Archive for the ‘Crime Economics’ Category
Trenton’s 2016 Report Card
Mayor Jackson gave his state of the city address last night. He highlighted quite a few things the city is doing and congratulated his staff on their hard work. What he did NOT do, nor has any Mayor of Trenton in the last 15 years done, is to give numbers that back up successful results.
Several years ago, the Fix Trenton’s Budget Committee which I led, agreed on 5 basic measures of goodness for a city. Since then I have been reporting on these indicators as an objective way to gauge our progress in Trenton. It’s not enough, to say we did something, or are working on something or want something to happen. Rather, the results are what matter.
All five of the following are “lagging” indicators, meaning they represent the past, but they are objective and widely used measurements collected in a consistent way across the state and nation. There’s no hand-waving with these numbers.
- Crime levels as measured by the Uniform Crime Report
- Population growth as measured by the U.S. Census Bureau (in the case of Trenton, every year)
- Graduation rate as measured by the NJ Department of Education
- Median Household Income as measured by the U.S. Census, and
- Economic success as measured by our Tax Base
Crime is slightly up but murders were down
The 2015Uniform Crime Report represents 18 months of Mayor Jackson’s tenure.
- Uniform Crime Reports for 2015 are 3048
- This is an increase from 2014 of 3%
- Murders were down from 32 in 2014 to 17 in 2015
Holding the rate steady would give the City a C, but since the murder rate declined so drastically I’m giving it a B.
Source: NJ State Police
Trenton is losing population
Trenton’s 2015 census estimate is 84,225 residents. This is a slight decline of from 2012’s estimate of 84,349.
Losing population is a crippling situation to be in. It implies that our economy is shrinking, we’re not a desirable place to live and that our property values are going down. Since 2010 Trenton’s population has decreased -.8% while New Jersey’s has increased 1.9%. In a growing state, Trenton is shrinking.
For continuing to lose population in growing state, Trenton gets a D.
Source: US Census Bureau
Graduation rates have improved
The Trenton school district’s 2015 graduation rate was 68.63%. This is an improvement over 2014’s dismal graduation rate of 52.95%
Just about 2/3 of Trenton kids are graduating now. That sounds better but still 1/3 don’t graduate high school which is appalling and continues to explain the high level of lawlessness in the city.
It can be argued that fixing the schools isn’t a prerequisite for revitalizing the city. The easiest target market for new residents is the millions of people without kids. However, failing schools don’t help.
For a big jump in graduation rates though, Trenton gets an A.
Source: NJ Dept. of Education
Incomes in Trenton are down again
Median Household Incomes in Trenton are down again to $35,647 (2014 numbers) from $36,662 (2013). These are the latest numbers we have but represent a disturbing trend in Trenton. Not only are we losing people, but evidently we’re losing higher income people. This is disastrous for an economy that is largely based on retail spending. Furthermore, 28% of people in Trenton live in poverty.
New Jersey’s median household income is more than double Trenton’s at $72,062.
For having shrinking incomes, a 3rd year in a row in a wealthy state, Trenton gets an F.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
Tax Base is down
Trenton gets an “incomplete” on this grade as it no longer bothers to publish its tax base information on the city web site. The version published there is almost 2 years old. So I went digging for another source and found our tax base (for 2015) published on the Dept. of Community Affairs web site. It gives our tax base as $1,996,653,658 (just under $2B). This would be down from the $ 2,036,287,800 I reported last year based on the January 1, 2015 City Tax list.
As we can see the numbers are inconsistent, but since they’re all that are available, I surmise that our tax base has in fact shrunk. To fix Trenton’s budget we need to be adding roughly $100M a year in taxable properties instead we lost $40M in value.
As a comparison, Hamilton’s tax base is over $5B and tiny Princeton’s is over $6B.
For a shrinking tax base that will lead to higher taxes I give Trenton an F.
Source: Department of Community Affairs
Is the city turning around? Nope!
- We’re in pretty much the same situation we were in last year
- There are some development projects but they aren’t paying taxes yet
- People are still moving away.
That’s not progress.
Hoping for a pro-regionalization campaign
I can’t think of any urban city in New Jersey which one would classify as truly “great”. A great city provides the intellectual, creative and financial juice to form new companies that fuel economic growth and the resulting high quality of life.
There are large cities in America that do this like Boston, San Francisco and New York. There are small cities that have done it as well; Raleigh and Austin come to mind.
As we wonder what it will take to make Trenton great again, we’d be foolish to think we could copy any of those cities. After all we live in a unique state at a unique time. But surely the ingredients for greatness are within our reach.
Much has been said about regionalization in New Jersey and how it can help. But let’s be honest, Princeton is a poor comparable for Trenton, Passaic, Irvington and Camden.
The question is what does regionalization mean for Mercer, Essex, Passaic and Camden counties? Does a rising tide raise all ships in those places? Will a regionalized police force lead to lower crime rates and is that a measurably good thing for not only the urban centers but the suburbs as well? What about schools? What about economic development?
My suspicion is “Yes”? Let’s seriously explore being a great county.
The analysis I have read about regionalization points to cost savings from combining operations. This is obviously a good thing. However, best guesses are that this amounts to around a 10% overall savings. This is nothing to sneeze at but given the severe imbalance in property taxes vs. cost of services between a poor city like Trenton and its wealthy neighbors, it may not be worth the risk.
If, on the other hand, we saw an overall reduction in crim, county wide and not just in the urban center, then that kind of improvement would certainly grab a safety conscious suburbanite’s attention.
