i saw a cop on a segway coming out of my part of PRidge a few months back. I was a little surprised.

 

I live right off Montgomery, adjacent to the business district of the Ridge, and have never seen one.  Must not be a regular thing.

 

Well, i did say i was surprised.  He was coming off of Woodford towards Ridge near Nativity.

Another thing to consider is that the Segways may free up cruisers.  If you are making a Segway patrol, you have a much larger range from the police station than if you do if you are walking.  If you need to do a patrol 3 miles from the station, you probably would drive there and leave a cruiser sitting there, not being used during the walking patrol, but with the segway, you could segway to and from the patrol area.

Speaking of money for the schools, how come none of CPS's end products seem to understand how a budget works? That operations and capital budgets are completely separate, and for good reason? That of the extraordinary sum of $48 million being spent to rehab Hughs High School, none of it can be diverted to teacher's salaries or police salaries? 

 

This hole in the public's knowledge is what COAST and to a large extent all republican anti-tax groups exploit, then they accuse you of saying the public's too dumb to understand an issue. Schools districts whip up emotion by cutting buses and art classes and raising sports fees; cities lay off police under the threat that crime will skyrocket. 

 

As for the segway issue, let's leave it to the police to decide what they think works best.  To me segway's don't seem to have much advantage over police mountain bikes (especially since bikes can go much faster, go on grass, etc.), but then again I've never policed anything other than some parties I threw in college. 

 

 

Cops on Segways remind me of this chase:

 

Speaking of money for the schools, how come none of CPS's end products seem to understand how a budget works? That operations and capital budgets are completely separate, and for good reason? That of the extraordinary sum of $48 million being spent to rehab Hughs High School, none of it can be diverted to teacher's salaries or police salaries?  

 

This hole in the public's knowledge is what COAST and to a large extent all republican anti-tax groups exploit, then they accuse you of saying the public's too dumb to understand an issue. Schools districts whip up emotion by cutting buses and art classes and raising sports fees; cities lay off police under the threat that crime will skyrocket.

 

As for the segway issue, let's leave it to the police to decide what they think works best. To me segway's don't seem to have much advantage over police mountain bikes (especially since bikes can go much faster, go on grass, etc.), but then again I've never policed anything other than some parties I threw in college.  

 

No one exploits the difference between budgets, and most people understand it.  They just focus on the step that comes before the budget is made - the part where money is taken out of taxpayers paychecks. 

Short-sighted policy decisions ruling budget debate

http://www.urbancincy.com/2009/08/short-sighted-policy-decisions-ruling.html

 

Difficult budget decisions combined with an election year, make for a truly wonderful time to follow politics. That is if you enjoy constant bickering, grand standing and get nowhere fast style of government.

 

What is happening now in Cincinnati is not unusual. A projected budget deficit during an economic downturn has resulted in City leaders having to make very tough decisions about where to make cuts in order to balance the budget until revenues once again increase. What this has led to is a back-and-forth political mud slinging contest.

 

The City Manager laid out his plan to balance the budget and that included the unpopular decision to cut 138 members from the police department. Making political matters worse, the Fraternal Order of Police has refused to make any concessions in order to help preserve their own workforce, saying that the cuts need to come from other departments.

 

This is not new. The police and fire unions across this country are some of the strongest around and hold a hard position. They are fighting for their constituents which is reasonable, but it is up to the policy makers to hear their argument and make an informed decision based on more than just the hard stance of one or two city departments. Over the past several years other departments have been sustaining cuts, while the police force has actually grown.

 

Yesterday a group of four City Council members announced their plan to save all 138 police positions. Their solution: delay a $2.5 million payment to Cincinnati Public Schools that is due in October. This would save the jobs through the rest of 2009, but not help out the cause in 2010. So they go on to suggest cutting the Planning Department, Comprehensive Plan funding, and the Office of Environmental Quality (OEQ) to name a few.

 

What is interesting is that the Planning Department is already undersized for the a city as large as Cincinnati, the Comprehensive Plan money is coming from the Capital Budget and therefore can not be used for operational costs like police or fire, and the OEQ is basically a skeleton staff that was recently formed and has been bringing in money and making city services more efficient.

