Life After ‘Youngstown 2010′ 4 March 2014 No Comment This column originally appeared on Youngstown State University’s The News Outlet. Nearly a decade ago, the city of Youngstown was in the midst of finalizing a comprehensive plan that sought to create a bold new vision for the struggling Rust Belt community. The plan, Youngstown 2010, called for a radical rethinking of the way in which the city needed to embrace its future. Unlike most city plans which promote growth, 2010 suggested a managed ‘right-sizing’ which embraced the notion that a new approach was needed to deal with the numerous challenges associated with decades of economic and population decline. The 2010 planning process began in earnest in 2002 and was led by then-Community Development Agency director Jay Williams in partnership with Youngstown State University and Urban Strategies Inc. of Toronto, Canada. The plan (and its process) was aggressively marketed throughout the local area. The Vindicator ran a four-part series prior to the first citywide public meeting at Stambaugh Auditorium in 2002 (and another series in 2008); a news conference was held to announce the community meeting schedule; two public service announcements ran for a nine month period in 2004; and local PBS affiliate WNEO produced a live program series, ‘2010 Moving Ahead: A Forum For Reporting Progress’. Billboard advertisements donned city corridors encouraging residents to get involved. A website for the plan was developed as was memorabilia such as t-shirts, tote bags, writing materials and even electronic logos for computer wallpaper. An art project – ‘Faces Of 2010’ – asked residents to contribute renditions of themselves in a mosaic layout which, coincidently, generated exactly 2,010 individual faces. After three years of community engagement in which an estimated 5,000 people participated, the final plan was unveiled to over 1,300 people at Stambaugh Auditorium in January 2005. Once a final draft was inked, the Youngstown 2010 Comprehensive Citywide Plan was adopted by City Council and soon began to generate local, national and even international media and academic recognition. For example, in 2006, the plan received the ‘National Planning Excellence Award For Community Outreach’ by the American Planning Association and was also named to the New York Times’ annual ‘Best Ideas Of The Year’ list. In 2005, Jay Williams – a political novice – decided to run for mayor as an Independent candidate using the Youngstown 2010 Plan as his platform. He would go on to defeat Democratic Party candidate and then-State Senator Bob Hagan by a 12 point margin. The win was historic as Williams became the city’s first African-American mayor and – at 34 years of age – its youngest as well. This new vision and new leadership created high hopes in the community. For the duration of his time as Mayor, Williams was asked to speak about the plan at numerous engagements throughout the nation which raised both he and Youngstown’s profile. However, as time passed, concern in the community grew that commitment to the plan was waning. In 2008, a historic recession exasperated an already overwhelming economic situation in the city. Eventually, Williams, himself, would begin to describe 2010 as a ‘journey and not a destination.” Then, in 2009, the city’s chief planner and Youngstown 2010 project director, Anthony Kobak, abruptly resigned and was not replaced. Two years later in August 2011, Jay Williams, himself, resigned to accept a position with the Obama administration. His replacement – Chuck Sammarone – would dismiss the plan outright. So, ten years later, what was accomplished under Youngstown 2010 and what is the condition of the city today? The plan contained a final chapter which outlined implementation strategies both citywide and for each side of town. Those strategies ranged from very general to somewhat specific and were organized under three themes: ‘Clean’, ‘Green’ and ‘Better Planned & Organized’. This column will take a look at some of the key goals from that chapter while also examining some key finding from the recent neighborhood conditions report issued by the Youngstown Neighborhood Development Corporation. Population Perhaps one of the most curious goals of Youngstown 2010 was a hope that the city could stabilize its population at 80,000 residents. This remained a goal in the final 2005 draft despite the fact that the city’s population in the year 2000 – two years prior to the start of the Youngstown 2010 planning process – had already declined to 82,000. Additionally, the city had been losing an average of nearly 16 percent population each decade for the past forty years due to a nationwide trend of suburban sprawl dating as far back as the 1930s and later exasperated by the collapse of the local steel industry in the late 1970s and early 1980s. When the 2010 U.S. Census report was released, it revealed that the city had lost an additional 18.4 