Jump to content
Oldmanladyluck

Cleveland: General Business & Economic News

Recommended Posts

^Without looking it up, I'd bet few if any of Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, Charlotte, Salt Lake City, or Nashville are governed by GOP mayors/majority city councils.

 

EDIT: but I more or less agree with the overall point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^^This is a pointless argument...

 

Dems can point to Boston, San Fran, LA, Seattle, NYC.

 

GOP can point to Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, Charlotte, Salt Lake City, Nashville

 

If you believe one party's politics are the sole cause of the problem, you're the problem.

 

I do think a lack of balance has hurt Cleveland. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

50+ municipalities in Cuyahoga is too much. I would love to see some mergers.

 

It has to start with Cleveland absorbing a few of the inner-ring though. I don't think Cuyahoga County would benefit from two cities with 150,000+. Imagine a Parma, Parma Heights, Seven Hills, Brooklyn consolidation - as they have already begun to share some dispatch services. That would be a city of approximately 135,000.

 

They also share a municipal court system, along with North Royalton and Brooklyn Heights.  This arrangement is common throughout the area.  Rocky River handles Westlake, Fairview Park and North Olmsted.  Avon and Sheffield go to Avon Lake.  Due to the overwhelming need, city mergers have already been happening in all but name. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^^This is a pointless argument...

 

Dems can point to Boston, San Fran, LA, Seattle, NYC.

 

GOP can point to Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, Charlotte, Salt Lake City, Nashville

 

If you believe one party's politics are the sole cause of the problem, you're the problem.

 

I do think a lack of balance has hurt Cleveland. 

 

There's no doubt that 1 party rule is bad.  It just doesn't really matter which party it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

50+ municipalities in Cuyahoga is too much. I would love to see some mergers.

 

It has to start with Cleveland absorbing a few of the inner-ring though. I don't think Cuyahoga County would benefit from two cities with 150,000+. Imagine a Parma, Parma Heights, Seven Hills, Brooklyn consolidation - as they have already begun to share some dispatch services. That would be a city of approximately 135,000.

 

If we could see Cleveland pick up some cities like EC or Brooklyn, that would put the population back over 400,000 and help with funding - though I do realize it is slightly more complicated than that.

 

I agree YABO. Mergers have to make sense first. Considering Parma-Parma Heights and Seven Hills share Parma City Schools, it makes more sense for them to merge than, say, Parma-North Royalton.

 

I realize the logistics of any merger isn't easy but from a geographical standpoint, EC, Brooklyn, Linndale, Cuyahoga/Newbergh Hts., and dare I say Lakewood and Bratenahl *should* be the first candidates of a Cleveland merger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^^This is a pointless argument...

 

Dems can point to Boston, San Fran, LA, Seattle, NYC.

 

GOP can point to Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, Charlotte, Salt Lake City, Nashville

 

If you believe one party's politics are the sole cause of the problem, you're the problem.

 

I do think a lack of balance has hurt Cleveland. 

 

There's no doubt that 1 party rule is bad.  It just doesn't really matter which party it is.

 

Indeed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^^This is a pointless argument...

 

Dems can point to Boston, San Fran, LA, Seattle, NYC.

 

GOP can point to Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, Charlotte, Salt Lake City, Nashville

 

If you believe one party's politics are the sole cause of the problem, you're the problem.

 

I do think a lack of balance has hurt Cleveland. 

 

There's no doubt that 1 party rule is bad.  It just doesn't really matter which party it is.

 

This is the issue: one party control of the system. Voter education is the key. Problem is in one party cities and towns voter "education" is vote for the party or get out. New ideas and people are forced away. Mayor Jackson said as much when he said the city has to worry about it's "own" over newcomers a few years back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Suburbs that share a school district should be first to merge.

 

 

No. More communities need to be part of Cleveland. A "super suburb" will just have more power to fight Cleveland to take away more jobs and resources---with only the self interest of the suburb and not the city or the region.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Republican Party is an organization that is openly hostile towards cities. Take a look at their debates last year when Ted Cruz used "New York values" as an insult. The reason they don't control any cities is that they haven't invested any resources of any kind into thinking about the problems cities face in any meaningful way. It is not voters' faults or Democratic politicians' faults that there are no Republicans in cities... It's Republicans' fault that there are no Republicans in cities.

 

That being said "one party rule" isn't all it's cracked up to be and urban Dems find plenty to disagree on. In local politics turf considerations seem to matter more than ideology anyways. Ideology is set at federal and state levels, local politicians just argue on how to implement and manage.

