2 hours ago, E Rocc said:

 

His comments about Jackson wanting to build a dirt bike track instead of fix the pools in his district (on the Trivvisonno show) made that clear, he only held back in a manner that I suspect ClearChannel/iHeart/whoever they are this week approved of for FCC related reasons.   That segment made up for a lot of particularly weak ones that I tuned out once I heard the traffic report.

 

I've met Polensek many times and he is a straight shooter, he cares about the City and has a vision.

 

I disagree on the dirt bike/pool matter though.  Apples & oranges.  I used to bid on the upkeep required for the pools and it was tremendous.  I think the dirt bike track is an idea that has real merit, it's just been presented so poorly, everyone dismisses it.  A swimming pool will never make money.  A dirt bike track absolutely could.  It's not like the City doesn't have plenty of vacant land either....

On 5/6/2019 at 2:54 PM, Terdolph said:

The difference is that there is a lot of rehabilitatable housing within easy walking distance of Euclid Ave. in E. Cleveland as well as the 120th street rapid station. 

 

The area just needs to be stabilized for investments to be safe.

Which will take years and millions upon millions upon millions of dollars

On 5/6/2019 at 2:54 PM, Terdolph said:

The difference is that there is a lot of rehabilitatable housing within easy walking distance of Euclid Ave. in E. Cleveland as well as the 120th street rapid station. 

 

The area just needs to be stabilized for investments to be safe.

 

Which Rapid station is that, again??

5 minutes ago, Terdolph said:

The one where the red line intersects Euclid.  It could be re-activated.

 

No way that happens...the platform would be 0.2 miles from the one at Little Italy.

23 hours ago, inlovewithCLE said:

Which will take years and millions upon millions upon millions of dollars

 

And a certain degree of political spine.

1 hour ago, Terdolph said:

The station is already there-it just needs to be reactivated.

 

Or am I confused?

 

The Little Italy/University Circle station was intended to replace the Euclid-E.120th, not supplement it.   It's less than a quarter mile away.   The old station probably doesn't meet ADA requirements, and stopping the train twice in such a short span would be extremely inefficient.

On 5/6/2019 at 2:24 PM, gottaplan said:

 

I've met Polensek many times and he is a straight shooter, he cares about the City and has a vision.

 

I disagree on the dirt bike/pool matter though.  Apples & oranges.  I used to bid on the upkeep required for the pools and it was tremendous.  I think the dirt bike track is an idea that has real merit, it's just been presented so poorly, everyone dismisses it.  A swimming pool will never make money.  A dirt bike track absolutely could.  It's not like the City doesn't have plenty of vacant land either....

 

Reality is the dirt bike track would have become a city-sponsored trouble magnet very quickly.  Pretty much any city or inner ring police officer will have the same view on this.  

^ I don’t know, to me the dirt track could be an asset. I mean, skate parks can be trouble magnets too but we have one in the Flats and it’s awesome. 

12 hours ago, surfohio said:

^ I don’t know, to me the dirt track could be an asset. I mean, skate parks can be trouble magnets too but we have one in the Flats and it’s awesome. 

 

Different magnitude of trouble.  Urban skateboarding doesn't have its roots in the drug trade, and gangs aren't involved.  Plus it's not that tough to get one's board there legally.

The Greater Cleveland Partnership is in the beginning stages of looking at government consolidation.

 

This is becoming a big deal.  If the business community is beginning to push for consolidation with the County, this could have a chance of coming to a vote by the people.

 

 

Edited May 14, 20196 yr by Oldmanladyluck

On 5/4/2019 at 10:29 AM, inlovewithCLE said:

I’m a Cleveland resident who has long supported East Cleveland becoming part of Cleveland. My position changes completely if Cleveland Heights were to get the “nice” parts. It would be blasphemous for Cleveland to agree to a merger like that. All of East Cleveland or none of it

 

Just to be clear, the Forest Hill neighborhood extends into a relatively small part of East Cleveland.  In my opinion, the real investment value (growth opportunity) in East Cleveland is along Euclid Avenue (particularly near UC, but not exclusively) and Nela Park -- neither of which is part of Forest Hill.  I'm not advocating for CH taking over all of Forest Hill, I'm just pointing out that if that were to happen it wouldn't significantly change the value of East Cleveland. 

 

I would also add that while the Forest Hill neighborhood is more stable than some portions of EC, it has its own problems that the neighborhood association there has been trying to address -- and at one point some were advocating for seceding from CH because they felt they weren't getting enough support. 

 

Point being, don't mistake the Forest Hill neighborhood for East Cleveland's pot o' gold.  

