.

Franklin County was already part of the Cincinnati MSA. It is Union County, Indiana that was added.

http://allcolumbusdata.com/?p=5781

 

Columbus-centered, but here are the updated numbers for all racial demographics for all major Midwest cities for 2017.

 

Weird choices for "Peer Cities"

 

Providence, Akron, Virginia Beach, San Antonio, Toledo, Portland, Ft. Wayne all on the same list.

http://allcolumbusdata.com/?p=5781

 

Columbus-centered, but here are the updated numbers for all racial demographics for all major Midwest cities for 2017.

 

Weird choices for "Peer Cities"

 

Providence, Akron, Virginia Beach, San Antonio, Toledo, Portland, Ft. Wayne all on the same list.

 

It's a comparison of all major Midwest cities along with Columbus' national peers.  Virginia Beach, San Antonio and Portland fall under the latter.  I determined "peer" cities using metro size between 1.5-2.5 million.

Franklin County was already part of the Cincinnati MSA. It is Union County, Indiana that was added.

 

Haven't heard of Union County, either. 

Franklin County was already part of the Cincinnati MSA. It is Union County, Indiana that was added.

 

Haven't heard of Union County, either.

 

It's northwest of Oxford, out US 27. There are only a little over 7,000 people living there.

Franklin County was already part of the Cincinnati MSA. It is Union County, Indiana that was added.

 

Thanks for the correction. I should have looked at the information myself rather than just relying on someone else's post.

 

It's pretty ridiculous that a county with 7,000 people (population density of 43 ppsm) is included in a MSA. It's quite obviously a rural county, with almost no connections to Cincinnati. I imagine a good chunk of the 7,000 people who live there commute over to Oxford or Hamilton, which is why they got included in the MSA, but I think this points to some pretty weird methodology. Cuyahoga and Summit Counties are adjacent to each other and are counted as separate MSAs, but this rural county way the hell out there in Indiana gets added to Cincinnati's MSA? Nonsense.

Well, Cuyahoga and Summit are both self-sustaining counties with large job bases.  Clearly Union County, IN is not so they probably have to drive to Butler County to work.

^ I get that, but the commuting methodology has led us to counter-intuitive results, like having a rural county in Indiana that is 60 miles from Downtown Cincinnati included in the 'metropolitan area'. Stuff like this makes MSA seem like a pretty silly statistic to use for any sort of analysis. There should be some sort of contiguous development component to MSA designation, I think. Or maybe we should just use Urbanized Area for discussions, and eschew MSA altogether.

 

I know (think?) all of this stuff is decided by commuting patterns, but if Cuyahoga and Summit counties are in separate MSAs because they are both self-sustaining and have large job bases, how does Orange County and it's 3 million people get added to LA's MSA? How does Alameda County (Oakland) get lumped in with San Francisco's MSA? It seems like there are several examples of this around the country, yet Cleveland and Akron remain separate. I have hypothesized in the past that Cuyahoga Valley National Park has contributed to the separation, but I have nothing other than a hunch to support that. Does anyone know if there is a database with commuting numbers by county? That would be very interesting data, I think.

^ I get that, but the commuting methodology has led us to counter-intuitive results, like having a rural county in Indiana that is 60 miles from Downtown Cincinnati included in the 'metropolitan area'. Stuff like this makes MSA seem like a pretty silly statistic to use for any sort of analysis. There should be some sort of contiguous development component to MSA designation, I think. Or maybe we should just use Urbanized Area for discussions, and eschew MSA altogether.

 

I know (think?) all of this stuff is decided by commuting patterns, but if Cuyahoga and Summit counties are in separate MSAs because they are both self-sustaining and have large job bases, how does Orange County and it's 3 million people get added to LA's MSA? How does Alameda County (Oakland) get lumped in with San Francisco's MSA? It seems like there are several examples of this around the country, yet Cleveland and Akron remain separate. I have hypothesized in the past that Cuyahoga Valley National Park has contributed to the separation, but I have nothing other than a hunch to support that. Does anyone know if there is a database with commuting numbers by county? That would be very interesting data, I think.

 

I agree it's a littler weird. I do think urbanized area is probably a better metric for most of our discussions here.

This application allows you to search for county-to-county commuter flows:

 

https://onthemap.ces.census.gov/

^ I get that, but the commuting methodology has led us to counter-intuitive results, like having a rural county in Indiana that is 60 miles from Downtown Cincinnati included in the 'metropolitan area'. Stuff like this makes MSA seem like a pretty silly statistic to use for any sort of analysis. There should be some sort of contiguous development component to MSA designation, I think. Or maybe we should just use Urbanized Area for discussions, and eschew MSA altogether.

 

I know (think?) all of this stuff is decided by commuting patterns, but if Cuyahoga and Summit counties are in separate MSAs because they are both self-sustaining and have large job bases, how does Orange County and it's 3 million people get added to LA's MSA? How does Alameda County (Oakland) get lumped in with San Francisco's MSA? It seems like there are several examples of this around the country, yet Cleveland and Akron remain separate. I have hypothesized in the past that Cuyahoga Valley National Park has contributed to the separation, but I have nothing other than a hunch to support that. Does anyone know if there is a database with commuting numbers by county? That would be very interesting data, I think.

 

You're completely right. Its not consistent. Summit and Portage counties are very tied to the economy of Cleveland and many communities in those counties would not exist without Cleveland. Akron City itself is tied to Cleveland. Akron should be be part of the Cleveland MSA. Akron actively fights this though as they want their own identity, which is silly as it hurts both them and the region.