 

I do think that "the way we've always done it" mentality is very bad in city administration, and new blood is very good, but it doesn't matter which party that new blood comes from. Perhaps if Republicans got serious about cities, they could be better positioned to provide new blood and new ideas, but unfortunately thinking about cities would alienate their base and their donors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I realize the logistics of any merger isn't easy but from a geographical standpoint, EC, Brooklyn, Linndale, Cuyahoga/Newbergh Hts., and dare I say Lakewood and Bratenahl *should* be the first candidates of a Cleveland merger.

 

Can you predict how this proposed merger would affect the city services in Lakewood?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I realize the logistics of any merger isn't easy but from a geographical standpoint, EC, Brooklyn, Linndale, Cuyahoga/Newbergh Hts., and dare I say Lakewood and Bratenahl *should* be the first candidates of a Cleveland merger.

 

Can you predict how this proposed merger would affect the city services in Lakewood?

 

The same thing it would do to home values?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lakewood would gain nothing from a merger. They run a great ship on their own

 

I wanted to give AmrapinVA a chance to sell this before I fled Lakewood for Rocky River lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lakewood would gain nothing from a merger. They run a great ship on their own

 

Yes and no. The yes being that Lakewood is running fairly decent as is.

 

The no being that the entire north east Ohio region could benefit from a single or fewer municipalities looking out for just themselves. We could work regionally to make the area more attractive to outside investment and thus grow the economy and the population leading to a benefit to Lakewood and all the other suburbs currently surrounding Cleveland and losing population.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lakewood would gain nothing from a merger. They run a great ship on their own

This is exactly the problem. People need to think about the big picture not what "benefits" them. Ultimately, it would benefit every community around Cleveland, but people seem to think short-term and in their bubble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lakewood would gain nothing from a merger. They run a great ship on their own

 

Lakewood would gain influence beyond its current borders and would become part of a more competitive metro.

 

Many Lakewood residents joke about giving Cleveland everything east of Bunts Rd.  Ha ha, stick em with the poors and keep the rest!  But what if instead Lakewood's wealthiest areas wanted to break off and form the Village of Lakewood Shores?  Do sharing and togetherness become more fashionable in that scenario?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: most of the post from today.

 

The attached article is from 4 years ago, yet it offers insight on why dem's/repub's think the way they do about cities/states.

 

Democrats Run America’s Ten Poorest Cities

4 years ago

 

I have come to believe that chain emails may one day lead to the death of our society. Chain emails alone are responsible for the creation and the success of at least one popular website, snopes.com. Chain emails (and their ugly step-sister, the forward) are the bane of every email user’s technological needs. We must make ourselves more adept with modern technology so we have to use the internet and email… which leads us to receive junk mail at a level far worse than anything the old mainstay, snail mail, used to give us. But not all chain mail/forward/junk mail is bad; in fact, there are times when these pieces of technological dross are downright informative!...........

 

http://eaglerising.com/1912/democrats-run-americas-ten-poorest-cities/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lakewood would gain nothing from a merger. They run a great ship on their own

 

Lakewood would gain influence beyond its current borders and would become part of a more competitive metro.

 

Many Lakewood residents joke about giving Cleveland everything east of Bunts Rd.  Ha ha, stick em with the poors and keep the rest!  But what if instead Lakewood's wealthiest areas wanted to break off and form the Village of Lakewood Shores?  Do sharing and togetherness become more fashionable in that scenario?

 

If I call the cops in Lakewood they are at my house in approximately five minutes. Until Cleveland can get its act together with police response time I'd never seriously support any kind of merger. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right. Everyone here talks about regionalism in Cleveland until we bring out concrete examples. Then Lakewood people point to Brooklyn and say "you should merge first". Shaker people point to Garfield, etc.

 

I've got no issue with Parma merging with Cleveland. Parma PSD is a disaster, so no great shakes there. It would increase Cleveland's population by 80K and because Parma is not losing population at the rate of places like Lakewood and Shaker/Cleveland Hts. it would actually stabilize the city's population loss some more. And as mentioned up thread post-war bungalows can gentrify just like homes in OC. It's a big area to cover and Police and Fire services would be handful for the city.

 

Of course, to be 100% fair, I don't live in Parma anymore so my investment is nil but I do see the direct benefits of consolidated services where I live now.

