North College Hill forum spotlights two renewal levies and candidate plans for transparency, safety and streets

A candidate forum in North College Hill on Dec. 22 focused on two renewal levies on the ballot and gave residents a chance to compare how city leaders would handle transparency, public safety and basic services.

Fire Chief Placke told the audience the ballot includes Levy 6, a five‑year renewal of a 12‑mill fire levy originally approved in 2021. "This is not a new tax," Placke said. He described the levy as funding full‑time firefighters, EMTs and paramedics, staffing two advanced‑life‑support ambulances and paying for station maintenance and equipment. Placke credited the levy with allowing the department to raise staffing and operational capacity, noting an Insurance Service Office rating of 2 and a 2024 Lexipol bronze training award. He also cited service volumes: a roughly 25% increase in total calls for service since 2021, the primary medic unit handling more than 2,000 calls in 2024, and the primary fire unit responding to about 558 calls that year. He urged residents to "please remember to vote." (Chief Placke said more information is available on the city website.)

Candidates also discussed Levy 7, the street levy, described by city staff as a renewal dedicated to street construction, resurfacing, pothole repair, curb work, striping, salt and snow removal, and equipment such as dump and bucket trucks. Several candidates said the street levy covers public works salaries and argued that without it the general fund would face pressure to pay for these services.

Across a series of questions moderated by Doctor Vanessa Enoch, candidate responses coalesced around several recurring proposals: digitize and post public records more promptly; improve the city website and communication (newsletter, app, social media) so residents know about services and schedules; expand youth mentoring and recreation programs (often citing work already done with schools and churches); and pursue grants and external funding rather than new taxes.

On transparency and records, multiple candidates pointed to recent steps already taken — purchasing laptops for council members and digitizing archived records — and urged standardized processes to fulfill public records requests. "We need to have appropriate technology and the appropriate resources so that we can provide information in a timely fashion," candidate Bridal Underwood said.

Public works and infrastructure drew repeated attention. Candidates described the public works force as "understaffed and under‑equipped," praised recent equipment purchases and urged that the street levy remain available to fund repairs and snow removal. On the audience's question about street sweeping, incumbents explained the city owns a sweeper that had been out for service at times and recommended published schedules and better resident communication.

Candidates also proposed a range of community interventions for youth violence, including ongoing mentoring, youth empowerment groups and reopening or repurposing community space (the "1500 Building" was mentioned several times) for activities.

The forum concluded with one‑minute closing statements from each candidate reiterating themes of accountability, service and competence and a reminder to voters to participate in the election.

The forum was primarily informational; it did not produce formal council actions. The two levies — Levy 6 (fire) and Levy 7 (streets) — are renewals voters will decide at the ballot box.