 

A recent report comparing recycling program costs for 2010 found that the proposed cuts to the enhanced recycling program would actually cost the City more money than it would save. The reason is that the current recycling contract costs the City $1,179,360 each year, while the enhanced program costs $980,519 each year, thus resulting in an additional $198,841 in costs for recycling while having a less effective program. The financials work out this way due to increased revenue and savings with the enhanced program. The current recycling contract recoups about 46% of its total contract cost through revenue and savings, while the enhanced program recoups around 77% of its total contract cost - offsetting the additional cost of the program and then some.

 

 

At the same time the elimination of the Office of Environmental Quality would cost the City roughly $17 million in lost revenue. The OEQ had a budget (pdf) of just under $3 million in 2009, but saved the City $650,000 in energy services performance contracts and other energy management efforts. Furthermore, the OEQ brought in $19,319,500 in grant money that would more than likely be lost as a result of cutting the department.

 

The numbers speak for themselves, but nobody seems to be discussing them. A reasonable debate about these tough budget decisions should be had, but said debate should be done on facts and available resources instead of political will and lobbying power.

 

Do we know if these 138 positions in the CPD are needed? Do we know the optimum level for a police force in order to reach the desired safety levels in our community? Maybe we need more, maybe less, or maybe everything is at an appropriate level right now. All I can say for sure is that I do not know, and I would love to see an audit that would investigate just how much we should be allocating to public safety each year to reach desired results before we keep pouring more and more limited resources into a single department at the expense of the rest.

 

Please contact City leaders and let them know how you feel on this issue. You can find all of the necessary contact information and additional action items HERE.

Do we know if these 138 positions in the CPD are needed?

 

This is a question that I admit I didn't stop to consider when the news first broke that the city was letting these guys go.  It's definitely a valid question, and probably the most important one.

 

Living in Walnut Hills, I can tell you that there's a SEVERE lack of police presence in the area.  But if I go further east into Hyde Park, Mt. Lookout and Columbia-Tusculum, police are EVERYWHERE.  Maybe the city could make do by putting bodies where we actually need them?

^ But who will make sure nobody is mistakenly eating their dinner with their salad fork?

Do we know if these 138 positions in the CPD are needed?

 

This is a question that I admit I didn't stop to consider when the news first broke that the city was letting these guys go. It's definitely a valid question, and probably the most important one.

 

Living in Walnut Hills, I can tell you that there's a SEVERE lack of police presence in the area. But if I go further east into Hyde Park, Mt. Lookout and Columbia-Tusculum, police are EVERYWHERE. Maybe the city could make do by putting bodies where we actually need them?

 

Are you in Walnut Hills or East Walnut Hills? or do you notice a severe lack of police presence in both?  East Walnut Hills falls in District 2 which is the same district as Hyde Park, Mt. Lookout and Columbia-Tusculum; while Walnut Hills falls in District 4 which includes Mt. Auburn, Avondale and up to Roselawn, Carthage and Roselawn.  Maybe there is a lack of a presence there because it's the border. i really don't know and am not a huge defender of the PD.

Do we know if these 138 positions in the CPD are needed?

 

This is a question that I admit I didn't stop to consider when the news first broke that the city was letting these guys go. It's definitely a valid question, and probably the most important one.

 

Living in Walnut Hills, I can tell you that there's a SEVERE lack of police presence in the area. But if I go further east into Hyde Park, Mt. Lookout and Columbia-Tusculum, police are EVERYWHERE. Maybe the city could make do by putting bodies where we actually need them?

 

Are you in Walnut Hills or East Walnut Hills? or do you notice a severe lack of police presence in both? East Walnut Hills falls in District 2 which is the same district as Hyde Park, Mt. Lookout and Columbia-Tusculum; while Walnut Hills falls in District 4 which includes Mt. Auburn, Avondale and up to Roselawn, Carthage and Roselawn. Maybe there is a lack of a presence there because it's the border. i really don't know and am not a huge defender of the PD.