 

Lakewood would gain nothing from a merger. They run a great ship on their own

 

Lakewood is losing population at a faster rate than Cleveland this decade. Not that great.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right. Everyone here talks about regionalism in Cleveland until we bring out concrete examples. Then Lakewood people point to Brooklyn and say "you should merge first". Shaker people point to Garfield, etc.

 

I've got no issue with Parma merging with Cleveland. Parma PSD is a disaster, so no great shakes there. It would increase Cleveland's population by 80K and because Parma is not losing population at the rate of places like Lakewood and Shaker/Cleveland Hts. it would actually stabilize the city's population loss some more. And as mentioned up thread post-war bungalows can gentrify just like homes in OC. It's a big area to cover and Police and Fire services would be handful for the city.

 

Of course, to be 100% fair, I don't live in Parma anymore so my investment is nil but I do see the direct benefits of consolidated services where I live now.

 

Lakewood would gain nothing from a merger. They run a great ship on their own

 

Lakewood is losing population at a faster rate than Cleveland this decade. Not that great.

 

The housing market there would suggest otherwise. Also city services, quality of life, dining, culture and activities are all very strong.  They don't need anyone. I suspect the population loss is smaller households and less rental occupancy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lakewood would gain nothing from a merger. They run a great ship on their own

This is exactly the problem. People need to think about the big picture not what "benefits" them. Ultimately, it would benefit every community around Cleveland, but people seem to think short-term and in their bubble.

 

I promise you I'm not thinking within a bubble. I lived in Lakewood for 4 years and Cleveland (near west) for five years. Just doing something for the sake of your picture of things aren't realistic.  While I enjoyed both experiences tremendously, the quality of life is much higher in Lakewood.  You say it would benefit all communities, that's simply not true. Lakewood has its own identity, personality, everything that comes with that. They've earned that through planning, leadership, execution.  They would not benefit at all from a merger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right. Everyone here talks about regionalism in Cleveland until we bring out concrete examples. Then Lakewood people point to Brooklyn and say "you should merge first". Shaker people point to Garfield, etc.

 

I've got no issue with Parma merging with Cleveland. Parma PSD is a disaster, so no great shakes there. It would increase Cleveland's population by 80K and because Parma is not losing population at the rate of places like Lakewood and Shaker/Cleveland Hts. it would actually stabilize the city's population loss some more. And as mentioned up thread post-war bungalows can gentrify just like homes in OC. It's a big area to cover and Police and Fire services would be handful for the city.

 

Of course, to be 100% fair, I don't live in Parma anymore so my investment is nil but I do see the direct benefits of consolidated services where I live now.

 

Lakewood would gain nothing from a merger. They run a great ship on their own

 

Lakewood is losing population at a faster rate than Cleveland this decade. Not that great.

 

The housing market there would suggest otherwise. Also city services, quality of life, dining, culture and activities are all very strong.  They don't need anyone. I suspect the population loss is smaller households and less rental occupancy.

 

Somehow areas in DC and the surrounding communities can have all those amenities and not lose population steadily over 50 years. But hey, it's Lakewood..they don't "need" anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lakewood would gain nothing from a merger. They run a great ship on their own

 

Lakewood would gain influence beyond its current borders and would become part of a more competitive metro.

 

Many Lakewood residents joke about giving Cleveland everything east of Bunts Rd.  Ha ha, stick em with the poors and keep the rest!  But what if instead Lakewood's wealthiest areas wanted to break off and form the Village of Lakewood Shores?  Do sharing and togetherness become more fashionable in that scenario?

 

If I call the cops in Lakewood they are at my house in approximately five minutes. Until Cleveland can get its act together with police response time I'd never seriously support any kind of merger. 

 

I don't want a merger either, same reasons as everyone else.  And yet I might vote for it.  A lot of the opposition on the Cleveland side is worried about the amount of control they'd lose to the absorbed suburbs.  Well, yeah.  That's part of the deal.  And voting rates in the city's distressed areas are very low.  So, it's not like the suburbs would be ceding to an occupation force.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ironically, the thing that makes some Cleveland neighborhoods attractive (successful CDCs that function like neighborhood-level City Halls, including security, building code enforcement, redevelopment/planning, assistance to low-income households, etc.) can be applied to suburbs that merge with Cleveland so that Cleveland neighborhoods and ex-suburbs can retain a high-degree of local control. It's not a perfect solution but it could be a good starting point for discussions.


"Fascism begins the moment a ruling class, fearing the people may use their political democracy to gain economic democracy, begins to destroy political democracy in order to retain its power of exploitation and special privilege." -- Tommy Douglas, Scottish-born Canadian Baptist minister and the seventh Premier of Saskatchewan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right. Everyone here talks about regionalism in Cleveland until we bring out concrete examples. Then Lakewood people point to Brooklyn and say "you should merge first". Shaker people point to Garfield, etc.