 

4 hours ago, Foraker said:

 

Just to be clear, the Forest Hill neighborhood extends into a relatively small part of East Cleveland.  In my opinion, the real investment value (growth opportunity) in East Cleveland is along Euclid Avenue (particularly near UC, but not exclusively) and Nela Park -- neither of which is part of Forest Hill.  I'm not advocating for CH taking over all of Forest Hill, I'm just pointing out that if that were to happen it wouldn't significantly change the value of East Cleveland. 

 

I would also add that while the Forest Hill neighborhood is more stable than some portions of EC, it has its own problems that the neighborhood association there has been trying to address -- and at one point some were advocating for seceding from CH because they felt they weren't getting enough support. 

 

Point being, don't mistake the Forest Hill neighborhood for East Cleveland's pot o' gold.  

 

It’s not about it being East Cleveland’s pot o’ gold. It’s about how ludicrous it would be to go to the voters of the city of Cleveland and ask them to take in East Cleveland without its most stable neighborhood. That’s insane, and no one would support that. It would go down in flames and set back the regionalism movement. In addition to that, your argument that it’s not a “pot o’ gold” still doesn’t justify why Cleveland shouldn’t insist on it in any merger talks. You don’t just give away a neighborhood like that. That’s dumb. We all agree where the best potential returns on investment are in a merger, but if it was that easy to make it happen then glenville and Hough and Fairfax (neighborhoods with the same amount of proximity to UC and already in the city) would be thriving now. It ain’t that easy. And it definitely wouldn’t with East Cleveland added, a place that doesn’t even have the basic level of service and quality that the neighborhoods I mentioned have! So before you can capitalize on any potential that East Cleveland has, you have to get it to the bare minimum of where the rest of Cleveland neighborhoods are. EC isn’t even at that. Which, again, is why it’s ludicrous to cede it’s most stable neighborhood in a merger. Forest Hill isn’t a pot o’ gold, but EC along Euclid Avenue isn’t either because of what it would take to even get it up to basic standards of the rest of the city of cleveland 

9 hours ago, Oldmanladyluck said:

The Greater Cleveland Partnership is in the beginning stages of looking at government consolidation.

 

This is becoming a big deal.  If the business community is beginning to push for consolidation with the County, this could have a chance of coming to a vote by the people.

 

 

 

Very interesting. 

5 hours ago, inlovewithCLE said:

It’s not about it being East Cleveland’s pot o’ gold. It’s about how ludicrous it would be to go to the voters of the city of Cleveland and ask them to take in East Cleveland without its most stable neighborhood. That’s insane, and no one would support that. It would go down in flames and set back the regionalism movement. In addition to that, your argument that it’s not a “pot o’ gold” still doesn’t justify why Cleveland shouldn’t insist on it in any merger talks. You don’t just give away a neighborhood like that. That’s dumb. We all agree where the best potential returns on investment are in a merger, but if it was that easy to make it happen then glenville and Hough and Fairfax (neighborhoods with the same amount of proximity to UC and already in the city) would be thriving now. It ain’t that easy. And it definitely wouldn’t with East Cleveland added, a place that doesn’t even have the basic level of service and quality that the neighborhoods I mentioned have! So before you can capitalize on any potential that East Cleveland has, you have to get it to the bare minimum of where the rest of Cleveland neighborhoods are. EC isn’t even at that. Which, again, is why it’s ludicrous to cede it’s most stable neighborhood in a merger. Forest Hill isn’t a pot o’ gold, but EC along Euclid Avenue isn’t either because of what it would take to even get it up to basic standards of the rest of the city of cleveland 

 

You keep calling other people's opinions dumb or ludicrous, but it seems like you're the one not getting the basic mathematical argument some of us are making.  Who cares if the neighborhood is East Cleveland's most stable if it is still a money loser?(answer: Cleveland Hts probably cares more about it's stability then revenue projections)  Cleveland could well end up less in the hole if it annexes EC without Forest Hills. 

 

Maybe not, maybe Forest Hills generates more revenue than it takes to provide it services, but that's a rare residential area.

9 hours ago, X said:

 

You keep calling other people's opinions dumb or ludicrous, but it seems like you're the one not getting the basic mathematical argument some of us are making.  Who cares if the neighborhood is East Cleveland's most stable if it is still a money loser?(answer: Cleveland Hts probably cares more about it's stability then revenue projections)  Cleveland could well end up less in the hole if it annexes EC without Forest Hills. 

 

Maybe not, maybe Forest Hills generates more revenue than it takes to provide it services, but that's a rare residential area.