 

Up until a month ago, I lived firmly in Walnut Hills.  I moved a few streets over and now, I guess it's technically East Walnut Hills.  To be honest, the lack of police presence around my current place doesn't bother me.  We don't need it.  But Walnut Hills proper is a neighborhood that desperately needs a larger police presence.  It's gotten to the point where it's almost comical.

Police officers, firefighters could be laid off under new city budget plan

By Jane Prendergast • [email protected] • November 23, 2009

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20091123/NEWS0108/311230077/City+could+lay+off+cops

 

Since 2000, the city has eliminated more than 800 full-time equivalent jobs in departments other than public safety, where sworn jobs increased 1.7 percent during the same time period.

Oh man, I live in Carthage and I don't see how this will go over well at all with the people here.

Everyone's already fuming over the School Board closing Carthage Paideia elementary school. Which, by the way, has either been the top ranked or second highest ranked elementary school in the district the last couple of years.

Now might close the Carthage Community Center. Community leaders here are going to flip their lids.

You take this away and you end up taking away all the youth programs that it has to offer. Not to mention all the stuff for Senior citizens. I even go there to use the weight room. It only costed me $15 for the whole year. It's small but has everything I need.

I don't think they put much thought into these things when they make decisions like this. Wait, that's been this cities problem for the last 10 years or so. So it should come as no surprise.

Nonetheless, people here in Carthage are going to think their getting picked on.

 

Hey, will this really mean people in Carthage will have no kind of community center? If that is true, maybe someone could rally the community to start a non-profit one, like in an empty storefront or maybe an empty building. You could apply for grants, even grants from the city when the economy improves.

Winburn unveils proposed budget cuts

by Jane Prendergast December 14, 2009

 

As Cincinnati City Council nears its vote for a budget that fills a $51 million deficit, some members have begun offering ideas on what to cut and what to spare.

 

i think my favorite part of this article is this quote from Charlie Winburn:

 

“I don’t want to pat myself on the back,” Winburn said, “but every once in awhile you have to, I guess.”

 

Yep, he's been on the job now for 9 or 10 days and he's congratulating himself? i guess that counts as every once in a while.

I saw that too.... I thought to myself "what an arrogant a$$hole.

Last night I attended a budget presentation (facilitated by Invest in Neighborhoods) by Lea Eriksen (City Budget Director) and Milton Dohoney (City Manager).  Some scary loss of revenue issues were brought up:

1) in the next two years we will be losing a total of ~$25 million per year from the operating budget due to Kasich's state budget cuts (halving of state local fund and loss of Ohio inheritance tax revenues)

2) due to City Council's change in policy of not maintaining the city property tax amounts we will lose over $3 million per year in operating tax revenue

 

Another thing noted was that while public safety (police and fire) budgets have been maintained and even slightly grown since 2000, other areas have had their operating budgets cut 20% to 40%+.  The public safety operational budget now comprises nearly 70% of the operating budget.  When you have an over $28+ million operational budget deficit created from revenue cuts by Republican members of state/city governments AND you can't cut public safety due to Republican and some Democrat opposition what can be done?

I tweeted Manager Dohoney's presser, but here is a synopsis: Cincinnati City Manager Milton Dohoney announced today that the proposed 2012 budget is balanced, with no layoffs. Income tax receipts were up and the city renegotiated the Convergys deal, yielding the city $14M and a commitment from Convergys to stay downtown thru 2020 & includes a $5M clawback provision should staffing goals not be reached. Riverfront & Washington Parks fully funded, in addition to maintain CPS nurses and reserve accounts. Increased funding to Community Councils, Film Commission, Port Authority, & Econ Development. Utility (water & sewer) rates set to increase slightly due to needed improvements for aging infrastructure.

 

Articles:

 

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/politics/2011/12/02/city-budget-no-layoffs-this-time-14m-from-convergys/

http://www.wlwt.com/money/29906900/detail.html

 

Overall, good news for Cincinnati.

http://www.fox19.com/story/16173594/city-managers-budget-includes-no-layoffs

http://www.fox19.com/story/16173594/city-managers-budget-includes-no-layoffs

Over the past few years, the city has faced laying off police officers and firefighters. However, Dohoney said this year, a grant is helping to fund 25 police officers and firefighters have made concessions in the way they do training in order to save money.

