by Chuck Hoven

     (Plain Press October 2024) Cleveland continues to have the second highest overall poverty rate and highest child poverty rate among American cities with populations of 300,000 or more. An analysis of data from the United States Census Bureau’s 2023 American Community Survey by the Center for Community Solutions shows these data points and other information about Cleveland’s population that should receive priority attention by local policy makers.

NEWS ANALYSIS

     In an article summarizing some of the analysis, Center for Community Solutions Chief Executive Officer Emily Campbell says that Cleveland’s population has stabilized at 351,383 residents, remaining virtually the same as in 2022.

     Campbell noted that the only big city with a higher poverty rate than Cleveland is Detroit, Michigan. Campbell pointed out that there are vast differences in the poverty rates among Cleveland neighborhoods that are revealed in the neighborhood data profiles just released by the Centers for Community Solutions.

     Campbell said, “Cleveland continued to have the worst child poverty rate of any large city. In 2023, nearly 35,000 of Cleveland’s children lived in poverty, for a child poverty rate of 48.4 percent.”

     The poverty rate among older adults is increasing, according to the analysis by the Center for Community Solutions. Campbell says, “In 2023, 24.7 percent of older adults lived in poverty, up from 20.9 percent just two years before. And it looks like it will continue to get worse – poverty rate for ages 60-65 in Cleveland was even higher at 29.0 percent.”

     [Editor’s note: To read the summary by Campbell and link to the neighborhood data profiles visit: https://www.communitysolutions.com/resources/campbell-clevelands-population-is-steady-older-adult-poverty-continues-to-grow]

     A recent commentary in the September 6, 2024, Forum section of The Plain Dealer by Davon Norris titled, “Cuyahoga County reappraisal wrongly shifts tax burden to the disadvantaged,” points out the unfairness of the property tax reappraisal process. Norris, an assistant professor of organizational studies and a faculty associate at the Stone Center for Inequality Dynamics at the University of Michigan, says analysis of the property tax reappraisals in Cuyahoga County shows that “properties with current assessed value less than $100,000 have proposed increase of 60%, on average, while higher valued properties above $200,000 have proposed increases of 25%.”

     Norris goes on to say,

     “Because of a feature of Ohio law, a higher assessment does not mean a person’s taxes will necessarily increase. Instead, the law generally operates as a burden-shifting mechanism where property value changes that are higher than average see tax increases, and property value changes that are smaller than average see tax decreases. This ensures that the overall revenue available for the county and its municipalities aligns with what voters have approved, and that the tax burden is shifted to property values that saw larger proportion increases.

     In the case of the Cuyahoga County reappraisal, though, this means the property tax burden will shift to lower-income property owners and areas within the county and its municipalities. Additionally, any income-regressive dynamic in a county like Cuyahoga County means that this burden is especially carried by the county’s Black population.”

     Norris’ article notes the higher costs will push many families into foreclosure. Norris says, “Ultimately, both Cuyahoga County and the state of Ohio need to review processes for property tax reassessments and explore alternatives. Property taxes support the public services that all residents use, and it is vital that the burden of paying for those services be shared fairly and sensibly. Shifting a larger burden to the lowest-value properties and areas seems to stand in the face of both fairness and sense.”

     [Editor’s note: The article is available to read at: https://enewspd.cleveland.com/data/52587/reader/reader.html?social#!preferred/0/package/52587/pub/89794/page/46/content/2915215]

     We can assume that the high percentages of families with children and senior citizens the Center for Community Solutions points out as living in poverty in Cleveland are either homeowners or renters living in some of the houses that are receiving the higher property tax reappraisals. This is bound to create an additional burden for these families with either large property tax increases or rent increase in the future.

     In Cleveland, existing older homes are often compared to brand new homes or substantially rehabbed homes in nearby neighborhoods when reappraisal costs are figured. While the homes may be of similar size. These reappraisals mean that older homes, many of which have not been substantially upgraded in decades are being compared to homes that have had expensive rehabs or to brand new homes.

     Clevelanders living in the older homes bear not only the burden of the substantial increases in property tax, but they also pay additional taxes to make up for the 15-year tax abatements all new and substantially rehabbed homes are receiving.

     Despite repeated calls for the City of Cleveland to end its tax abatement program or use City funds to reimburse the school system and other government entities that are deprived of tax dollars due to the abatement, Cleveland City Council continues to have a tax abatement program. This, along with Tax Increment Financing deals, adds an additional property tax burden to Cleveland residents not receiving an abatement. Many of those paying more in property taxes or rent because of this policy are those that can least afford to do so.

     Given this data, Clevelanders should expect that their elected officials and policymakers at the City and County level would be acting to protect vulnerable families and individuals from the ravages of poverty. They should expect public officials to be developing programs to lift people out of poverty.