percent of its population. The news was met with shock by some city officials who anticipated more population loss but not to such a degree. Two years later in 2012, an updated Census report showed that Youngstown led the nation in population loss between 2010-2012 among cities with a population of 50,000 or greater. Meanwhile, Mahoning County led Ohio in population loss from 2011-2012. In fact, between 1990 and 2010, the only area of the city where the number of residents grew was the East Side due to the construction of two prisons. Youngstown’s current population now stands at approximately 65,000, a 61 percent decrease since its peak. Crime, Education & Income While the Youngstown 2010 Plan – largely a land use plan – did not directly address issues of crime, education and poverty, it’s important to review these items as they do speak to the holistic health of the city and impact planning objectives. Regarding crime, calls for police service for violent and property crime in the city decreased by nearly a third between 2003 and 2012. Annual homicide rates decreased sharply as well in comparison to a peak in the mid-1990s. However, it should be noted that the city’s population decline also plays a factor in these figures as well. Between 1990 and 2010, the percentage of residents without a high school diploma dropped by 14 percent and those with a college degree rose by nearly a third. However, 20 percent of adults in the city still do not have a high school diploma while only 16 percent have a four-year college degree or higher. This leaves Youngstown with a higher percentage of residents without a high school diploma and a lower percentage of residents with a post-secondary degree than almost any other city of comparable size and composition in the nation. Employment and income statistics are not much better. As of 2011, the unemployment rate in the city stood at 19.5 percent (some place it even higher). The median household income is now $24,880, which is significantly lower than Mahoning County ($40,123) and nearly half that of Ohio ($47,358). Unfortunately, more than a third of city residents live in poverty (36 percent). In fact, Youngstown led the nation in 2011. Additionally, the suburban poverty rate in Mahoning County also rose by nearly 40% since 2000. Housing, Code Enforcement & Demolition One of the most significant challenges facing Youngstown’s neighborhoods is vacant and abandoned property, whose rate has doubled since 1990 and now sits at 19 percent. The Youngstown 2010 Plan identified several goals in dealing with this issue: targeting of highly visible demolitions; converting surplus school buildings into green space; reorganizing the city’s code enforcement department; creating a housing court; improving the city’s land bank program; and seeking state funds for demolition and redevelopment of larger commercial structures. When he entered office in 2006, Williams’ administration made demolition a priority by increasing the budget for it several fold. Williams also sought from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency a waiver aimed at helping accelerate the demolition process. However, his request was ultimately denied. In fact, additional regulations would eventually be enacted which nearly doubled the cost of the average demolition in the city. Two years into the Williams administration came the ‘Great Recession’ and a new wave of foreclosures which compounded an already overwhelming problem. Eventually, residents began to organize. In 2008 and again in 2010, the Mahoning Valley Organizing Collaborative conducted a citywide vacant property survey. The 2010 results reported a vacancy rate of 44.8 structures per 1,000 residents, a figure nearly 20 times the national average These reports led to a campaign around the issue. Between 2008 and 2010, neighborhood groups in the city more than doubled (20 in 2005 to 49 in December 2013). A collective effort between organized residents of Youngstown and Warren along with local officials and policy organizations led to the passage of a state law which allowed for the creation of county land banks in both Mahoning and Trumbull counties in 2011. However, it was obvious that additional help was needed with neighborhood development and planning as well. In 2009, the Youngstown Neighborhood Development Corporation was formed in response to this need. While some notable development has taken place over the past ten years (mostly in the downtown and near-North Side), the most comprehensive neighborhood development took place in the Idora neighborhood, one of only a handful of neighborhoods to receive a comprehensive plan under Youngstown 2010. Spearheaded by the Youngstown Neighborhood Development Corporation, efforts have included aggressive demolition and board-up programs; vacant lot beautification; mural projects; multiple community gardens and an urban farm; and home rehabilitation and purchasing programs.