 

Takes the bite off the FOP's (illogical) anti-streetcar stance. At least for another year.

Riverfront & Washington Parks fully funded, in addition to maintain CPS nurses and reserve accounts. Increased funding to Community Councils, Film Commission, Port Authority, & Econ Development. Utility (water & sewer) rates set to increase slightly due to needed improvements for aging infrastructure.

 

Where did you get this info, because I have been unable to find the supporting details?

Riverfront & Washington Parks fully funded, in addition to maintain CPS nurses and reserve accounts. Increased funding to Community Councils, Film Commission, Port Authority, & Econ Development. Utility (water & sewer) rates set to increase slightly due to needed improvements for aging infrastructure.

 

 

Where did you get this info, because I have been unable to find the supporting details?

 

I got this info from the press conference. I was watching and tweeting live. So if it isn't published anywhere yet, its only in my notes (and the budget). But @janeprendergast tweeted it as well: http://twitter.com/janeprendergast

Mods: can we change the name of this thread to City of Cincinnati Budget?

 

I just compared the 2010 and 2015 revenues.  Here is what has changed over the past five years, since the depths of the recession:

 

Income Tax:  Increased from $215M to $260M  (+$45M)

 

Property Tax: $28.9M/28.9M  (property tax rate fluctuates each year to keep taxation at 1999 levels)

 

Local Gov. Fund:  Decreased $40M to 13M  (all caused by the election of John Kasich -- elimination of state inheritance tax and other items)

 

Investments: Decreased from $8M to 2.5M

 

Other: Increased from $41M to $46M  (includes Cincinnati Southern Railway lease revenue

 

Parking: $0 to $1.5M ("parking" was not its own category until the Cranley era)

 

Casino: $0 to $8M

 

>>>

 

Overall, city revenue has increased from $332.9 to $360M in five years.  Increases in income tax and casino revenue have more than offset losses in state shared revenue (local government fund) and "investments".  If not for the elimination of the state inheritance tax and other damage to the local government fund, city revenues would have increased by roughly $55 million.  With each tenth of one-percent of the earnings tax bringing approximately $13 million, the city could have a balanced 2016-2017 budget after lowering the earnings tax from 1.8% to 1.4%.  Discuss. 

 

 

 

 

^I'll throw this out there: A great school system would have more of an impact to increase the city's population than lowering incoming taxes ever will.

Yeah I would rather have better public transit, public schools, etc than a couple hundred bucks back on my taxes.

My only thought in favor of reducing the earnings tax - think of the marketing for the city! The impression that would give for Cincinnati to lower the earnings tax (even just 0.1 or 0.2%) would be huge. Otherwise, I would also like to see the extra revenues passed on to transit or public health or something.

There is a completely mistaken perception that Cincinnati's taxes are high.  They are currently lower than Cleveland, Columbus, and many smaller Ohio cities.  And they are *significantly* lower than NKY's various municipal earnings taxes, many of which are at 2.5% (Covington, Newport, etc.). 

 

I'd love to see the earnings tax lowered and then have an obnoxious TV ad aired making fun of the tea party.  Those guys really and truly DO NOT ever actually look at and compare municipal budgets.  They just think whatever some loud-mouth tells them to think. 

 

I think part of that misconception is from people who live in townships in Ohio who do not levy an earnings tax. Which places like delhi and sycamore have significant populations and then if you work in Cincinnati limits then you see this as an 'extra tax' you wouldn't normally pay.

 

Because of this i would have to think townships leech resources from the County's they reside in due to their inability to pay for increased services as population of the township increases.

^I'll throw this out there: A great school system would have more of an impact to increase the city's population than lowering incoming taxes ever will.

 

This, this, and this!

I think part of that misconception is from people who live in townships in Ohio who do not levy an earnings tax. Which places like delhi and sycamore have significant populations and then if you work in Cincinnati limits then you see this as an 'extra tax' you wouldn't normally pay.

 

Because of this i would have to think townships leech resources from the County's they reside in due to their inability to pay for increased services as population of the township increases.

