Liverpool population takes a nosedive
by M. Stewart
With a major earthquake in Japan and revolutions sweeping across the Arab world, the big story in our sleepy little corner of the world this week was the dramatic population loss in East Liverpool.
The Morning Journal reported Thursday that East Liverpool has lost 1,894 residents since the turn of the century, leaving the city with a population of just 11,195. That's a 17 percent drop in 10 years.
The newspaper story was based upon "2010 Census data released Wednesday," but I was unable to locate specific city data at the U.S. Census Bureau web site for the state of Ohio. I do not doubt that the MoJo figures are accurate, but I do wish someone would tell us where to locate that information. I would particularly like to see the Census Bureau's 2010 city "fact sheet" for East Liverpool. Without more data, it's difficult to do anything more than speculate on causes and ramifications.
Most people automatically assume that population loss is a bad thing, but it doesn't have to be. In some cases it might be a positive step, depending on which segment of the population decided to leave. If it turns out that a significant portion of those 1,894 people were working taxpayers and homeowners, we're in deep trouble. On the other hand, if most of them were poverty industry clients, the news couldn't be better. Changes in the mean income and homeowner-to-renter ratio should provide some clues.
If it should become clear that our dramatic population loss is concentrated in the working taxpayer/homeowner sector, city officials finally will be forced to mount an all-out emergency assault on the poverty industry. If they do not, it's time for all of us hard-working homeowners to make other plans for the future. Only a fool willingly goes down with the ship, especially when the captain and crew are busy drilling holes in the hull.
But I'm not yet ready to make that judgment. First, we need more data to analyze. Second, we need to see how city politicians react to the analysis. If it's business as usual--that is, continuing to aid and abet the poverty industry--then we'll know what we have to do.
By the way, I am tightening up the posting requirements for this web site. Until now, I have posted virtually all comments sent in by readers, but that policy has come to an end. In an effort to foster higher quality discussions, I will no longer post comments that display mindless political and personal invective. I couldn't care less what anyone thinks about the change. If you don't like it, do not visit the site.
With a major earthquake in Japan and revolutions sweeping across the Arab world, the big story in our sleepy little corner of the world this week was the dramatic population loss in East Liverpool.
The Morning Journal reported Thursday that East Liverpool has lost 1,894 residents since the turn of the century, leaving the city with a population of just 11,195. That's a 17 percent drop in 10 years.
The newspaper story was based upon "2010 Census data released Wednesday," but I was unable to locate specific city data at the U.S. Census Bureau web site for the state of Ohio. I do not doubt that the MoJo figures are accurate, but I do wish someone would tell us where to locate that information. I would particularly like to see the Census Bureau's 2010 city "fact sheet" for East Liverpool. Without more data, it's difficult to do anything more than speculate on causes and ramifications.
Most people automatically assume that population loss is a bad thing, but it doesn't have to be. In some cases it might be a positive step, depending on which segment of the population decided to leave. If it turns out that a significant portion of those 1,894 people were working taxpayers and homeowners, we're in deep trouble. On the other hand, if most of them were poverty industry clients, the news couldn't be better. Changes in the mean income and homeowner-to-renter ratio should provide some clues.
If it should become clear that our dramatic population loss is concentrated in the working taxpayer/homeowner sector, city officials finally will be forced to mount an all-out emergency assault on the poverty industry. If they do not, it's time for all of us hard-working homeowners to make other plans for the future. Only a fool willingly goes down with the ship, especially when the captain and crew are busy drilling holes in the hull.
But I'm not yet ready to make that judgment. First, we need more data to analyze. Second, we need to see how city politicians react to the analysis. If it's business as usual--that is, continuing to aid and abet the poverty industry--then we'll know what we have to do.
By the way, I am tightening up the posting requirements for this web site. Until now, I have posted virtually all comments sent in by readers, but that policy has come to an end. In an effort to foster higher quality discussions, I will no longer post comments that display mindless political and personal invective. I couldn't care less what anyone thinks about the change. If you don't like it, do not visit the site.
posted by M. | 8:51 AM
21 Comments:
Matt; I would imagine the people that left were the ones seeking better paying jobs elsewhere. From my experiences welfare bums tend to stay put and consume the government cheese.
