| |||
|
|||
|
|
Active forum topics
Who's online
There are currently 0 users and 34 guests online.
|
Categories:
Good for regionalism 24% (35 votes) Bad for regionalism 26% (38 votes) A reason to change the entire process 50% (74 votes) Total votes: 147 |
Northeast Ohio Poll
What You're Saying
Tag Cloud
Blogroll
Brewed Fresh Daily Add Us to Your Favorites
|
||
|
Printer-friendly version
Comments
This fiasco of the Avon exit to 90 show exactly what many people were concerned with Regionalism. Cleveland strong armed Lorain into paying a ransom for the expansion that regionalism is calling for. This only hurt the entire process of getting the region to work together. It set a precident that will show up again in other similiar circumstances. Forcing Lorain to pay a tribute to Cleveland should not have been permitted, but again the flaw with regionalism is that the stronger bigger partners will exact a ransom for the price of progress. It is a shame.
Antonio, Do you believe there is a way to do do regionalism where the smaller partners will feel they are treated fairly even if the larger partners get what they want? Or is that too much to hope for. Regionalism won't make tough decisions go away, but if we get it right -- I hope -- people will have faith in the process. Clearly there isn't faith in current process.
While you and others "hope", Avon and the people that WOULD HAVE benefited from those tax dollars go without because they got cheated by a system that is simply not fair. Still, those in the Clev-Cuya voting block had a choice. They could have chosen NOT to do what they did. Those in power have the responsibility to NOT use that power if it is wrong. It is shockingly close to the definition of tyranny. Indeed, tyranny is defined as "arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power".
This whole regionalism idea will never fly as long as this type of thing remains the norm. But then that just gets us back to where we were without "regionalism", right? If Clev-Cuya cannot make it without blackmailing it's neighbors (like us in Medina County...right down a widened I-71), then it is time for new leadership. I cannot help but think of that little school yard saying: why is Clev-Cuya blowing out Avon's candle just to make theirs look brighter?
Sharing of revenue is not inherenty bad. Perhaps the good folks from Avon and Lorain County should have said "fair is fair" and recommended that if any corporation moves out of Avon into Cuyahoga County they would in turn share that tax revenue.
Thinking regionally is new for northeast Ohio. And as we all know, change is often painful; and many don’t want to change until they are forced to. The tax-sharing agreement was the right thing for the region. NOACA’s next step, after the dust settles over Avon, should be a blanket resolution that establishes a regional policy to cover future, similar situations. I’m sure that group can come up with a standard all would be happy with when negotiated in a less-stressful context.
I'm glad that tax sharing is a part of the deal; but I'm upset that this interchange was proposed in the first place. We have to stop sprawling out farther and farther. There is plenty of land that needs to be redeveloped in the City of Cleveland and in Cuyahoga County. We can't just keep moving farther out and leaving problems behind. I hope that all future interchanges outside of Cuyahoga County are blocked. We should develop and urban growth boundary, as Portland did, to stop sprawl. Maybe with gas near $100/barrel, people will start thinking more carefully about where they live and what kinds of cars they buy.
The truth is that we need more than just an interchange. We need I-271 extended west from Medina to I-2. That might solve most interchange issues, increase East to West flow, and ignite further economic development. This needs to be solved regionally and shared regionally. All too often, one city or one county tries to control everything, which ends in failure or a redo. Examples are the widening of I-71, our sports teams, and any large scale economic investment funds. These big issues should be handled regionally, spreading the costs over the region, because utlimately the region will benefit.
We should have an interchange at every major thoroughfare. That way developers can keep getting paid and paying staff, the Clinic can keep being a nonprofit and EVERY community can have a chain drugstore/restaurant/gas station/Target-Walmart-Kohls/etc. What better way to maintain our thriving economy?? The survey should have asked, "Should the interchange have even been considered?"
When asked, most people will say that they "favor" regionalism. As per usual, however, the devil is in the details. If regionalism means the City of Cleveland can go around extorting money from the suburbs and the surrounding communities, then regionalism is a bad idea. If it means that government entities and elected officials actually work together for the greater good, then it's an outstanding idea. As for the interchange shakedown, the Avon elders could have agreed to pay their tribute to the self-proclaimed Emperor of East 6th & Lakeside as long as they maintained the ability to say how those funds were spent. After all, that money does belong to their constituents.
The whole point of adding this interchange was so that the Cleveland Clinc Foundation can build a new facility on the main western Cleveland corridor. This is big business coming out to the surrounding cities to pull in all of the insured patients into their system to support the main campus down town. How does this support regionalisim? It rapes the local heathcare community of vital dollars that are needed to support the uninsured and maintain quality health care at existing facilities. Until the CCF and other large health corporations support the surrounding communities with millions of dollars a year in community service (as do the community hospitals), then I believe the whole idea of regionalisim for healthcare is a farce and is not a bi-directional process.
Regionalism just means all of us, not just one community. Our combined governments need to stop working on highway projects that take money and tax monies better spent elsewhere. A viable Ohio train system will benefit everyone and is a much bigger bang for the dollar. We need to stop doing more of the same and start thinking like we want NE Ohio to truly be better off economically in ten years.
The decision to build more road infrastructure is poor for a region already oversupplied with infrastructure. More retail growth will follow for a region that already has more retail square foot per capita than most places in the nation. Cleveland settled for a short term tax benefit that won't begin to replace the dollars lost in the long term. Avon and Lorain get a guarantee of more traffic and congestion. Hard to see any winners here besides the Cleveland Clinic and land developers. Regionalism means thinking seriously about what will benefit the region as a whole for the long term - not just trying not to rock the boat so everyone stays happy in the short term.