 

In Ohio, if a township wants to levy a tax, they have to incorporate. So all of the people who live in a township and work in the city have to pay the full city earning tax.

 

We are lucky that Ohio doesn't have the concept of a "charter township" like Michigan does. Michigan allows townships to become a "charter township" which gives it extra rights (including the right to levy taxes) and protections against being annexed by cities. Imagine if all of the suburban townships around Cincinnati could start levying a 0.2% earnings tax to pay for basic services, which would reduce Cincinnati's share of the earning tax revenue by that amount. That would be devastating for Ohio cities.

Right -- so if somebody lives in an unincorporated area that decides to become a city and levy a 1% earnings tax, they would still pay 2.1% total earnings tax, but 1% would go to the city where they reside and 1.1% would go to Cincinnati (although I'm not sure how these situations work out so far as how much goes to Metro). 

Murray blames talk of raising part-time city worker wages to $15 for current budget crisis...um okay. 

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/opinion/contributors/2017/03/26/budget-deficit-more-than-numbers-spreadsheet/99536150/

Murray blames talk of raising part-time city worker wages to $15 for current budget crisis...um okay. 

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/opinion/contributors/2017/03/26/budget-deficit-more-than-numbers-spreadsheet/99536150/

 

 

Shhhhhh! Quit talking about it Jake, you are just making the budget deficit worse the more you speak!!!!

 

New council's first action?  Raising property taxes:

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2018/01/08/majority-cincinnati-city-council-votes-raise-taxes-property-owners/1013014001/

 

Unbelievable.  Imagine the uproar if this had happened under Mallory.

From the 10/23/06 Enquirer:

 

 

Budget woes squeezing city

Focus on police spending means less for other functions

BY DAN KLEPAL | ENQUIRER STAFF WRITER

 

In coming weeks, city of Cincinnati officials will begin debating a two-year budget written by a new city manager.

 

Click on link for article.

 

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061023/NEWS01/610230392/1077/COL02

 

 

Here's a headline from 12 years ago. Link doesn't work but not much has changed.

New council's first action?  Raising property taxes:

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2018/01/08/majority-cincinnati-city-council-votes-raise-taxes-property-owners/1013014001/

 

Unbelievable.  Imagine the uproar if this had happened under Mallory.

 

I can't even find this anywhere on the front page of the Enquirer website.  It is listed as the 27th story on the News section.

 

Only 2 comments, because no one has seen it, to protect Cranley.

 

***One of the top stories, Cincy sees a rash of closings, Neighborhoods have gunshots, Team kicked off rec league for racist shirts

 

Streetcar article?  Front Page, for 3 business days, 80 comments,

Well to be fair it is WAY down at number 3 on their priorities list for the new year..........https://www.cincinnati.com/story/opinion/editorials/2018/01/05/our-2018-editorial-board-agenda/998130001/

 

 

Amplifying our watchdog function - holding governments accountable for how they spend the people’s tax dollars, maintain transparency and adhere to Ohio’s open records laws.

 

 

Bottom line is that it doesn't matter when tea partiers raise taxes.  If you point out to a tea partier that Kasich raised the state sales tax, first they deny, then they accept but deny at the same time. 

^They like sales taxes because poors pay them

New council's first action?  Raising property taxes:

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2018/01/08/majority-cincinnati-city-council-votes-raise-taxes-property-owners/1013014001/

 

Unbelievable.  Imagine the uproar if this had happened under Mallory.

 

The article only talked about this increase in terms of how many additional dollars the owner of a $100,000 home would pay. It would be helpful information to know that the previous millage was, and the new millage council approved, but apparently the Enquirer did not think this was relevant information to include in their article.

 

Additionally, Cincinnati's earning tax rate is still lower than Columbus, Cleveland, Toledo, Dayton, and Akron.

Edited my previous post to remove some incorrect details. Since the Enquirer did not actually include any details about which property tax was increased and by how much, I was making an assumption. Fortunately the Business Courier did include these details in their article. Council voted for "Option 2", which was to increase the property tax rate for the capital budget (a.k.a. debt service) by 1 mill to 7.5 mills. Council rejected "Option 1" which would have raised the property tax rate for the operating budget back to 6.1 mills, the amount previously approved by voters; however, that millage has been decreased each year for the past 15 years due to an asinine policy to cap the city's revenue at $29 million.