Fred--
Let's hope you're wrong, but I fear you are not. If the trend is as you suggest, then it will be the final wake-up call. If immediate, decisive, and aggressive action is not taken by city hall to counter the poverty industry, the city can be pronounced dead. If the status quo continues, homeowners can cash out and cut their losses.
Matt,
What could city hall do to stop or slowdown the infestation of low-income or poor people? Go after the landlords to make the renters pay more so we get a better class of people? Require drug and alcohol testing? There is no easy answer, so the influx of the welfare-poverty class of people continue, and the exodus of the working class of people who can afford better leave. You just admitted that a fool goes down with his ship and (I assume that you were referring to city hall as) the captain and the crew drilling holes in the hull.
Really--
To begin with, city council could pass stronger anti-slum lord legislation. I believe there is some new legislation in the pipeline having to do with nuisance properties, but I haven't heard about it since it was first discussed in committee. Even if that legislation gets passed, it's just a single tool in an otherwise empty toolbox.
Council could create a fee structure that would dissuade, rather than reward, slumlords who own 20, 50, or more properties in town. How about identifying owners and condemning properties that house only vagabonds and wild animals? They're all over town. A city can force these things if it wants to and attach the costs to the owners' taxes.
Council could pass and the city could enforce strict exterior housing and business property maintenance ordinances, with nobody grandfathered in. An expanded inspection system would pay for itself in collected fines. We have to make it prohibitively expensive for people to abandon and neglect property in our city.
In the short run, I'd settle for enforcing the weak system we have now. Booth Tire's appeal was rejected by the board of housing appeals, and it was ordered to be demolished at least a year ago. The owner completely ignored the order, and the dilapidated, burned out building still sits at the entrance to town.
Council and the mayor could speak out against the CMHA poverty-for-profit scheme and pass ordinances that interfere with the system. Instead, council rubber stamps anything Tom Snow wants and bends over backwards to accommodate the exploitation of the poor in the city. Unfortunately, the mayor seems to have nothing to say about the ravages of CMHA.
The city could pass and enforce legislation that would hold absentee delinquent commercial property owners like state Rep. Craig Newbold to a higher standard of maintenance and appearance. How many prominent, rotting buildings in town belong to Mr. Newbold? What has city hall done about that situation? Nothing that I know of.
How's that for starters?
Matt,
I'm sorry you are no longer going to post anything that goes against your views... You know all the Bad stuff the right brings out that the lefties are protesting as far as SB5 and Wisconsin..
But you will put all the garbage the left puts out there..
I for one will be one less person you will see on here as much, even though I find myself middle right, I do agree with some things you write about.
As for BOOTH TIRE- Why did the city waste the money with court hearings, when they could have used some of those granted funds to tear it down like the old DQ?
I believe if you educate yourselves on H.U.D. it would answer many of your questions.
http://www.usa.gov/Agencies/Federal/Executive/HUD.shtml
Charging higher rent is not the answer.
M,
I wanted to let you know our church will be taking up a Love offering tomorrow for Japan. We possibly may set up as a supply headquarters as well for the area to send needed supplies also. I will not mention our church's name because that would be wrong of me. I just wanted you to realize that there is still christian churches that practice what is in the bible...
Middle Right-
The DQ property was given to the city and they tore it down as soon as they had ownership. Booth Tire is still privately owned an thus the reason for court action. The city doesn't want to waste money but the law is the law and a man's home or business according to law is his castle and is protected by rights.
The last time ELO had a population anywhere close to this was 1890 and the pop then was 1890 10,956
Middle Right--
I'll say this one time. The new posting policy has nothing to do with whether I agree or disagree with a poster. Off-topic comments will be posted at my discretion. I will refer you to the last paragraph of the main post for more information. It doesn't matter to me how often you visit the site. Because I am not selling anything at ORL, readers are not customers; they are guests.
