Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well, it seems, some things never change. Smh! Fairfield elected a brand new mayor last year. Fairfield also elected all new city councilors, except for one. There is only one city councilor that survived the election last year. You would expect the leaders of the cash strapped city to be working together to save the city from disaster, but noooo! The mayor vs council battle has already begun. Fairfield is not going to be satisfied until it no longer exists as a city.
Location: Atlanta, Birmingham, Charlotte, and Raleigh
2,580 posts, read 2,463,511 times
Reputation: 1614
Quote:
Originally Posted by GotLuv4Bham
Well, it seems, some things never change. Smh! Fairfield elected a brand new mayor last year. Fairfield also elected all new city councilors, except for one. There is only one city councilor that survived the election last year. You would expect the leaders of the cash strapped city to be working together to save the city from disaster, but noooo! The mayor vs council battle has already begun. Fairfield is not going to be satisfied until it no longer exists as a city.
I've said it for a year now. It's time for Fairfield to relinquish their municipal charter and just become another neighborhood within the city of Birmingham. They have no sustainable revenue base to fund their municipality in the long term. Lack of sustainability equates to dissolution of municipal operations because no one is going to work for a jurisdiction that cannot make payroll or fund provisions of municipal services.
I am really surprised they have been able to hang on this long. And since they have been able to I'm guessing they will for as long as they are allowed to. No politician ever seems to want to relinquish whatever power they hold, even if it is for the greater good of their constituents. But then again, if they just put it to a vote, I'm not sure whether Fairfield citizens would vote any particular way, but I would like to see it happen.
It will be interesting to see what happens when the Crossplex project comes online if it begins to poach whatever struggling business is left in Western Hills mall and the rest of Fairfield's commercial areas.
Location: Atlanta, Birmingham, Charlotte, and Raleigh
2,580 posts, read 2,463,511 times
Reputation: 1614
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tourian
I am really surprised they have been able to hang on this long. And since they have been able to I'm guessing they will for as long as they are allowed to. No politician ever seems to want to relinquish whatever power they hold, even if it is for the greater good of their constituents. But then again, if they just put it to a vote, I'm not sure whether Fairfield citizens would vote any particular way, but I would like to see it happen.
It will be interesting to see what happens when the Crossplex project comes online if it begins to poach whatever struggling business is left in Western Hills mall and the rest of Fairfield's commercial areas.
To the latter statement, doubtful. Fairfield has mediocre police protection so why would any business with any real desire to sustain or grow want to locate within a jurisdiction basically has only the county sheriff as their law enforcement. Also the distance between Five Points West and Fairfield, which is about 2-3 miles won't translate much down Bessemer Road. The whole area would have to revitalize prior to Fairfield sees any benefits, which might be too later for the municipality with lackluster existence.
To the latter statement, doubtful. Fairfield has mediocre police protection so why would any business with any real desire to sustain or grow want to locate within a jurisdiction basically has only the county sheriff as their law enforcement. Also the distance between Five Points West and Fairfield, which is about 2-3 miles won't translate much down Bessemer Road. The whole area would have to revitalize prior to Fairfield sees any benefits, which might be too later for the municipality with lackluster existence.
No, what I'm saying is I am thinking businesses would leave Fairfield and want to move to the Crossplex Center in Birmingham.
I'm not sure Birmingham would really want to absorb Fairfield. I mean... maybe they would, but much like Mountain Brook stands to gain nothing from merging with Birmingham... Birmingham doesn't really stand to gain anything from merging with Fairfield.
I'm not sure Birmingham would really want to absorb Fairfield. I mean... maybe they would, but much like Mountain Brook stands to gain nothing from merging with Birmingham... Birmingham doesn't really stand to gain anything from merging with Fairfield.
This is not about Mountain Brook merging with Birmingham or vice versa. Neither of them is in the same boat as a city that can not maintain services and is on the verge of bankruptcy like Fairfield is. So that is a disingenuous parallel to make. Some of us have suggested that Mountain Brook and other suburbs go to a county-wide single government with Birmingham to reduce duplicate city services and thus save money and to pool resources for big projects, but maintain their autonomy within their districts, and have representation on the council. Then they could also maintain their school districts and home values which is really why people in wealthy suburbs oppose any type of merger.
The question of what to do with Fairfield is different. I think it should totally cease to exist as a separate municipality and be absorbed by Birmingham. The why has been asked and answered several times on several different occasions. So the question becomes, what do you think would be a good enough reason to annex them and whether or not that plays into reality or what the council thinks is worth it. And if you believe there are no good reasons, that's fine too, but using M-B to demonstrate that is false logic.
All the other stuff like Median Household income, and home values themselves that you and others have brought up as reasons not to annex Fairfield can be looked up on this site as Fairfield's numbers in that regard exceed Birmingham's. Adding Miles College, which they tried to annex some land under it before but failed, should be obvious. We know Birmingham does want that at least. The cost of taking on and adding more citizens that are already in a tight contiguous grid is up for debate, but not something I personally am particularly concerned about.
No, it really isn't a disingenuous parallel. They aren't worlds apart like Mountain Brook and Birmingham may be... but the fact remains that if both sides don't feel like they stand to gain something, then it's pretty unlikely to happen.
As for median household income and home values... meh. City Data's estimates may show that as of a couple years ago but if you actually look at what homes are selling for in 2017, Fairfield's are in many cases depreciating and Birmingham's are not. In a few select neighborhoods in Birmingham, home values have risen significantly over the last few years. That's not the case at all in Fairfield. As an example, take a look at this property: http://www.realtor.com/realestateand...0-01088#photo3
There an estimate puts the value of the home at $120k, yet it sold in 2012 for $40k. Do you really think the home has tripled in value? Or do you think it is more likely that the algorithms that various sources use are just not accounting for how bad things are in Fairfield?