Take that to the Cleveland voters then and see how well you can sell it. ??‍♂️ If you think you can sell that to voters who are already suspicious about taking on a burdened East Cleveland anyway and you’re gonna convince them to do it while giving Forest Hills away to Cleveland Heights, let me know how well that turns out. That’s been my point from the beginning. It’s ludicrous in part because it will never ever ever ever pass muster with Cleveland voters. But if you want to find out for yourself, have at it

And as I mentioned earlier (and I think it was to you X), ALL of East Cleveland is a money loser. So I understand the argument you’re making. I comprehend it. I just reject it. 

26 minutes ago, inlovewithCLE said:

Take that to the Cleveland voters then and see how well you can sell it. ??‍♂️ If you think you can sell that to voters who are already suspicious about taking on a burdened East Cleveland anyway and you’re gonna convince them to do it while giving Forest Hills away to Cleveland Heights, let me know how well that turns out. That’s been my point from the beginning. It’s ludicrous in part because it will never ever ever ever pass muster with Cleveland voters. But if you want to find out for yourself, have at it

 

This discussion is moot because of the way mergers work in Ohio.  It's going to be really really hard to merge EC with anyone in the first place, and pretty much impossible to carve out any one neighborhood.  We really do need the state to get involved to solve the EC problem, but until the city and county demand it nothing will change.

2 hours ago, Foraker said:

 

This discussion is moot because of the way mergers work in Ohio.  It's going to be really really hard to merge EC with anyone in the first place, and pretty much impossible to carve out any one neighborhood.  We really do need the state to get involved to solve the EC problem, but until the city and county demand it nothing will change.

 

There's just no way anyone's going to take one part and not the other.   

 

The problem with a state solution is they would (rightly) demand some changes and oversight that residents would oppose.   The bulk of East Cleveland's problems are largely self inflicted, or at least self exacerbated.   Look at who they vote for, it seems to be a choice between corrupt, crazy, grossly incompetent, or all of the above.

It has to be a city/county merger or bust.  Then this wouldn't be the narrative anymore...

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/realestate/worst-cities-to-live-in-every-state/ss-AAApyNv?ocid=spartanntp#image=36

On 1/31/2019 at 3:56 PM, NYC Boomerang said:

I never said it was going to happen tomorrow.  Regionalism is perhaps inevitable eventually.  Same with companies.  When there are competitive/economic pressures, companies at times need to combine and consolidate to stay alive (by saving costs).  Cuyahoga county is stricken by inefficiencies.  One of the very superficial, but real benefits for Cleveland, if perhaps it pulls this off one day, is to have Cleveland regain its footing in the rankings of cities by population.  I cannot stand it when Columbus is referred to as the biggest city in Ohio.  Columbus, through annexation, is now 2.7x larger than Cleveland in land area.  References to city rankings by population are so apples and oranges.  Unfortunately, Cleveland, due to its small size in land area and tremendous population loss, gets marginalized every time these rankings are referenced whether it be by state or nationally.  One of my biggest pet peeves and I really think it impacts Clevelanders' psyches and inferiority complexes. 

 

On another tangent, I do think, if things keep trending how they are in the city, and Cleveland is able to hang onto some of these young professionals as they start families, the tables could really turn over the course of a few decades (I know that is a long time, but it isn't in Cleveland terms).  What I mean is, I think what we've seen over the past 70 years in Cleveland (population loss in the city proper) can reverse itself over let's say the next 50 years.  In Northeast Ohio, with the population stagnant or shrinking, it is a zero-sum game.  I think Say Yes to Education is huge for Cleveland and I think if the schools can start showing real improvement (I think they have been), and young people don't suburbanize as much, over time, it could be the suburbs who are losing population (often high tax payers) to the city.  The economy and pressures of the 21st century favor cities over suburbs / rural.  It favors less materialism and more experientialism.  I think some suburbs have already realized this and have tried to adapt (Shaker Heights (Van Aken District)).  I think suburbs are in real risk of their own slow decline as young people trend more urban and the education quality differential narrows.  Further, retail is dying and this is going to eat away at one of the main tax revenue bases for suburbs.  

 

I think in a few decades you might see a region where the suburbs are devoid of culture and amenities and relative advantages (of course the wealthiest of suburbs will likely be fine) and Cleveland the city will remain with these tremendous cultural institutions, job centers, real public transportation and a housing stock more geared towards multi-family (which is where the country is trending).  The point is, the stagnant region is in competition with itself for the tax revenue base, and Cleveland I think is much better positioned over the next 50 years to at least improve itself (whereas I think the suburbs are mostly in a decline).  In time, I think the suburbs are going to see the writing on the wall and they might be the ones pushing for regionalism.  We are all in this together whether we like it or not.      

