Categories
News Politics

Short-sighted policy decisions ruling budget debate

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.

Data from Office of Environmental Quality

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.

Data from the Office of Environmental Quality

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.

Categories
News

This Week In Soapbox 8/25

This Week in Soapbox (TWIS) you can read about a new housing development in Avondale, green roof design and business news, a new gourmet pretzel shop in Bellevue, an expanded CRA program for Hamilton County, and 25 new green homes coming to Northside.

If you’re interested in staying in touch with some of the latest development news in Cincinnati please check out this week’s stories and sign up for the weekly E-Zine sent out by Soapbox Cincinnati. Also be sure to become a fan of Soapbox on Facebook!

TWIS 8/25:

  • $4.7M Forest Square Senior Apartments development to start this October in Avondalefull article
  • UC landscape architect becomes one of first accredited green roof professionals in the worldfull article
  • Twisted Sisters Cafe brings pretzel bliss to Northern Kentuckyfull article
  • Northwind development to bring 25 new green homes to Northsidefull article
  • Hamilton County Commissioners look to expand Community Reinvestment Area programfull article
  • Northern Kentucky Sanitation District’s green roof a regional modelfull article
Categories
News Politics

Recycling gets hit hard in Cincinnati due to budget cuts

The City of Cincinnati announced yesterday that its yard waste collection service for residences and business owners has been canceled. The move comes on the heels of suspended discussions about the use of larger recycling carts, and reforms presented by City Manager Dohoney that would streamline and pay for a new waste collection system.

During the budget discussions in past weeks, many fiscal conservatives openly mocked the idea of investing in new recycling carts for City residents. The 64-gallon wheeled recycling carts would have put recycling on a comparable level to normal trash pick up in terms of capacity, but would have also cost the City a $3.5 million of upfront capital. The debate was quickly ended and the discussion about improving the City’s recycling program has been indefinitely suspended.

These are not the first of the items that have set waste collection and recycling back in Cincinnati. In November 2008, City Manager Dohoney proposed a new waste collection fee to help balance the budget, and went on to say that a $300,000 study of a automated trash collection system using trucks that lift cans with mechanical levers instead of having city workers do the heavy lifting.

Photo from the City of Cincinnati

The automated system would, in the long-term, save the City money as Dohoney reported that “we are averaging seven people out a month with some type of injury as a result of how we collect solid waste.” Dohoney went on to say that those injuries were costing the City approximately $1 million a year. Both this, and the trash collection fee, were met with heavy criticism as many did not like the idea of a new fee, for an otherwise indirectly paid for service through property taxes.

But as the politicians and community leaders continue to punt this issue back and forth the problems still exist. Cincinnati’s rates of recycling are far too low, the costs associated with trash collection are still too high, the efficiency of collecting trash is still not where it needs to be, and users still have no benefit to reduce their waste production.

The solutions are present. City Manager Dohoney’s proposal was a step in the right direction, but the adoption of a RecycleBank-style program would be another step towards reducing the production of waste and encouraging higher rates of recycling. A ‘Pay as You Throw’ (PYT) system would require users to pay for their waste collection based on the amount of waste they produce, something that would encourage lower rates of waste production and higher rates of recycling when paired with a RecycleBank-style program.

It is truly unfortunate to see long-term economic, social and environmental benefits cast aside due to the fear of an initial capital cost that is seen as either being wasteful or too much given the current economy. In addition to growing revenue streams, cities also need to find ways to improve their efficiencies for not only their customers, but their bottom lines. These kinds of actions would help avoid future personnel cuts the next time an economic downturn hits, and make city operations more responsive.

The results from these cuts will be seen quickly and easily as people will immediately start discarding their yard waste with their regular trash. The use of smaller recycling bins versus larger carts that are easier to use will continue to stack the deck against recycling over regular disposal that might be more convenient. The progress that Cincinnati has made on this front in recent years might just all be lost in one budget cycle.

Yard Waste Cancellation Details:
Beginning Friday, August 21, yard waste collection will be discontinued as a separate service. The City will maintain regular garbage collection and will pick up yard waste as a part of that, although City officials strongly encourage residents and business owners to find alternative means to discarding their yard waste (i.e. composting, mulching, yard waste drop-offs). If you have additional questions, or would like to find the Hamilton County yard waste drop-off location nearest you visit this website.

Categories
Arts & Entertainment News

More Than Fair

When was the last time you saw a live Demolition Derby?