 

I've got no issue with Parma merging with Cleveland. Parma PSD is a disaster, so no great shakes there. It would increase Cleveland's population by 80K and because Parma is not losing population at the rate of places like Lakewood and Shaker/Cleveland Hts. it would actually stabilize the city's population loss some more. And as mentioned up thread post-war bungalows can gentrify just like homes in OC. It's a big area to cover and Police and Fire services would be handful for the city.

 

Of course, to be 100% fair, I don't live in Parma anymore so my investment is nil but I do see the direct benefits of consolidated services where I live now.

 

Lakewood would gain nothing from a merger. They run a great ship on their own

 

Lakewood is losing population at a faster rate than Cleveland this decade. Not that great.

 

The housing market there would suggest otherwise. Also city services, quality of life, dining, culture and activities are all very strong.  They don't need anyone. I suspect the population loss is smaller households and less rental occupancy.

 

Somehow areas in DC and the surrounding communities can have all those amenities and not lose population steadily over 50 years. But hey, it's Lakewood..they don't "need" anyone.

 

D.C. Builds, a lot. Lakewood doesnt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True. Annexing is at best a mirage. Thriving cities and those with steady population growth do so by becoming more attractive to residents and businesses, and vice versa, not by artificially expanding borders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting fact, from 2000 to 2015 census, Lakewood declined population from ~56k to ~51k.  Approximately 3k of the 5k decrease was in the age range of 0-19 years.  Smaller households are a major player with the decrease

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did three terms as an elected councilman of my *tiny* Washington DC suburb and the big lesson I learned is partisan politics has almost nothing to do with running an efficient municipality. This is reflected in the fact that lots of municipal elections are non-partisan. Common sense and some business experience is much more valuable than a political philosophy. Even if Cleveland were 100% Democratic, there is still a big difference between styles of the incumbent mayor and TJ Dow, for example.

 

 


There's nothing wrong with optimism, as long as you don't get your hopes up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did three terms as an elected councilman of my *tiny* Washington DC suburb and the big lesson I learned is partisan politics has almost nothing to do with running an efficient municipality. This is reflected in the fact that lots of municipal elections are non-partisan. Common sense and some business experience is much more valuable than a political philosophy. Even if Cleveland were 100% Democratic, there is still a big difference between styles of the incumbent mayor and TJ Dow, for example.

 

 

 

Really? In late August, the Fairfax County "non-partisan" school board just held a special election for an open seat that was held by Republican funded member. I've never seen such a partisan race in my life. On and on about transgender bathrooms from both sides but very little about overcrowding which is becoming quite the problem here and both Dems and GOP voters would agree is a real issue. It might as well have been Trump vs. Hillary. 

 

That's just one of a thousand examples of local non-partisan politics that are run in a very partisan manner.

 

Interesting fact, from 2000 to 2015 census, Lakewood declined population from ~56k to ~51k.  Approximately 3k of the 5k decrease was in the age range of 0-19 years.  Smaller households are a major player with the decrease

 

Between 2000-2010 Parma shrunk by about 3.5% yet it's 18-64 population actually grew by .5%. There was a sharp decrease in both young and old people. And Parma is not getting gentrified like Lakewood. Yes, household size plays a role but the other factor is young people with families are choosing to move away from the region in general. Even from almighty Lakewood. This is dragging the region's population down no matter how nice some 'burbs are compared to others. It's also a sign that new immigrants are not moving to region.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did three terms as an elected councilman of my *tiny* Washington DC suburb and the big lesson I learned is partisan politics has almost nothing to do with running an efficient municipality. This is reflected in the fact that lots of municipal elections are non-partisan. Common sense and some business experience is much more valuable than a political philosophy. Even if Cleveland were 100% Democratic, there is still a big difference between styles of the incumbent mayor and TJ Dow, for example.

 

 

 

Really? In late August, the Fairfax County "non-partisan" school board just held a special election for an open seat that was held by Republican funded member. I've never seen such a partisan race in my life. On and on about transgender bathrooms from both sides but very little about overcrowding which is becoming quite the problem here and both Dems and GOP voters would agree is a real issue. It might as well have been Trump vs. Hillary. 

 

That's just one of a thousand examples of local non-partisan politics that are run in a very partisan manner.