Schools could benefit too. As it stands, suburbs currently fund not only their own schools but the lion’s share of the cost of urban schools. Those urban schools produce generally poor results for a premium dollar. But what if by integrating schools on a county level we were able to reduce the overall cost of providing a decent education? There are thousands of examples of where this has happened in the USA. If I lived in West Windsor, I’d much rather have a vote on how my money was spent in Trenton than not. And as I’ve said many times, I’m the product of an integrated public urban school that I’d gladly compare to Princeton High.
But the real benefit could come from economic development. Our suburbs struggle to attract ratables while at the same time fight the ugliness and hassle of sprawl. But what if they benefitted from development in urban centers which typically have a surplus of developable land and welcome it? Couldn’t that be a home run? Imagine what would happen if county leaders could, in good conscious, focus their development efforts on cities knowing that the ratables their efforts generate would fund county-wide budgets.
This all sounds good but there is quite a bit of work to do to turn these ideas into real plans for action. The fortunate thing in our favor is that a lot of the work has been done by State regionalization task forces and our current State administration is solidly behind those plans.
What is needed are Mayors and City Councils who are willing to lead their municipalities into a form of government that give up traditional autonomy in favor of a more balanced regional economy. A strong leader in Trenton will need to find and sell the benefits of regionalization not only to the city but to suburbanites as well.
We’ll have to recognize that there is a good bit of well-deserved fear involved in a suburban town throwing in with a city like Trenton. And Trentonians would have to realize that they would no longer call their own shots.
My hope is that at least one Trenton campaign in the 2014 election sets as its centerpiece, mutually beneficial county-wide regionalization. Let’s explore sharing our library, Cadwalader park, our communication center, our schools and our developable land with our neighbors in return for becoming integrated back in to the region’s economy.
NPR’s “This American Life” from Trenton
A simplistic and misleading account of Trenton’s budget dilemma.
That said, listening to it at least paints the picture of the problem. We don’t have a collective understanding of the problem or the solutions. There’s a leadership vacuum around the subject of revitalizing Trenton.
This inspires me to help in the organization efforts for Trenton’s new political group, “The Majority for a Better Trenton”.
“The State’s Role in Fixing Trenton (Part 2): Using the State’s Power to Re-invent Trenton”
In Part 1 of “The State’s Role in Fixing Trenton” I argued that New Jersey should fund a portion of Trenton’s revenue and I presented a simple calculation for a fair funding level, $70M. However, there are several big changes that only the state can make that will truly re-invent Trenton’s economy and potentially all of New Jersey’s urban centers.
Over the years, state and federal governments have adopted policies favoring the creation of suburbs: most notably road building, tax advantaged mortgages for single family homes and electrification. Technology also played an important role in making urban centers less important as telecommunications, trains, power generation and eventually container shipping spread manufacturing out of town. [1]
These policies and technologies, among others, led to urban decline over the last 50 years. Urban renewal and the riots in the late 60s were just nails in the coffin.
These are powerful mega-trends but their influence is waning and new mega-trends are taking over: Read the rest of this entry »
Economic “Must Reads” for Trentonians
Reinvent Trenton is published to help policy makers and voters think about Trenton’s issues and how to resolve them. The site introduces new ideas, it presents data and it offers what I hope are constructive plans to revitalize the city. Quite a bit of what you read on the site comes straight out of business, economics and public policy reading that I’ve done. The idea is to interpret academic ideas and apply their central concepts to our situation here in the River City. Read the rest of this entry »
Crime budget questions we need answered
If you ask a Trentonian about their number one city issue, crime will probably come up. Yet we don’t really seem to have any clue about its measurable affects on our city or how to manage them.
Previously, I wrote about the cause and effect of a city’s crime level and it’s immigration level ( How Crime Affects Trenton). However, this is a very small part of the story. First, we have to agree on what it is about a city that we’d like to improve. In general, the best measure of a city’s health is its per capita income. Cities with high crime rates have low per capita incomes and vice-a-versa (The Economics of Crime).
How crime affects Trenton
All Trentonians know that our high crime rate isn’t good for the economy. However, not many of us know just how bad it is. It turns out that economists have studied the subject and have asked themselves that very question.
In “CRIME, URBAN FLIGHT, AND THE CONSEQUENCES FOR CITIES”, economists Julie Berry Cullen and Steven D. Levitt worked through quite a bit of crime, census and other data in addition to third party research to build up an econometric model of the effects of crime. It’s worth noting that Steven Levitt later went on to write Freakonomics which is referenced in my earlier article on the economics of crime.
I’ve provided a link to the article but I’ve summarize it fairly simply below. I’ll warn readers of the report in advance that this is an academic paper and some of the conclusions it draws are a bit disturbing to the politically correct mind. Read the rest of this entry »
The Economics of Crime
One of, if the not the biggest thing holding back revitalization in American cities is crime.
The facts speak for themselves – cities with high crime rates generally have poor growth rates. Cities that have somehow improved their crime rate do much better.
New York and Washington, DC are great examples of cities that have aggressively attacked their crime issues and have unleashed unprecedented economic growth. Washington used to be the most dangerous city in America and New York was supposed to be leading the country into chaos.
Looking just at New Jersey, two cities, New Brunswick and Newark are overcoming their crime issues and generating positive population growth. Meanwhile, Asbury Park, Trenton and Camden continue to scare their populations away.
Lot’s of people have lots of things to say about crime. The police say they do all they can and blame the courts for a revolving door justice system or the public for not cooperating. Children’s advocates blame lack of after-school programs. Civil rights leaders blame racism. Parents blame everybody and Bill Cosby blames parents.