Views From the Hill

What Do You Think of Increasing the Bottle Tax to Fund Schools?

2012-01-03T14:57:00.000-08:00

Mayor Rawlings-Blake is advancing a bill that would raise Baltimore’s bottle tax from two cents to five cents. All bottle tax revenue would be used to fund school renovation and repairs. The Baltimore Sun article, Rawlings-Blake readies for battle over proposal to raise bottle tax describes the bill and some of the issues.

A high quality school is one of the pillars of neighborhood revitalization in Reservoir Hill Improvement Council’s (RHIC) strategy. All new funds for public education are welcome. Still, the bottle tax poses a problematic question. Principally, the tax is a regressive tax that disproportionately impacts lower income families. However, it is a simple tax and the need is desperate for addressing the $2.8 billion dollar required for school renovations as documented by the American Civil Liberties Union’s Education Reform Project in their 2010 report, Buildings for Academic Excellence.

RHIC has been working closely with many member organizations in Baltimore Education Coalition and Transform Baltimore to develop innovative and viable funding solutions to create first-class school facilities for all city students, teachers, and neighborhoods. This has led to a three-part proposal for raising school construction and renovation funds:

1. Leverage annual construction funds for long-term borrowing

Borrow the funds needed to renovate buildings upfront and use existing streams of money to pay off this debt. This will require agreement by city and state officials to commit to maintaining current levels of annual school construction funding for Baltimore City over 25-30 years. Also, the funds must be given to the city school system “flexibly,” so that it can be used to leverage a large sum of school construction dollars now. Greenville, SC used this model to renovate and modernize all 70 of its school buildings in five years. The current levels of city and state annual funding for school construction (~$60 million) would allow the city school system to leverage $1 billion upfront now.

2. Increase Baltimore City's annual contribution to school construction

The City's share of VLT (slots) revenue, estimated to generate $15-17 million annually, could be used to borrow enough funds upfront to fully renovate 5-6 high schools or build 10-12 new elementary schools; the slots revenue would pay off the debt. A 5-cent bottle tax would generate an estimated $10 million annually, and could leverage ~$155 million to improve school facilities.

3. Increase state funding for city school construction

Connecticut covered 80% of the costs to rebuild every school in New Haven.

Maryland must contribute more to ensure that all children can learn in school buildings that meet standards for adequacy, in accordance with the State Constitution.

Point number two above (Increase Baltimore City's annual contribution to school construction) most directly pertains to the bottle tax question, because it requires us to seek out new sources of revenue at the local level.

Let us hear from you.

The Baltimore Education Coalition and Transform Baltimore are supporting the Mayor’s bottle tax proposal as a first step towards achieving high quality school buildings throughout the district.

Do you support an increase in the bottle tax if all the bottle tax revenues go toward school rehabilitation and repair?

If you would rather not pose your thoughts publicly, please them to Rick Gwynallen at rgwynallen@reservoirhill.net

A welcome increase in City sanitation services

2009-04-02T05:28:00.001-07:00

By Cheryl Casciani
Chair, Baltimore Commission on Sustainability and
Director of Community Investment, Baltimore Community Foundation

I have been a resident of Baltimore City for 15 years and in that entire time I cannot recall an occasion where my city services have been increased…until the announcement of the proposed
1 + 1 trash and recycling collection program. This program, which requires passage of legislation being considered before the City Council, will entitle Baltimore residents to their accustomed twice per week visit from City sanitation trucks. It is true that one visit will be for trash and the second will be for recycling, but when you examine what the full program means for residents, neighborhoods and the City as a whole, one can quickly see the enhanced benefits.

First, all City trash routes are being updated to assure that all streets in a given neighborhood have the same trash collection day. This is the first route update in over 30 years, and all routes will now include vacant lots and alleys. And, the worker schedules will change so that we will eliminate the problem of no holiday collections. The biggest change, however, is that residents will now have weekly pick-up for an unlimited amount of recyclable material.

In 2008 the City introduced a single-stream recycling program, and as a result Baltimore’s recycling tonnage increased by 30% in one year’s time. The program was expanded in early 2009 so that most of what residents now throw into their trash can be recycled. To see an updated list of what is recyclable, visit http://www.cleanergreenerbaltimore.org/. Why should we care about this? The City saves approximately $33 for every ton of trash that it doesn’t send to the landfills and refuse facility, and the City gets additional revenue from recyclables. Last year alone Baltimore realized close to $400,000 in recycling revenue. This is clearly good for the City as a whole.

