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.
I don't know if I am inferring properly or not, but out of the endless threads that discuss violence and decay in the city of Chicago, I see the following:
1. Chicagoland is a pretty healthy place, economically and by most measures.
2. Chicago's problems and inability to deal with them threaten the vitality of the metropolitan area.
we bemoan a city that despite its greatness has enormous problems and consider those problems to be the city's while fully realizing (and complaining) that all of us in Chicagoland pay the price for the city's ills.
cities are municipal units; the are not organic by nature. But metropolitan areas are. Metropolitan areas function as an economic and social unit based on interdependence and a sense of being one. and our suburban areas draw endlessly from having the benefit of the city of Chicago as the core of our metro area; without it, we would truly be diminished on any level. It is not by accident that suburban Chicago contains far more wealth than any suburban region in the midwest; we're attached to the right city.
Chicagoland, as a concept, is far more important than Chicago, the city. Chicago, like virtually any sought after, alpha city in America, is a mix of the crown jewels of the metropolitan area set in a sea of endless poverty and decline. It is the nature of American cities and a process that has been firmly etched into who we are as urban Americans since arguably the 1950s and the escape to suburbia. Detroit may be the most famous doughnut hole of all American cities, but that concept exists in the best of cities, including the likes of New York, Chicago, LA.
there are no panaceas out there. if you are looking, you won't any. but if you want to get serious about really solving Chicago's problems, at least on the level of what we can do here in northeastern IL as a community (as opposed to what can be and needs to be done in DC, which has failed our cities and metro areas miserably), than one has to consider the idea of metropolitan government.
Maybe, just maybe, Chicago's problems are best dealt with by taking as much of Chicago out of the equation and making Chicagoland the focus. For whether we like it or not (and many who gripe about the city the loudest don't like it all), city and suburbs are one, a single economic/social unit, and need to be governed on more and more levels with that being a reality.
Chicago needs to look at the examples of Miami-Dade, Portland, and metro Indianapolis where the artificial divide of city limits, separating city from suburbia, have been muted and reversed.
No, this is not a popular response. But it is a practical one. And without it, people will continue to gripe about the murder rate in Chicago and the ills of the city and not realize that the problems of the city are metropolitan, not urban, problems and that it is best for all of us, city and suburb, to do as much consolidation as possible. When we look at Chicago as a municipality, we play out a fiction that it is designed or capable of dealing with the portions of the metro area that arbitrarily fall under its jurisdiction. Only by realizing how meaningless Howard Street and Austin Boulevard are can we move forward.
the notion I am suggesting here will get far more negative responses than positive ones (and many of the negatives are worthy of discussion), but if you are serious about the discussion, you need to at least look towards the metropolis, not the city, to start dealing with issues based on that very notion that We Are One already, in all but how we divide municipally, an insanity of endless jurisdictions, none of which can address the issues of metropolitan life.
Got any examples of more regional oriented government units that work any better than municipal oriented system?
no, i don't, chet. i just know the present system with its endless jurisdictions doesn't work. i know that you have been highly critical of the city of Chicago and how it operates. and not without a degree of validity.
but even if the city were to get its act together, it still couldn't solve the problems it faces and, as I noted, these are not only related to the entire metro region, they were in large part created as a metro wide problem (not just in Chicago; all cities were affected by the emptying out of the middle class to the suburbs. what is left in some of the less successful is mostly poor;in more successful cities like Chicago, there is a smaller core of wealthy residents, but the poverty is still great).
How does Chicago differ from the other two largest cities in the US, NY and LA? All three are global in scope and would be considered healthy by the standards the world places on them. they are all alphas. But I would say they differ in one significant way: both NY and LA encompass vast areas that look like and function as suburban (much of Queens, Staten Island, the San Fernando Valley, westside along the Wilshire corridor and into the Hollywood Hills). Chicago, on the other hand, stays pretty much urban throughout. If Chicago were the same as Cook County, it would look a lot more like NY and LA. NY's and LA's more encompassing limits give it a stronger tax base.
so again, Chet, I can't point to any of the cities I mentioned and tell you how successful their metro reincarnations are (although I think it is safe to say that progressive Portland likes the way it structures itself and has cut down on endless sprawl in the way it is organized). but I will tell you that you can kiss good bye the notion of the city of Chicago going it alone. The tax base isn't there. And if we were to do a degree of metro combining, the competition between municipalities (fratricide at best) would change to more of a notion we're all in this together and we end up promoting the whole metro area.
