Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Ohio > Cincinnati
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-01-2011, 10:25 AM
 
Location: Blue Ash, Ohio (Cincinnati)
2,785 posts, read 6,647,680 times
Reputation: 705

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarah Perry View Post
What you don't get is that if there's insufficient maintenance of even basic services, nobody's going to be attracted to a community. Not individuals, certainly not the corporations that create jobs.

Here's a concept: if the big projects are justifiable and such a great idea, private developers will be beating down the door to do them.

Hey, I like, for example, the idea of the Washington Park project. But the council just cut funding for maintenance in the parks we already have. Apparently you like this management concept. I don't.
Yes, and how do you expect to pay for those services when the city is declining in population? The city is going no where, and if those developments do not happen (the streetcar is a lost cause in backwards Cincinnati), so the little bit that they do have going for them could possibly bring in some residents. Do not tell me what has happened in OTR in the last few years is nothing but amazing. Bring in the people, bring in the money. Don't bring in the people, loose the money.... in return, loose basic services. Come on, look at other cities for examples. Cincinnati is not alone in this country of ours.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-01-2011, 10:35 AM
 
118 posts, read 246,342 times
Reputation: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beavercreek33 View Post
Yes, and how do you expect to pay for those services when the city is declining in population?
Population has not declined but appears stable and even gaining slightly.

Cincinnati's population inches higher | Business Courier
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2011, 10:37 AM
 
Location: Blue Ash, Ohio (Cincinnati)
2,785 posts, read 6,647,680 times
Reputation: 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by Love-Cinci View Post
Population has not declined but appears stable and even gaining slightly.

Cincinnati's population inches higher | Business Courier
Good post. Stabalized/declined more like it. According to the last estimate, the city did decline. It isn't shrinking like it did, but still is in many sections of the city. There is still a lot of work to do in Cincinnati.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2011, 10:38 AM
 
Location: Blue Ash, Ohio (Cincinnati)
2,785 posts, read 6,647,680 times
Reputation: 705
2009 City Estimates (Incorporated Cities of 250,000+)
Rank City 2009 Estimate, 2008 Estimate (Change)

01. New York 8,391,881, 8,346,794 (45,087)
02. Los Angeles 3,831,868, 3,801,576 (30,292)
03. Chicago 2,851,268, 2,830,026 (21,242)
04. Houston 2,257,926, 2,238,183 (19,743)
05. Phoenix 1,593,659, 1,569,917 (23,742)
06. Philadelphia 1,547,297, 1,540,351 (6,946)
07. San Antonio 1,373,668, 1,349,274 (24,394)
08. San Diego 1,306,300, 1,305,754 (546)
09. Dallas 1,299,542, 1,279,539 (20,003)
10. San Jose 964,695, 948,686 (16,009)
11. Detroit 910,921 912,632 (-1,711)
12. San Francisco 815,358 808,001 (7,357)
13. Jacksonville 813,518 809,891 (3,627)
14. Indianapolis city (balance) 807,584 800,730 (6,854)
15. Austin 786,386 767,201 (19,185)
16. Columbus 769,332 759,360 (9,972)
17. Fort Worth 727,577 704,299 (23,278)
18. Charlotte 704,422 687,971 (16,451)
19. Memphis 676,640, 676,660 (-20)
20. Boston 645,169, 636,748 (8,421)
21. Baltimore 637,418, 638,091 (-673)
22. El Paso 620,456, 609,248 (11,208)
23. Seattle 616,627, 602,934 (13,693)
24. Denver 610,345, 593,086 (17,259)
25. Nashville-Davidson Co. (balance) 605,473, 598,465 (7,008)
26. Milwaukee 605,013, 604,179 (834)
27. Washington city District of Columbia 599,657, 590,074 (9,583)
28. Las Vegas city Nevada 567,641, 562,849 (4,792)
29. Louisville/Jefferson Co. (balance) 566,503, 563,119 (3,384)
30. Portland 566,143, 556,442 (9,701)
31. Oklahoma City 560,333, 551,875 (8,458)
32. Tucson 543,910, 540,653 (3,257)
33. Atlanta 540,922, 537,385 (3,537)
34. Albuquerque 529,219, 523,240 (5,979)
35. Kansas City 482,299, 480,129 (2,170)
36. Fresno 479,918, 472,949 (6,969)
37. Mesa 467,157, 463,829 (3,328)
38. Sacramento 466,676, 461,036 (5,640)
39. Long Beach 462,604, 460,138 (2,466)
40. Omaha 454,731, 448,050 (6,681)
41. Virginia Beach 433,575, 432,228 (1,347)
42. Miami 433,136, 431,196 (1,940)
43. Cleveland 431,369, 434,023 (-2,654)
44. Oakland 409,189, 403,188 (6,001)
45. Raleigh 405,612, 393,692 (11,920)
46. Colorado Springs 399,827, 397,317 (2,510)
47. Tulsa 389,625, 385,755 (3,870)
48. Minneapolis 385,378, 381,978 (3,400)
49. Arlington 380,085, 374,793 (5,292)
50. Honolulu 374,658, 373,295 (1,363)
51. Wichita 372,186, 365,838 (6,348)
52. St. Louis 356,587, 356,730 (-143)
53. New Orleans 354,850, 336,644 (18,206)
54. Tampa 343,890, 340,108 (3,782)
55. Santa Ana 340,338, 337,152 (3,186)
56. Anaheim 337,896, 333,114 (4,782)
57. Cincinnati 333,012, 333,170 (-158)
58. Bakersfield 324,463, 318,701 (5,762)
59. Aurora 323,348, 316,676 (6,672)
60. Toledo 316,179, 316,664 (-485)
61. Pittsburgh 311,647, 312,119 (-472)
62. Riverside 297,841, 293,207 (4,634)
63. Lexington-Fayette urban county 296,545, 292,240 (4,305)
64. Stockton 287,578, 285,357 (2,221)
65. Corpus Christi 287,439, 284,845 (2,594)
66. Anchorage 286,174, 280,471 (5,703)
67. St. Paul 281,253, 279,447 (1,806)
68. Newark 278,154, 277,377 777
69. Plano 273,613, 268,552 5,061
70. Buffalo 270,240, 271,220 (-980)
71. Henderson 256,445, 253,693 (2,752)
72. Fort Wayne 255,890 254,143 (1,747)
73. Greensboro 255,124 251,179 (3,945)
74. Lincoln 254,001, 250,939 (3,062)
75. Glendale 253,209, 251,772 (1,437)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2011, 10:54 AM
 