 

Interesting fact, from 2000 to 2015 census, Lakewood declined population from ~56k to ~51k.  Approximately 3k of the 5k decrease was in the age range of 0-19 years.  Smaller households are a major player with the decrease

 

Between 2000-2010 Parma shrunk by about 3.5% yet it's 18-64 population actually grew by .5%. There was a sharp decrease in both young and old people. And Parma is not getting gentrified like Lakewood. Yes, household size plays a role but the other factor is young people with families are choosing to move away from the region in general. Even from almighty Lakewood. This is dragging the region's population down no matter how nice some 'burbs are compared to others. It's also a sign that new immigrants are not moving to region.

 

As always, just a bundle of cheer. 

 

I would point out, that municipalities like Avon, Medina, Solon, Twinsburg continue to grow and develop.  So it becomes inner ring suburbs and their amenities competing with places further out.  I would say that is the bigger threat than people relocating... Believe it or not (gulp)...people enjoy living here (shhhh)

 

 

Edit:  i know you hate cheerleading...but i have to balance out your takes.  You have an equal lack of balance in any of your arguments.  Largely though, im not naive, im well aware of our regions weaknesses...I cause havoc on twitter with our officials.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Really? In late August, the Fairfax County "non-partisan" school board just held a special election for an open seat that was held by Republican funded member. I've never seen such a partisan race in my life. On and on about transgender bathrooms from both sides but very little about overcrowding which is becoming quite the problem here and both Dems and GOP voters would agree is a real issue. It might as well have been Trump vs. Hillary. 

 

That's just one of a thousand examples of local non-partisan politics that are run in a very partisan manner.

 

As a municipality, we faced no such issues. I don't believe that school boards should be deciding bathroom issues either. I'd kick that up to the state level or higher. As you say, overcrowding is what they should be dealing with, and that is pretty non-partisan.

 

As an aside, my municipality passed an ordinance in 1997 to allow any resident, irrespective of citizenship, vote in local elections. We got no press coverage.  :-)


There's nothing wrong with optimism, as long as you don't get your hopes up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did three terms as an elected councilman of my *tiny* Washington DC suburb and the big lesson I learned is partisan politics has almost nothing to do with running an efficient municipality. This is reflected in the fact that lots of municipal elections are non-partisan. Common sense and some business experience is much more valuable than a political philosophy. Even if Cleveland were 100% Democratic, there is still a big difference between styles of the incumbent mayor and TJ Dow, for example.

 

 

 

Republican Voinovich had a 100% Democratic council and worked well with it.  Far better than Kucinich or Campbell, arguably better than White.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ There is a huge gap in policy ideas in Cleveland City Council even though they are all Democrats.  Would anyone really consider Polensek to be a liberal?

 

The gap in policy ideas are all from middle to the extreme left though. But, I do agree, it isnt as frozen as some people think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Without looking it up, I'd bet few if any of Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, Charlotte, Salt Lake City, or Nashville are governed by GOP mayors/majority city councils.

 

 

Houston, Nashville, Charlotte, and Salt Lake City have Democratic female mayors.

 

Dallas has a Democratic mayor.  San Antonio's office is non partisan, the incumbent is a liberal of Asian descent who replaced a black woman.

 

San Diego has a Republican mayor, also Jacksonville, Oklahoma City, Miami, and Fort Worth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ There is a huge gap in policy ideas in Cleveland City Council even though they are all Democrats.  Would anyone really consider Polensek to be a liberal?

 

They are Democrats because they have to be to get reelected.  Even Zack Reed seems to have said some liberal things basically just to get reelected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True. Annexing is at best a mirage. Thriving cities and those with steady population growth do so by becoming more attractive to residents and businesses, and vice versa, not by artificially expanding borders.

 

I've said this before.    Any attempt by the City of Cleveland to involuntarily annex suburbs would be met with a disproportionate retaliation by the state government, on behalf of any suburb which feels threatened.  Meaning basically all of them.  The region as a whole would suffer.

 

The state Democratic Party would have to join in or lock itself into a permanent minority status.

 

The idea is such anathema that even discussing it poisons constructive regionalization discussions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a good article about Kenn Ricci and his almost secret, growing aviation group of companies headquartered at Cuyahoga County Airport.  Group sales are now around $2.5 billion.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/douggollan/2017/08/24/not-netjets-directional-aviation-capital-is-a-major-player-in-private-aviation-you-may-not-know/#32177bc185cf

 


There's nothing wrong with optimism, as long as you don't get your hopes up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...