I live, work, and normally entertain myself in the city – but everyone could use a little country culture every now and again. Even though the Reds were in town and it was Salsa Night on the Square, I visited the Hamilton County Fair tonight. I went to support my parents, who entered quilts and photographs (and brought home ribbons I might add) but ended up spending hours there and really enjoying myself.

Photos by S.L. Hanners

I won’t tell you everything that’s there – you’ll have to find that out for yourself. Instead I give you the top 10 list of things you MUST DO at the Hamilton County Fair.

  1. Ride the flying ice cream truck.
  2. Board a retro classic (and very aerodynamic looking) bus.
  3. Pet a piglet.
  4. Watch cars wreck into each other until only one driver is standing.
  5. See a vintage boat that appeared in the James Bond movie “Live and Let Die”.
  6. Learn where milk comes from and try it yourself.
  7. Check out the new ‘Go Green’ display.
  8. Buy a telephone booth.
  9. Avoid horse droppings.
  10. Discover something new about where you live.

The price is right – $8 each gets you into the exhibits, demonstrations, the grandstand entertainment, and all the rides on the fairgrounds. Last but not least, I was impressed to see – wait for it – recycling bins available at a festival in town. Finally someone is giving us a place to put those empty plastic soda and beer bottles! Even the biggest festivals in the city haven’t achieved that feat yet. Way to go Hamilton County Fair, you’re more than fair in my book!!

The Hamilton County Fair continues through August 15th. Find out more at their website.

Special thanks to Brianne Fahey, formerly of Live Green Cincinnati, for submitting and producing this content. If you have a story, lead or piece of information that you would like to have shared on UrbanCincy just shoot us an email at UrbanCincy@gmail.com.

Categories
News

Higher densities not necessarily the answer to our sustainability questions

When one thinks of sprawl the first thought that comes to mind is the spread out, low-density suburbs that have eaten away at our nation’s fertile farmland and natural environment. An immediate reaction is that density is in fact better, but is this so?

There is an assumption made that density would somehow reduce the amount of land needed for sprawling suburbs, and that greater amounts of land can be preserved. This is true in theory, but does not always happen once the market has its way. Furthermore, preserved land is not the same land it once was; meaning that the preserved “greenway” connecting your neighborhood to another community feature may or may not be beneficial to the natural systems that exist. Does it serve as a corridor for wildlife, is it farmable or is the preserved land serving any significant purpose outside of additional trees that are reducing the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere? Most likely not.

What has happened in Atlanta is something that should be learned from. Atlanta is arguably the king of sprawl in modern day America, but some might say, well Fulton County has a higher population density than does Hamilton County. Similar arguments can be applied to other less urban regions than Cincinnati. The fact is that Fulton County is just about built out with the exception of some land in the far southern reaches of the county. Furthermore, this built-out county has extraordinarily dense suburban areas including the central Perimeter area which includes 30 story office towers, residential towers and 12 lane highway systems to boot. The traffic is abysmal like much of the rest of Atlanta and the problem is only going to get worse.

Midtown, Buckhead and Perimeter skylines in Atlanta – photo from mattsal88 on ImageShack

The reason is a combination of densities and form. The suburban areas of Atlanta, and even much of the urban areas, are almost entirely car-dependent. So a low-density suburban area that is car-dependent is one thing, but a high-density area of the same makeup is nightmarish. The “spatial mismatch” is exacerbated to a degree seen nowhere else in America than Atlanta and Los Angeles (Los Angeles County is the most populated county in the country at 9+ million). The people living in one area are working in another creating a spatial mismatch that is exacerbated by the high densities. They are not walking, biking or taking transit to a level enough that would offset its densities.

When you hear of the next “new urbanist” neighborhood on the fringes of a metropolitan area, or the next lifestyle center that pitches itself as being the next best thing to an authentic urban shopping experience, be wary. These are not real communities where store owners live in addition to running their business. The residents are most likely hopping in their car that is parked nicely within one of their two (or more) dedicated parking spaces and driving into the center city for work.

Higher densities in our suburban areas are not the answers to our sprawl issues. A correction of the spatial mismatch is what’s needed to truly create a sustainable metropolitan area. Natural systems need to be preserved in their truest form and our most fertile food-producing regions need to be maintained for their highest and best use. Higher densities in the core with high density satellite neighborhoods connected by high-quality transit options are the best possible solutions.