 

Link below to a really interesting article about Cleveland's population stabilization.  It also references the fact that Columbus' land area is equal to the combined total of Cleveland, Cincinnati and Akron!  Columbus is the "14th" most populous city in the US, with Cleveland being "52nd".  This statistical charade really frustrates me!  I know it is just a stat but I think it really molds attitudes and perceptions of Cleveland.  The fragmentation legally of Cleveland, of course, also creates significant inefficiencies for the region.  The region's structure is such a hindrance economically and reputationally.  I wish we could get out of our own way and work together to succeed!  Regardless, it is great to see the city stabilize.  I fully expect the next 70 years to be growing years, a reversal of the last 70 years.  The ship is turning.       

 

https://expo.cleveland.com/news/g66l-2019/05/d1695a54c89135/clevelands-population-flattens-near-385000-after-decades-of-big-losses-new-census-estimates-say.html

10 hours ago, NYC Boomerang said:

 Columbus is the "14th" most populous city in the US, with Cleveland being "52nd".  This statistical charade really frustrates me!  I know it is just a stat but I think it really molds attitudes and perceptions of Cleveland.  

 

Amen. A proper merger of the county would result in Cleveland / Cuyahoga County being the tenth largest city in the country (population approximately 1.24M, between Dallas at 1.3M and San Jose at 1M). Obviously this is nowhere near the most important potential benefit of a merger, but it would certainly improve perceptions, both locally and nationally. 

Edited May 24, 20196 yr by Boomerang_Brian
Added population details

On 5/23/2019 at 8:16 PM, Boomerang_Brian said:

 

Amen. A proper merger of the county would result in Cleveland / Cuyahoga County being the tenth largest city in the country (population approximately 1.24M, between Dallas at 1.3M and San Jose at 1M). Obviously this is nowhere near the most important potential benefit of a merger, but it would certainly improve perceptions, both locally and nationally. 

The biggest issue is that no one wants to give up their power. I wonder if we could have some sort of hybrid system where technically it’s merged and the mayor’s of the suburbs can be “borough presidents” or something like that. They’ll never agree to vote themselves out of existence, so unless the state forces it to happen, some sort of creative hybrid merger may be the only way

On 5/26/2019 at 11:21 AM, inlovewithCLE said:

The biggest issue is that no one wants to give up their power. I wonder if we could have some sort of hybrid system where technically it’s merged and the mayor’s of the suburbs can be “borough presidents” or something like that. They’ll never agree to vote themselves out of existence, so unless the state forces it to happen, some sort of creative hybrid merger may be the only way

 

Sounds like a good idea! ?

 

 

Quote

What do you think the public perception of Cleveland would be if nothing changed except the nominal borders?  How about we make all of Cuyahoga County the City of Cleveland.  We could even keep each city as a "borough" and let them each keep their own police department, fire department, "borough council", "borough mayor", "borough pride", whatever.  School districts would stay the same.  Basically what Indianapolis did.  Nothing else changes.  Overnight we would become the 9th largest city in the country (and still 4 cities in the top 10 would have a larger land area than us).  We would have the lowest murder rate in the entire country (9 times lower than New York City's lauded murder rate and slipping just under El Paso, Texas and Lincoln, Nebraska into the #1 spot).  We would have a median household income of $45,000, and a city unemployment rate under 7%.  We would have huge "livable city neighborhoods" like the "borough of Cleveland Heights" and the "borough of Lakewood" and the "borough of Shaker Heights" and the "borough of Rocky River" and the "borough of Chagrin Falls", etc.  We would have multiple major employment centers, all within the city limits.

 

We would be the new hotness!

 

Edited May 29, 20196 yr by jam40jeff

34 minutes ago, inlovewithCLE said:

The biggest issue is that no one wants to give up their power. I wonder if we could have some sort of hybrid system where technically it’s merged and the mayor’s of the suburbs can be “borough presidents” or something like that. They’ll never agree to vote themselves out of existence, so unless the state forces it to happen, some sort of creative hybrid merger may be the only way

 

You are absolutely correct - the number one threat to proper regionalism is that current office-holders will not want to give up their power.  This MUST be a grassroots effort, as it is highly unlikely it will be embraced by local politicians.  It's also really important that it is done with extensive public discussion and at a slower than ideal pace, in order to build up support.  People need to feel like their voices are being heard, or it will go the way of St. Louis' recently failed merger proposal.