I was told at city hall that the matter of Booth Tire had been turned over to the law director and that nothing was done. I was directed to speak to Mr. Payne about it, but I failed to do so prior to his recent health problem.
Fred--
High rent just plays into the hands of the slumlords. The city must find a way to make it prohibitively expensive for them to do business in the city. I am not opposed to subsidized housing for the economically deprived. What I am opposed to is a system such as we have in East Liverpool where people who do not live in the city exploit our housing stock, destroy our neighborhoods, and profit from the government-subsidized poor. These people are no different from or better than drug dealers. I also oppose any system that does not provide genuine incentives to escape from poverty. Those who have become addicted to a poverty lifestyle should not be rewarded.
It's clear we are going backwards, after all, the population had been in decline for 30 years. The future is not to bright unless something drastically changes. The only thing I think could stop this is a lot of descent paying jobs coming to the area. Go here http://www.city-data.com/city/East-Liverpool-Ohio.html and it's easy to see why people are leaving.
Fred--
I think there are lots of good jobs in the area. After all, plenty of people who live in surrounding municipalities have decent jobs. Actually, a lot of people in East Liverpool have good jobs as well, but an equally large portion don't work at all. When you have that many people who have little or no income, it brings the average income way down. It works the same way as standardized test scores in our schools.
The vast majority of our problems come from a heavy concentration of poverty that other towns simply won't tolerate. People who have no income don't pay taxes, so East Liverpool's tax base is seriously depleted, yet EVERYBODY gets the services that only a portion of the citizens pay for.
There is a reason why Salem, Columbiana, and Lisbon aren't overrun with poverty. They refuse to allow it, whereas East Liverpool actually promotes it. Look no further than the last Section 8 grant that city council agreed to accept. The entire city is crumbling under the weight of poverty, and they literally ask for still more.
The drastic change that we need is a change of attitude from our political leaders. It simply blows my mind that dismantling the poverty industry isn't job #1 every minute of every day at city hall. Every problem we have can be traced directly or indirectly to it.
Then why did the population drop 17% the past 10 years? Many times I look in the review and the only jobs advertised are STNA or truck drivers.
Fred--
Are you talking about jobs within the city limits? Except back in the old pottery days, most residents of East Liverpool have worked outside of town. During the steel industry heyday, it was Midland, Weirton and Steubenville. Jobs are regional.
If we're talking about population, we're talking about residents--the people who choose to live in a given town. The people who live in more prosperous towns don't necessarily work in those towns. How many people who earn good money at our local power plants actually live in Stratton or Shippingport?
Real estate is dirt cheap in East Liverpool. You can purchase a nice home in ELO for the price of a car, put $20K or so into it, and live in a place that would be worth 20 times more in most markets. But most people don't want to do that because of the very real possibility that a slumlord will rent the house next door to a bunch of forlorn, drug-addled hillbillies that will ruin your life.
Our business community has largely been reduced to serving only the needs of the poor, and our tax base is so small that the city can't provide the services middle-class people expect. And who wants to destroy their vehicles driving on our streets? Regardless of what city hall people say, it's not just the winter weather. Decent towns don't have the street problems we have because people are willing to pay for maintenance.
Our region clearly isn't the most prosperous in the country, but there are a whole lot of people who manage to make a decent living in Northeastern Ohio and Western Pennysylvania. Most of them just choose not to live in East Liverpool, and you can't blame them.
Harry,
If the city would tell the owner of booth tire, give us the building we'll demolish it. I'm sure she'd go for it...
Pray tell: where are all these good jobs of which you speak? Pittsburgh? Cleveland? Possibly but certainly none in our immediate area.
Nothing wrong with commuting to work but with the price of gas, a person needs to earn a VERY good salary to make a drive to Pittsburgh - let alone Cleveland - pay off.
And, obviously, the "good" jobs that pay decent wages today are those for which a degree is needed, not "the mill" or "the pottery" which once were the highest paying jobs for those without nursing or teaching dgree (for example).
Today, those who land one of the very few "good" jobs still available here hang on to them forever so they are rarely available.