118 posts, read 246,342 times
Reputation: 47
Quote:
The Queen City added 1,731 residents since the start of the millennium, bringing the city to 333,012 residents in July 2009, according to revised population estimates released Friday by the government. That's a 0.52 percent increase from 2000. Cincinnati ranks as the 57th largest city of 19,507 places in the report. That is down two spots from 2008's ranking of No. 55. Compared to 2008, the city's population is down slightly, to 333,012 from 333,170, according to the Census
Guess it depends on how you view it. To me population declining ever so slightly still shows stability. Especially when you compare stats to a city that is rapidly losing population.

Dayton for example:

Population (2000)166,210Population (2001)164,040Population (2002)162,488Population (2003)161,360Population (2004)159,835Population (2005)158,291Population (2006)156,740Population (2007)155,520Population (2008)154,557Population (2009)153,843
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2011, 11:00 AM
 
Location: Blue Ash, Ohio (Cincinnati)
2,785 posts, read 6,647,680 times
Reputation: 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by Love-Cinci View Post
Guess it depends on how you view it. To me population declining ever so slightly still shows stability. Especially when you compare stats to a city that is rapidly losing population.

Dayton for example:

Population (2000)166,210Population (2001)164,040Population (2002)162,488Population (2003)161,360Population (2004)159,835Population (2005)158,291Population (2006)156,740Population (2007)155,520Population (2008)154,557Population (2009)153,843
Still, Cincinnati has a long way to go. And the way they view urban development, it might be even longer than expected.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2011, 11:25 AM
 
118 posts, read 246,342 times
Reputation: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beavercreek33 View Post
Still, Cincinnati has a long way to go. And the way they view urban development, it might be even longer than expected.
Well, I agree as far as city government is concerned. But they are not the thrust of Cincinnati's downtown re-development. It seems that Cincy corporations took things in hand by forming 3CDC. What they (and others) have accomplished in OTR is incredible. So time will tell what comes of it. I spend considerable time downtown and patronizing businesses in OTR and consider the urban core stable and beginning to become somewhat vibrant.

Back to going belly-up. I have nothing good to say about city government here. The so-called budget the council just passed exacerbates our municipal money problems by deferring things another year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2011, 12:14 PM
 
Location: Cincinnati
3,336 posts, read 6,957,591 times
Reputation: 2084
when politicians control a budget, this is what you get. the long-term picture of the city isn't as important as getting reelected. nobody will reelect people who fire policemen, even if it is an open secret that there are too many.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2011, 12:28 PM
 
6,351 posts, read 21,565,782 times
Reputation: 10010
Granted, I live North of I-275 so I really don't have a dog in the fight (unlike Michael Vick...) Anyway, I spent last week listening to Darryl Parks, WLW's Father Confessor, interview the various Cincinnati City Council members. And, yes, I've come away with the opinion that, basically, they're spineless politicians that just want to "kick the can down the road".

Despite my belief that unions are a mixed blessing, I've had more than my fill of WLW's "public-sector unions are the reason we're is the situation we're in now" mantra, I definitely have sympathy and support cincinnati's public sector unions. I think the Sanitation Division should have long ago started working towrds the new waste collection technology and gotten trash truck crews down to the current 1 or two that Rumpke, Waste Management and the other private sector outfits have gone to. But, having said that, I still prefer my gov't trash collectors to private ones. We liked our city-employed guys in Centerville vs. the private contractor we have since we bought a house in the adjoining twp.

Sure Cincinnati can privatise trash collection and make the Rumpkes richer since they pay their workers less than the city does. But that's money in a LOT fewer hands to spend locally.

I certainly don't know enough about police administration, but if I were chief, I'd reassign the revenue agents that troll on I-71 to where the REAL crime is taking place...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2011, 01:25 PM
 
2,886 posts, read 4,991,744 times
Reputation: 1508
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crew Chief View Post
...Despite my belief that unions are a mixed blessing, I've had more than my fill of WLW's "public-sector unions are the reason we're is the situation we're in now" mantra, I definitely have sympathy and support cincinnati's public sector unions...
I'm no union hater. And I think if you want to point a finger at the real reason for the city's budget problems, it's Pettus-Brown Syndrome, where big sums of money are simply handed out to the incompetent and/or criminal cronies of elected and appointed officials in City Hall. What the average taxpayer sees is, I believe, only the tip of the iceberg.

But if the city has more police officers and firefighters than it can afford, then some of them should be laid off. Period. Those people WERE NEVER GUARANTEED LIFETIME EMPLOYMENT, but the union leadership certainly acts as if they were. When you have to have security threatening to remove the union presidents from a council meeting, you have a problem.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2022 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Ohio > Cincinnati
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:12 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top