 

We have to learn lessons from the East Cleveland failed merger.  It is painfully obvious that merging w Cleveland would have been beneficial for the city of East Cleveland and the people who live there.  And both the mayor and vice mayor were pushing for it for all the right reasons.  But city council did not want to give up their power and office-holder benefits, so they drafted a ridiculous list of demands that Cleveland city council essentially laughed out of the building.  And there was a recall effort that removed the mayor from office.  These are the things that happen when you don't build up grassroots support for these regionalism efforts.  It will be a slow and frustrating process.  It will be worth that effort.  We thrive or die as a region.  There isn't much to be said for being an awesome suburb of a dying city.

Edited May 26, 20196 yr by Boomerang_Brian

14 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

 

You are absolutely correct - the number one threat to proper regionalism is that current office-holders will not want to give up their power.  This MUST be a grassroots effort, as it is highly unlikely it will be embraced by local politicians.  It's also really important that it is done with extensive public discussion and at a slower than ideal pace, in order to build up support.  People need to feel like their voices are being heard, or it will go the way of St. Louis' recently failed merger proposal.

 

We have to learn lessons from the East Cleveland failed merger.  It is painfully obvious that merging w Cleveland would have been beneficial for the city of East Cleveland and the people who live there.  And both the mayor and vice mayor were pushing for it for all the right reasons.  But city council did not want to give up their power and office-holder benefits, so they drafted a ridiculous list of demands that Cleveland city council essentially laughed out of the building.  And there was a recall effort that removed the mayor from office.  These are the things that happen when you don't build up grassroots support for these regionalism efforts.  It will be a slow and frustrating process.  It will be worth that effort.  We thrive or die as a region.  There isn't much to be said for being an awesome suburb of a dying city.

 

The current office holders are not the biggest block to a city/county merger.   Not by a long shot.

The biggest block would be the suburban voters.   I'm not sure if you all realize how strong the antipathy towards Cleveland city government is in the suburbs, and the more "needed" the suburb to make this work, the stronger the antipathy.   Though it's strong enough even in the inner ring.   I would bet that only in East Cleveland there is even 33% support for the idea.

 

Then, if it becomes seen as a threat, the state legislature gets involved.   Republicans are going to side with the suburbs for multiple reasons.   Democrats will find themselves in a bind because they need those suburban voters.  If they go against them, on an issue they feel this strongly about, they become a permanent minority party.   In fact, they might just lash out at the originators of the idea for putting them in this position.

 

When it's all said and done, the idea of a city county merger is a complete non starter.   In fact, it's so toxic an idea to so many people that it quite literally poisons discussion of more reasonable resource sharing proposals.

So then what’s going to happen is Cleveland is going to keep rebuilding itself, the suburbs will deal with the same problems the city dealt with, the suburbs will get bled dry until they have to merge and then they’ll merge at less than favorable terms than if they would’ve just gotten their heads out of their arse and did it in the first place, PARTICULARLY many of the inner ring suburbs which are ALREADY starting to struggle and have some of those issues. 59 municipalities for 1.3 million people is stupid and ridiculous. And it doesn’t help anyone but people who want to keep their fiefdoms. But if the mentality stays the same, then the only way things will change is when suburbs go bankrupt, starting with the inner ring. East Cleveland is essentially already bankrupt. Garfield Heights teeters back and forth on a consistent basis, Maple Heights is struggling, there are parts of CLEVELAND HEIGHTS that resemble East Cleveland now. It’s already happening. There are too many municipalities and not enough resources to support all of them at the current level. But if people want to be stupid, stand by while your suburb goes bankrupt, one by one. 

1 hour ago, E Rocc said:

 

The current office holders are not the biggest block to a city/county merger.   Not by a long shot.

The biggest block would be the suburban voters.   I'm not sure if you all realize how strong the antipathy towards Cleveland city government is in the suburbs, and the more "needed" the suburb to make this work, the stronger the antipathy.   Though it's strong enough even in the inner ring.   I would bet that only in East Cleveland there is even 33% support for the idea.

 

Then, if it becomes seen as a threat, the state legislature gets involved.   Republicans are going to side with the suburbs for multiple reasons.   Democrats will find themselves in a bind because they need those suburban voters.  If they go against them, on an issue they feel this strongly about, they become a permanent minority party.   In fact, they might just lash out at the originators of the idea for putting them in this position.

 

When it's all said and done, the idea of a city county merger is a complete non starter.   In fact, it's so toxic an idea to so many people that it quite literally poisons discussion of more reasonable resource sharing proposals.