And no... it is not "obvious" that adding more citizens and Miles College should make Birmingham want Fairfield. If the cost of supporting those citizens exceeds what they can provide from a tax base, then it would be quite the opposite. If you remember, when Vestavia annexed Cahaba Heights, Vestavia really just wanted the retail area. The sales tax bump. If they could have managed to do that without taking on the new citizens in the residential parts of the community, they absolutely would have. So why don't you spell out what is so "obvious" about taking on citizens that have a lower per capita income than Birmingham already has and has almost no tax revenue stream? I'm also not really sure that adding Miles College really moves the needle.
So again I say... I'm not really so sure Birmingham would want to take on Fairfield. If Western Hills Mall was a decent tax revenue producer, the argument would be a bit stronger. But if that were the case, Fairfield wouldn't be in this predicament to begin with. Would it be good for Fairfield? Yeah, it probably would be. Would it be good for Birmingham? That's unclear at best.
No, it really isn't a disingenuous parallel. They aren't worlds apart like Mountain Brook and Birmingham may be... but the fact remains that if both sides don't feel like they stand to gain something, then it's pretty unlikely to happen.
It is. They are. Fairfield is drowning, they need a lifeline. Birmingham and Mountain Brook do not. As much as you would like to point out that Mountain Brook doesn't need Birmingham, Birmingham does not need Mountain Brook. Fairfield is facing insolvency. The fact that you want to blow by this and then go on to talk about the cost of Birmingham having to pay for services for Fairfield's citizens is...strange.
Quote:
As for median household income and home values... meh. City Data's estimates may show that as of a couple years ago but if you actually look at what homes are selling for in 2017, Fairfield's are in many cases depreciating and Birmingham's are not.
Well I wasn't the one who brought it up as a reason not to so...just because the numbers don't support your argument doesn't mean much to me. I was just pointing out in the here and now: Fairfield's numbers are better than Birmingham's. So if the deal was done today it would bring Birmingham up. PERIOD.
Quote:
And no... it is not "obvious" that adding more citizens and Miles College should make Birmingham want Fairfield. If the cost of supporting those citizens exceeds what they can provide from a tax base, then it would be quite the opposite. If you remember, when Vestavia annexed Cahaba Heights, Vestavia really just wanted the retail area. The sales tax bump. If they could have managed to do that without taking on the new citizens in the residential parts of the community, they absolutely would have.
Wait, so water is wet? Politicians are greedy and will try to take just the icing off the cake and leave the rest? I already said Birmingham tried to take Miles College without taking Fairfield before that. I know if they could they would. Might be a better look politically and socially if they offer a lifeline to Fairfield's citizens at this point when they have trouble with law enforcement and garbage pickup and they share a direct border with a troubled West Birmingham.
Quote:
So why don't you spell out what is so "obvious" about taking on citizens that have a lower per capita income than Birmingham already has and has almost no tax revenue stream?
Fairfield's median household income is higher than Birmingham's. Fairfield offers some more interstate frontage and some retail areas that could be rehabilitated by a city with more resources and better recruiting.
Quote:
I'm also not really sure that adding Miles College really moves the needle.
I know, you're not sure of anything, but that doesn't stop you from stating your opinions as facts. Your opinion is that they shouldn't do it. Fine. Has nothing to do with them being too poor or Mountain Brook or Miles College not being desirable.
It is. They are. Fairfield is drowning, they need a lifeline. Birmingham and Mountain Brook do not. As much as you would like to point out that Mountain Brook doesn't need Birmingham, Birmingham does not need Mountain Brook. Fairfield is facing insolvency. The fact that you want to blow by this and then go on to talk about the cost of Birmingham having to pay for services for Fairfield's citizens is...strange.
The city of Birmingham isn't a charity. Until you can demonstrate how absorbing Fairfield into Birmingham would benefit Birmingham, you aren't really doing anything.
Quote:
Well I wasn't the one who brought it up as a reason not to so...just because the numbers don't support your argument doesn't mean much to me. I was just pointing out in the here and now: Fairfield's numbers are better than Birmingham's. So if the deal was done today it would bring Birmingham up. PERIOD.
Quote:
Fairfield median household income is higher than Birmingham's.
No, it wouldn't. I've already pointed out why the numbers are likely flawed. And even if they WERE higher (which they aren't), it doesn't make up for the fact that Fairfield provides no commercial district. If all the numbers were the same and The Summit were in Fairfield's city limits instead of Birmingham, then it would be an obvious things to do. And again, if that were the case, Fairfield wouldn't be in this predicament in the first place.
Also, lol at you thinking that a family of 6 bringing home $40,000 a year is in better shape financially than a family of 2 bringing home $39,000 a year. Obviously per capita income is the better indicator. And Birmingham's is higher and that gap is only widening as parts of Birmingham gentrify.
This is like elementary level stuff here. If family A is bankrupt and can't pay for themselves and family B, while not rich, can get by and is supporting themselves... why would family B want to absorb family A? Their qualities of lives would meet somewhere in between them. So why would family B want to reduce their own quality of life?
You still haven't shown that absorbing Fairfield would benefit Birmingham. I'm not saying Birmingham WOULDN'T do it because the overall impact would be pretty minimal given the relative sizes of the cities... and also because Birmingham's got quite the history of making poor decisions... but Birmingham still isn't a charity so it would make more sense for them to NOT absorb them unless Birmingham would actually benefit.
You could just be intellectually honest and say that you think it would help Birmingham's cache by adding 10,000 new residents because it would make their population numbers and growth figures look good on the surface. Dig a bit below the surface and it wouldn't be so rosy though.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.