The city of Athens is tasked with answering a tough question: What will ultimately happen to the developing city and the people who live here? In the latest draft of the city's comprehensive plan, property on Mill Street stands to be rezoned, and this could encourage landlords to tear down single-family homes and to build large apartment complexes. It could be a tough pill to swallow, but eventually, the city must decide what sort of housing it allows for the people who live here -both students and citizens.
Many students see houses like the ones on Mill Street as inseparable from a real college experience and as a defining facet of this college town. Wide porches, balconies and sofas act as the bookends to an Ohio University student's post-dorm years and give certain neighborhoods in Athens an ethos that is a vital counterpart to academic life.
But looking at it from the other side of the rent check, it makes more sense to raze the houses and put up multi-unit buildings. Riverpark Towers and University Courtyard are much more profitable than the houses it would take to put a roof over the same number of students. The maintenance at a large apartment complex is much more feasible than taking care of a large number of run-down houses, utility costs are lower and they look better than a street of run-down row houses.
But whatever way the city decides, the landlords still win. If Mill Street ultimately gets rezoned and the houses there razed, the complexes that will sprout up will be more profitable than the houses. And if the houses and the couches are allowed to stay, there will always be a demand for them, and there will always be students eager to move in.
If one thing in Athens is constant, it is a housing shortage. No matter what the location or price, it seems there are always more students than rooms, leaving landlords in the catbird seat. And by further constraining students to specific neighborhoods, the city would further deepen the chasm between students and Athens residents. Town-gown relations already are strained enough without physically separating the two camps.
Though students might not like it, Athens must ultimately decide the fate of Mill Street. Whatever they decide, their final call will have ramifications on the city's development -and the lives of OU students -for years to come.
More reckless spending
On Monday, President Bush laid out his plans for the 2006 fiscal year, which begins on Oct. 1, by presenting Congress with a $2.57 trillion budget request. The proposed budget is just the most current incarnation of past expenditure requests and demonstrates the typical fiscal irresponsibility that has plagued the current administration throughout its reign.
About the only thing right with Bush's budget proposal is his stance on how much aid should be given to the nation's farmers. It is encouraging to see Bush is determined to reduce subsidies, an action that is keeping with his policies concerning free trade. Reducing the subsidies to farmers not only will save money, but it will create a more open world market. Although some might disagree with the action, it is a first step that shows Bush is attempting to fix the nation's problems and not just rewarding the states that put him over the top in the last election. But as encouraging as this action is, it alone cannot redeem the budget's other shortcomings.
The priorities that Bush's budget sets -winning the war on terror and protecting homeland security -will further be a drain on America's cash flow and severely limit the amount that can be spent on other necessities. Further, the budget does not even include an estimate about the cost of Bush's first domestic priority, overhauling the Social Security system. With fiscally draining priorities and the exclusion of an issue that might cost taxpayers trillions, the budget request reaffirms the image that the current administration is flushing money down the toilet.
Of all the problems with the president's budget the most telling fact is that, even with a rebound in the economy, the budget almost certainly will run a deficit. That scenario, when paired with Bush's desire to make his tax cuts permanent, sets the stage for a potential financial disaster. Congress cannot roll over and must make sure every dollar given to the president will be spent correctly. Anything less than that is a failure on the part of the entire government.
17 Archives
The Post Editorial