 

I agree that suburban voters would be the biggest potential block and voters in the city would be the other biggest potential block.  That's why any effort has to fully incorporate discussions and outreach throughout the county.  A top down push would be disastrous, would have no chance of passing, and would negatively impact the politicians who pushed for it (just as you've said).

 

I should have said that office-holders were "one of the main threats" not "the number one threat".  The push-back threat order would probably be:

1. Suburban voters

2. City voters

3. Local media

4. Local office-holders

 

I also agree there is great antipathy towards Cleveland city government - both in the suburbs and also even within the city.  To me, one of the biggest reasons to advocate for a proper merger is that the historical leadership of Cleveland is bad.  A proper merger results in regional government that has substantially more opportunity than the current city of Cleveland, suburb of Cleveland, or current Cuyahoga county government that is layered on top of 59 separate municipalities within its borders.  I believe that this opportunity will open the door for talented locals to stay, pursue government office, and build on what we have.  I'm talking about individuals who have the desire, skill set, and charisma to be effective government leaders, but are discouraged by the decades of malaise that Cleveland government represents, not to mention the repeated corruption scandals.  Over the past several decades these individuals have chosen to leave the area or pursue other opportunities.  Let's give them a better reason to stay and pursue local office here.

 

Furthermore, as it stands, since I live in the suburbs I have no say over Cleveland city government even though their leadership heavily affects the region that I live in.  I'd like to have a say in who is managing the city.

 

The biggest benefit from regionalism is a reduction in redundant government function.  The potential for better leadership and the opportunity to vote on that leadership (as a suburban voter) are the next biggest reasons why I support a proper merger.  If we end up with the same type of leadership that Cleveland has traditional held, that would mean that the merger had failed to achieve one of its most important goals.

 

(And Democrats are already a permanent minority party in this state.  I didn't follow that part of your argument.)

 

I believe that Louisville, Indianapolis, and Nashville have all benefited from city-county-suburb mergers like what I'd like to see here.  Columbus has most of the same benefit since they had the foresight to anticipate suburban sprawl and preemptively annexed areas that would later become pseudo-suburbs within the city.  If done right (obviously a big if), a proper merger will tremendously benefit this area.

Edited May 26, 20196 yr by Boomerang_Brian

There are certain types of people who would never be satisfied with any attempt at regionalization, which must happen for a balkanized metro area like ours to compete again metro areas with a greater sense unity. There is nothing that can be done to satisfy them. The metro area is better off without them. But I think metro areas are going to be regionalized no matter what as the nation continues to split among left and right. Many on the far-right mistakenly believe that their rural constituents are tax donors to urbanized areas, and are pushing for state splits, secessions and city-states. In reality, the urbanized areas are tax donors to rural areas and have sought sanctuary status, urban growth boundaries and the like to create a legal and/or fiscal moat for their civil rights and tax dollars.

 

So all this talk about regionalization may be moot. City-states, especially for those of us surrounded by illiberal red-state wilderness, may be the default route to urban unity.

I agree the further out one goes the less likely there is a chance of mergers. People live in Solon to not be in Cleveland. 

  I think it has to be a focus on the inner suburbs.  Make the other suburbs find value in merging with Cleveland or merging with neighboring suburbs. Every bit helps. 

  The county should be more proactive. This becomes easier with singles and doubles not a big smashing regional government grand slam. 

12 minutes ago, audidave said:

I agree the further out one goes the less likely there is a chance of mergers. People live in Solon to not be in Cleveland. 

  I think it has to be a focus on the inner suburbs.  Make the other suburbs find value in merging with Cleveland or merging with neighboring suburbs. Every bit helps. 

  The county should be more proactive. This becomes easier with singles and doubles not a big smashing regional government grand slam. 

 

It’s funny that Solon is your example suburb because I do live in Solon and I do support regionalization. Focusing on merging Cleveland with inner ring suburbs does not delivery anywhere near the potential benefit of a full county merger. I think that part of the reason that the Memphis annexation efforts have been less successful than Indy, Nashville, and Louisville is because Memphis only added inner ring suburbs. Let’s think big!

Edited May 26, 20196 yr by Boomerang_Brian

Do we really think that Cleveland's leaders are any better or worse than Cuyahoga County's? In fact, I'll argue that some of Cleveland City Council persons are more adept than their counterparts on Cuyahoga County Council. How many Solonites, Westlakers or Brecksvillians are fleeing the county because of them? I'm sure there are some, hence the declining populations of Cuyahoga County and the rising population of its collar counties. My suggestion is, unite under a Cleveland-Cuyahoga County government, retain/institute an expanded CDC-like governance over neighborhoods and former suburbs, and institute a commuter income tax for all those commuting into Cleveland-Cuyahoga County from collar counties and use the money to update and modernize the county's infrastructure, clean/clear polluted vacated industrial properties, and expand transit between Cuyahoga and its collar counties.