Fact is, suburbia is a lot healthier if Chicago is healthy. Look at metro Detroit and see a suburban area far below its potential because of that doughnut hole in the middle.
if we were combined to a sufficient degree, the new jurisdiction could work on the very restructuring that would raise areas that are currently in the city of Chicago into dense, walkable, areas with excellent transportation options.
Got any examples of more regional oriented government units that work any better than municipal oriented system?
Quote:
Originally Posted by edsg25
no, i don't, chet.
I don't think any such examples are to be found. Smaller towns like Portland are a whole other ball of wax, and the fortuitous shifts from manufacturing to information technology that they've experienced has benefited greatly by that area's geographic isolation. Folks with limited mobility have a whole different set of motivations to remain invested in such an area.
I disagree that Chicago is more urban than its adjacent areas -- in fact I think that anyone that does not understand the essential qualities of density, walkability, retail shopping / dining and a whole variety of commuting options that are present in a wide range of suburban areas all the way out to Fox River all contribute to the vitality of the region, and frankly there are more folks on this board that are unaware of these options and too eager to condemn anyone without a 606xx zip code. Antagonistic phrases like "enclave" are routinely thrown around to denigrate the choices of the successful suburbanite while the ultra-wealthy inhabitants of Chicago's Gold Coast or Lincoln Park get a pass while they are arguably more detached from the real problems of Chicago...
Attempts to consolidate political power under larger more bureaucratic structures that are less responsive to the needs to citizens would be a huge mistake. In places like LA vast numbers of private schools flourish precisely due to bone headed policies of their failed public education system.
Costly mistakes in the management of the outer boroughs of NY have made the incomes of folks in Manhattan about as unequal to those in the outer boroughs as one might expect in a third world country.
Greater local control with appropriate limits to spending growth is a better solution than mindless consolidation. Parts of Chicagoland that have managed the realities of tax cap with realistic budgets remain some of the most desirable spots in the region while towns that have low information voters disconnected from reality are declining.
Last edited by chet everett; 10-14-2012 at 08:25 AM..
I disagree that Chicago is more urban than its adjacent areas -- in fact I think that anyone that does not understand the essential qualities of density, walkability, retail shopping / dining and a whole variety of commuting options that are present in a wide range of suburban areas all the way out to Fox River all contribute to the vitality of the region, .
when i was identifying those suburban areas, I was thinking less about density and more about economic viability. my suggestion was more along the lines that NY and LA have more of a tax base because they encompass more suburban type communities that are higher income than what you find in much of the city.
as noted, I don't think that there is any cure all to speak of with a metro form of government. my suggestion is, as much as anything else, the realization that when we keep our cities apart from the suburbs, both suffer. in the case of the city, it is the tax base that is most in question. i don't think a city like Chicago can escape from its ills even if it had the best of government....too many problems, concentrated in one place and the place is part of a larger fabric of the metro area that is responsible for it.
I would agree that many folks in places like the Gold Coast are minimally if at all involved with the city's problems as you suggest and that many folks who live outside the city share more concern here on this board then these city people do. but I'm not sure if it is all that relevant. Areas like the Gold Coast and better off neighborhoods cannot carry the load for Chicago and, as I noted, I would consider Chicago to be a heather city than most and that all cities face its problems.
if we don't find a way towards more consolidation, I think we are condemned to constantly play this litany of murder, violence, and poverty, because I don't think the city has the wherewithal to prevent it. and that is the type of cancer that threatens the whole area.
chet, i personally do think we're all in the same boat and that we need some form of reorganization. and.....for the record....who is to say that a consolidated metro area cannot still have those very elements of local control that you suggest and which are good. we're not talking all or nothing here. we're talking about the elements that need to be consolidated and those that do not. for example, i could see a local voice in community schools, but if all schools were under the same system in generating revenue and you didn't have the imbalances caused by separate jurisdictions, you'd have a more healthy environment for all.