The city manager said during the presentation yesterday that in 2022 a lot of excess bond capacity would be available. (I probably haven't gotten the wording right.) Does anyone know the reason for that?

^ most likely one of the 30 year bonds in 1992 that they are paying on would have matured or a number of smaller bonds for infrastructure would have matured by then and they no longer have to make the debt service payments on them.

According to the city's most recent comprehensive annual financial report these are the debts that will be coming off the books soon:

 

General Obligation Bonds - $30,000,000 issued in 1987; fully paid off in 2018

Urban Redevelopment - $1,085,000 issued in 2014; fully paid off in 2021

Recreational Facilities - $5,950,000 issued in 2007; fully paid off in 2021

 

There is other various debt that rolls off the books between 2020-2040 but it doesn't show me how much comes off the books when.

 

The city currently has $1,181,058,000 in debt outstanding.

Since the tax rate will go up this year but the WHV bonds won't be issued until around 2021, what happens with that extra revenue in the mean time? Does it just get used to pay down other bonds or do we hold on to the cash?

That's a good question. I can't imagine they just sit on it so they could use it to fund one-time capital costs or pay down other debt.

Enquirer has an article today about the state of Cincinnati's debt load.

 

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2018/03/07/cincinnati-now-pays-50-m-interest-its-debt-problem-city-says-no/398991002/

 

Cincinnati now pays $50M in interest on its debt. Is that a problem? City says no.

 

What would you do if your monthly credit card bills jumped more than 50 percent over 10 years? What's worse, you're nearly maxed out on those cards, because you needed to keep borrowing to keep up with expenses.

 

Congratulations. You now face the same situation as the city of Cincinnati.

 

Rising debt and payments on it are forcing the same hard decisions for city officials that anyone would need to make at their kitchen table.

 

The city's now paying nearly $50 million a year in interest on its debt – roughly equal to what it takes to run Cincinnati's health department, including its eight neighborhood clinics, for a year.

 

Here are just a few such recent decisions:

• Borrowing $35 million to help patch a hole in Cincinnati's ailing pension system.
  
• Taking out $100 million in bonds to repair roads and replace aging city police cars, dump trucks and other vehicles.
  
• Letting development projects linger, including the block-long expanse of concrete and mud at the site of the former city parking garage at Fourth and Race streets, because the city can't borrow more.
  

What's at stake with this balance sheet bingo?

 

In the short term, the city wants to borrow even more for high-profile projects. The projects include:

• New or renovated buildings for the police and fire departments for nearly $30 million.
  
• A $33 million loan to cover the city's share to replace the Western Hills Viaduct.
  
• A potential multimillion-dollar contribution to help cover infrastructure costs around a new pro soccer stadium for FC Cincinnati.
  

The huge debt load worries some observers, given Cincinnati's role as the economic hub of the region.

Enquirer has an article today about the state of Cincinnati's debt load.

 

Do you think anyone is starting to realizing what a dumpster fire Cranley is?

I think the city is in fine position but they need to finish up the dang development projects to get more economic development moving and tax rolls higher, and it just goes to show Cranley skipped over that part on purpose to fund his other adventures if that in case is true of letting the project linger

It was penny wise, pound foolish to waste $100 million on road resurfacing. We'll be repaving those roads two times over before we are done paying off the debt for this.

Greg Landsman suggests raising the city earnings tax:

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2018/06/06/cincinnati-mayor-john-cranley-budget-litter-cleanup-no-center-closing-health-gap-money/678119002/

 

...which would not be part of the conversation if not for Cranley giving reckless raises to police & fire. 

The city manager released his proposed 2020-21 budget. He listed an estimated $14M deficit going in, which was lower than the $18.9M deficit originally estimated.

 

https://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/manager/news/city-manager-presents-proposed-fy-2020-2021-budget/?fbclid=IwAR2A6CZYAvEFE2WNr9taxxzX1rbxJPCRrSYuZjczpHxSuEYbYa0Igzp_8Qo