19 minutes ago, KJP said:

Do we really think that Cleveland's leaders are any better or worse than Cuyahoga County's? In fact, I'll argue that some of Cleveland City Council persons are more adept than their counterparts on Cuyahoga County Council. How many Solonites, Westlakers or Brecksvillians are fleeing the county because of them? I'm sure there are some, hence the declining populations of Cuyahoga County and the rising population of its collar counties. My suggestion is, unite under a Cleveland-Cuyahoga County government, retain/institute an expanded CDC-like governance over neighborhoods and former suburbs, and institute a commuter income tax for all those commuting into Cleveland-Cuyahoga County from collar counties and use the money to update and modernize the county's infrastructure, clean/clear polluted vacated industrial properties, and expand transit between Cuyahoga and its collar counties.

 

I’m with you on Cleveland council over Cuyahoga council. As far as the commuter tax, isn’t that what the local income tax is? Especially once you factor in the “credit” that most cities offer for income tax paid by its residence in other cities?

 

I like the Cleveland council model better, but there would need to be more cross council oversight to avoid Ken Johnson type situations. I think it would also be really important to have several at-large representatives in order to have some level of county-wide prioritization over the fiefdom model of Cleveland city council. 

50 minutes ago, KJP said:

Do we really think that Cleveland's leaders are any better or worse than Cuyahoga County's?

 

"We" being Urban Ohio members?  No. 

To the average suburbanite in Cuyahoga County, a resounding yes:  Cleveland is much worse.   There are many of these kinds of comments on Cleveland.com for a reason.....

26 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

 

I’m with you on Cleveland council over Cuyahoga council. As far as the commuter tax, isn’t that what the local income tax is? Especially once you factor in the “credit” that most cities offer for income tax paid by its residence in other cities?

 

I like the Cleveland council model better, but there would need to be more cross council oversight to avoid Ken Johnson type situations. I think it would also be really important to have several at-large representatives in order to have some level of county-wide prioritization over the fiefdom model of Cleveland city council. 

 

I'd reduce the credit on those whose city of residence are outside the county. The rationale is there. They are incurring infrastructure costs in the county without sufficiently paying for them. I'd also increase the admissions tax on non-county residents as many non-Cuyahoga County residents partake of Cleveland sporting events, theaters, etc. I'm sure there's a way for computer systems to ID when people buy their tickets to add a non-county tax to it. As for taxation without representation, you can call or write to the Cuyahoga County Council. If you want to vote for or against them, you have the freedom to move to the county.

 

1 minute ago, Cleburger said:

 

"We" being Urban Ohio members?  No. 

To the average suburbanite in Cuyahoga County, a resounding yes:  Cleveland is much worse.   There are many of these kinds of comments on Cleveland.com for a reason.....

 

I'm not worried about cle-dot-bomb comments. They're scared idiots who are too afraid to put their real names to their babbling. How many of them actually live in Cuyahoga County? They could be trolls from another country for all we know. 

 

Edited May 26, 20196 yr by KJP

12 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

I'm not worried about cle-dot-bomb comments. They're scared idiots who are too afraid to put their real names to their babbling. How many of them actually live in Cuyahoga County? They could be trolls from another country for all we know. 

 

 

I think you'd be surprised how many actually live in the City of Cleveland and surrounding suburbs...but I have no scientific way of proving this.   

 

What I do know through casual conversations with family and friends in the burbs, is a great many of them still think Cleveland is the city they knew in the 1970's.   It's scary in fact how many just don't go downtown because of what they experienced 40 years ago. 

The local income tax “credit” is determined by the city of residence. An individual paying income tax in the city of Cleveland is paying that income tax to Cleveland regardless of where they live. The credit only affects what they pay to the city they live in. So it already does act as a “commuter tax”, at least to a certain extent. 

 

I’d agree with an event tax for non-county residents. Perhaps it could be in the form of a general admissions tax that is offset by a resident discount or credit. 

^Put toll booths ar the county line!

 

Why doesn't regionalism start with baby steps? Let's start with the Cleveland and Cuyahoga County library systems merging. Have Metroparks take over city park services one suburb at a time. Do little things that can demonstrate how pooling resources makes things more efficient. 

 

Currently many see a regional based anything as bloated and corrupt. Ask Parma Joe Six Pack if he wants his neighborhood managed by a county wide authority just like the water and sewer (zero customer service/massive billing errors for many years), RTA, the jail system, or Metro.  There needs to be several good examples besides metroparks on how economies of scale saves money.