Individual households will see an increase in the amount of material that the city will collect because there are no limits on the amount of recycling that can be placed out for pick-up. These changes will make the entire collection system more efficient and free up collection crews for alley clean-up and seasonal cleaning and collection operations. The new program also includes the proposed addition of 20 additional sanitation code inspectors who will address code violations and persistent neighborhood sanitation problems.

It is true that this program will only work if residents recycle, which is why all of us – residents and businesses who already recycle, community organizations like the Reservoir Hill Improvement Council (RHIC), youth leadership organizations like Kids on the Hill, foundations like the Baltimore Community Foundation, and City officials – should do everything to get our neighbors and businesses to recycle. I encourage people to take advantage of the community forums now taking place throughout the City so they may learn more about the program. You can see the updated schedule on the Cleaner, Greener Baltimore website. Neighborhood organizations throughout the City are also good sources of information about the recycling program.

Change is always hard. But, people will marvel at how easy it is to make this change. Residents will also be able to take pride in their role in saving the City money and making our streets cleaner and greener.

Should Reservoir Hill have additional public trash receptacles?

2009-03-06T11:46:00.000-08:00

Should Reservoir Hill have additional public trash receptacles?

When the current sanitation campaign, Pride in Reservoir Hill is Picking Up!, kicked off last autumn, there was discussion about getting more public trash receptacles in targeted areas, but it has not been a focus on the campaign as of yet. There are some containers currently in use. However, there is not enough of them or placed at enough strategic locations to help mitigate the trash problem. RHIC would like to hear from people their opinions on the subject. Should we get more public receptacles? Why? Why not? If we should get them, where should they be located?

We want to hear from you!

New Ideas for Vacant Houses

2008-06-05T12:58:00.000-07:00

Councilman William H. Cole

Reservoir Hill is a neighborhood with outstanding potential. Centrally located, the neighborhood has access to the largest park in Baltimore City and is within walking distance to light rail, MARC, and other forms of mass transit. It is within two miles of Johns Hopkins University, Coppin State College, the University of Baltimore, and the Maryland Institute College of Art.

It is a neighborhood with superior architecture and large, well-built houses. Over the last few decades, we’ve seen some of these properties converted from single family homes to condominiums or multiple-unit apartment buildings. While these large properties are certainly conducive to granny apartments that provide additional income for the property owner, finding the right balance between homeownership and rental is a constant struggle.

Today Reservoir Hill faces two significant obstacles to increasing home-ownership:

Vacant houses: There are 30,000 vacant properties city-wide, nearly 200 of which are in Reservoir Hill. Vacant houses clearly attract crime and adversely affect property values.

Speculators who buy houses with no intention of improving them: They leave houses vacant and dilapidated until they can realize a profit. As a result, they drive house prices up, making them unaffordable to many, while adding no value to the community.

To reduce the number of vacant and/or abandoned properties, the city has a number of programs (Project 5000, SCOPE) and will soon embark on an ambitious Land Bank project in an effort to reduce bureaucratic red tape and get properties into the hands of potential homeowners more quickly.

No single housing program will work for all communities, or even for all circumstances in one community. A home-ownership program has to fit both the specific situation and the realistic potential.

A successful home-ownership program must (a) provide incentives to individuals who intend to live in the houses they purchase, (b) provide new home-owners with the tools they need to succeed, and at the same time, (c) discourage speculators from taking houses off the market and leaving them vacant.

Not currently part of the city’s house-rescue or home-ownership plans is the Dollar House Program, a successful program of the 1980’s. (Example: Otterbein neighborhood). A modified Dollar House program, designed to take advantage of Reservoir Hill’s assets and overcome the obstacles, could eliminate many of the city-owned vacant houses and increase home-ownership.

To succeed, the program must have several essential elements:

l Owner-occupied within 18 months,
l Assistance/support for new home-owners including financial counseling and debt planning.
l Specific deadlines for renovations in stages depending on the size of the house.
l Minimum length of residency, with penalty (repaying tax credits) if requirement is not met.
l Houses grouped in such a way that new home-owners can form mutually supportive networks with Dollar House neighbors.

An example of a successful project for a large house:
The new owner renovated the first floor within 18 months and moved in. While living on the first floor, she renovated the 2nd and 3rd floors. She then moved up to the 2nd and 3rd floors and rented the first floor. Applying the rental income to her mortgage made the project affordable for her.

If you had to create a housing rehabilitation program for the city, what would it look like?

Do you think a Dollar House program would work in Reservoir Hill? Why? Why not?

What do you see as assets and obstacles to increased home-ownership in Reservoir Hill?

What suggestions do you have for opportunities/remedies?