Just saying--
Cleveland is out of our practical range, but certainly Pittsburgh and Western Pennsylvania isn't. Youngstown is also in our commuting zone, as is Steubenville-Wheeling.
The days are gone when hoards of uneducated or unskilled people can expect to live a middle class life by working at a factory. We still have the power plants and a handful of other industrial jobs that pay well, but it's not like it used to be, and it won't ever be again.
Education has been the ticket to the middle class for a good while--long enough for a couple of generations to take advantage of the changeover to a knowledge economy. That people in our area have lagged behind much of the rest of the country in that area is one of the reasons employers are reluctant to locate here. Our local work force is seriously deficient, and what's weird is how many people are somehow proud of that fact. Yet they still expect someone to come to their door and offer them a high-paying job just because they are alive.
Take a walk downtown, through the diamond on any particular day and you won't have to wonder WHICH part of the population left. The town is full of unemployed parasites of state welfare funds. Seeing the young lady in the Statue of Liberty suit outside the tax place makes me laugh because the diamond and East Liverpool could seriously have a statue of liberty plaque that says, and I paraphrase, "bring your huddled masses..." of the the poor and indigent and drop them on our town; because that's mostly what we have. I'd love to see the mean income, and like you said, a reliable source. If it's about 25 thousand, i'd call them a liar.
The streets are deplorable. I overheard the mayor of Chester the other day saying, "if Pennsylvania avenue or River Road was in the city of Chester, i'd close it down." That would just be silly- that's something a LEADER would do. We don't have any of those in this city. It's easier to cry poor and fit in with the rest of the population; indigent, poor, and wait on someone else to do it for you.
Could you imagine how funny it would be if the city just closed down Pennsylvania Avenue from the city limits thru Mulberry street except to local traffic, citing it was unpassable and dangerous? Re-routed all traffic up Calcutta Smith Ferry??? I think it would be hilarious.
Middle left,
Your thoughts of closing Pennsylvania Ave and sending traffic up Calcutta-SmithsFerry road is coming true. People are fed up with the streets in East End and are finding other ways to bypass the pathetic roads in East Liverpool. If I owned a storefront in East End I would be calling the Mayor about once an hour for an update. The stores have got to be losing money from the lack of traffic. I know Calcutta is busier when I go to and from work. BTW is Grand Ford still in business? Do they deliver?
I've noticed that traffic is heavier on Globe and Etruria. I, too, am traveling these roads now on my way back and forth to Beaver......now they are pot-holed too!
I wonder which roads Jim Swoger and John Torma travel...and how much swearing they do when the rims of their vehicles slam into a hole!
Homes should be inspected before each new renter has moved in. We rented off a local slumlord "Vickie" when we still lived in town. First we lived in a small apartment of hers. It wasn't too bad. The guy underneath played loud rap music but that wasn't the landlords fault and he was young. However, we needed a bigger place. She offered us half of a double and agreed to waive a deposit if we cleaned it up when we moved in. We said yes, we were young and stupid. We moved in and found mold in the frig and roaches. She didn't give us back the deposit on the first property, we were a little afraid to ask for it since we were so grateful about getting the double. Well within a week we realized the place was a roach infested hole. There were hardly any light bulbs working when we looked at the property which should have been a warning sign, once again young and stupid. Well, we moved. At this point we asked for our first deposit back, we had children and it was a roach infested hole. She said we'd brought roaches from the previous place we had lived.... That would be the apartment she also owned which did not have roaches, but it did have at least one rodent which I caught in a trap. The guy living beneath us at the old place said that he had no roach problems either so no one knew what she was talking about. But, she kept her deposit. It wasn't like we could go out and get a lawyer. Less landlord cheating would go on and maybe property would be better maintained. When we rented we did our best to keep the properties we lived in looking nice.
People don't buy in town because you never know when the house next to you is going to end up in the hands of a slumlord. Let's face it, when a house is foreclosed or older people die and the house goes on auction or is sold dirt cheap, it is the slum lords that buy up the property.
Post a Comment
<< Home