^ I would include Metrohealth with Metroparks as being a well run regional entity.  CC public library is great too although they should take over all the libraries in the county as you stated.

Metro has been doing much better by leaps and bounds, but I know people that consider metro the hospital where gangbangers get their gunshots treated. Five years ago it nearly evacuated during a polar vortex event because it was in such a state of obsolescence and disrepair. 

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio—During four days in early January, when the "polar vortex" drove temperatures in Northeast Ohio down to 10 below zero, MetroHealth Medical Center was nearly evacuated — twice — as the health system's aging infrastructure buckled under the extreme cold. Pipes froze and burst, patient rooms flooded, toilets blew their tops and the hospital's limping steam heat system nearly failed.

https://www.cleveland.com/healthfit/2014/05/metrohealth_unveils_campus_tra.html

4 minutes ago, originaljbw said:

Metro has been doing much better by leaps and bounds, but I know people that consider metro the hospital where gangbangers get their gunshots treated. Five years ago it nearly evacuated during a polar vortex event because it was in such a state of obsolescence and disrepair. 

 

 

 

https://www.cleveland.com/healthfit/2014/05/metrohealth_unveils_campus_tra.html

 

 

And now it's all being replaced on top of all the new facilities they are building across the county... so there's that.  I've heard good things about their care as well. 

On 5/26/2019 at 5:02 PM, KJP said:

institute a commuter income tax for all those commuting into Cleveland-Cuyahoga County from collar counties and use the money to update and modernize the county's infrastructure, clean/clear polluted vacated industrial properties, and expand transit between Cuyahoga and its collar counties.

 

At a company I worked for a while back (where many workers commuted from collar counties), I (half) joked with a coworker from Lakewood that we should put tollbooths at the county line and only charge tolls coming into the county at morning rush and leaving at afternoon rush, then use the revenues to subsidize businesses to stay within the county.

Edited May 29, 20196 yr by jam40jeff

On 5/28/2019 at 8:20 PM, jam40jeff said:

 

At a company I worked for a while back (where many workers commuted from collar counties), I (half) joked with a coworker from Lakewood that we should put tollbooths at the county line and only charge tolls coming into the county at morning rush and leaving at afternoon rush, then use the revenues to subsidize businesses to stay within the county.

 

Lake and Summit Counties for sure would return the favor.

1 hour ago, E Rocc said:

 

Lake and Summit Counties for sure would return the favor.

 

And may the county with the most residents and businesses win! ?

On 5/28/2019 at 2:38 PM, Mov2Ohio said:

 

 

And now it's all being replaced on top of all the new facilities they are building across the county... so there's that.  I've heard good things about their care as well. 

Oh I agree that they are doing much better, but for many who have never used a metro facility the old stereotype still stands. Same for people who havent been downtown since 1977, unfortunately these people still vote. 

On 5/28/2019 at 8:20 PM, jam40jeff said:

 

At a company I worked for a while back (where many workers commuted from collar counties), I (half) joked with a coworker from Lakewood that we should put tollbooths at the county line and only charge tolls coming into the county at morning rush and leaving at afternoon rush, then use the revenues to subsidize businesses to stay within the county.

 

That's basically what the entire state of New Jersey does, except since it's a state full of bedroom communities for Philly and NYC, they charge you to leave!

Elsewhere, it's called a congestion tax. Since we don't have congestion, we'll have to call it what it is....a mooch tax.  It's for people trying to get the benefit of living next to a major city/county without having to actually pay for the amenities that said city/county offers.

The Emerald Necklace could be used as an urban growth boundary.   Maintaining water/sewer/roads inside the necklace (the vast majority of Cuyahoga County) should take precedence; further development outside the necklace should be discouraged.  And because most of the county is inside that boundary, that could be politically feasible.

 

Thoughts?

Or we could embrace this idea offered by the father of the Interstate highway system who never intended to have highways penetrate the cities. But the automakers, oil companies, tire companies, road builders, etc. knew that they needed to mow down the cities' densities if they wanted to sell their wares to the largest untapped automotive market....

 

 

Or to be a convention mecca or other dumb reasons for regionalization. To be sure, there are very good reasons for regionalization, but they aren't dealt with here.

 

5 minutes ago, KJP said:

Or to be a convention mecca or other dumb reasons for regionalization. To be sure, there are very good reasons for regionalization, but they aren't dealt with here.

 

I thought the same thing this morning. The premise is solid. The article execution was laughable.