Location: Schaumburg, please don't hate me for it.
955 posts, read 1,832,102 times
Reputation: 1235
Quote:
Originally Posted by edsg25
when i was identifying those suburban areas, I was thinking less about density and more about economic viability. my suggestion was more along the lines that NY and LA have more of a tax base because they encompass more suburban type communities that are higher income than what you find in much of the city.
as noted, I don't think that there is any cure all to speak of with a metro form of government. my suggestion is, as much as anything else, the realization that when we keep our cities apart from the suburbs, both suffer. in the case of the city, it is the tax base that is most in question. i don't think a city like Chicago can escape from its ills even if it had the best of government....too many problems, concentrated in one place and the place is part of a larger fabric of the metro area that is responsible for it.
I would agree that many folks in places like the Gold Coast are minimally if at all involved with the city's problems as you suggest and that many folks who live outside the city share more concern here on this board then these city people do. but I'm not sure if it is all that relevant. Areas like the Gold Coast and better off neighborhoods cannot carry the load for Chicago and, as I noted, I would consider Chicago to be a heather city than most and that all cities face its problems.
if we don't find a way towards more consolidation, I think we are condemned to constantly play this litany of murder, violence, and poverty, because I don't think the city has the wherewithal to prevent it. and that is the type of cancer that threatens the whole area.
chet, i personally do think we're all in the same boat and that we need some form of reorganization. and.....for the record....who is to say that a consolidated metro area cannot still have those very elements of local control that you suggest and which are good. we're not talking all or nothing here. we're talking about the elements that need to be consolidated and those that do not. for example, i could see a local voice in community schools, but if all schools were under the same system in generating revenue and you didn't have the imbalances caused by separate jurisdictions, you'd have a more healthy environment for all.
The problem with this solution is that most suburbs are not in the same boat. They have much better schools, less crime and less poverty. They also frequently have higher property taxes that they are not gonna want to share with city hall. No one of them will ever surrender their autonomy and local jurisdiction.
The problem with this solution is that most suburbs are not in the same boat. They have much better schools, less crime and less poverty. They also frequently have higher property taxes that they are not gonna want to share with city hall. No one of them will ever surrender their autonomy and local jurisdiction.
The decades of effort that people from all kinds of backgrounds have poured into making their local governments more responsive are not something than anybody from Evanston to Oak Park to Flossmoor to Naperville to Libertyville to Kennilworth to the hundreds of nice places in-between would ever cede to the corrupt power lords of Chicago.
You cannot separate the responsibility for spending money from the responsibility of setting property tax rates without leading to a whole host of problems that are frankly worse than what plagues the worst parts of the region right now.
Isn't going to happen, and more importantly it shouldn't happen. How in the world would bringing suburbs like Cicero and Rosemont into Chicago government help clean it up? How would adding the populations of Harvey, Robbins, and Ford Heights help with Chicago's fiscal and poverty problems?
The fact of the matter is we already have regional government authorities, and they aren't any better than local authorities (i.e. Cook County government and the RTA). I also think you severely misunderstand how government works in NYC and LA, and also seriously underestimate the problems they are currently facing. Chicago could easily solve it's budget problems if it had a tax on resident income and the financial sector like NYC does, or the level of state aid that LA gets from California (I don't think we should do either, but both those cities are having problems while having revenue resources that are not available to Chicago).
Got any examples of more regional oriented government units that work any better than municipal oriented system?
Actually Portland, Oregon has a city government as well as a regional government. The regional government play the middle man working between cities so that larger projects can happen. One of the reasons the light rail in the Portland metro is so extensive and expanding.
I am not sure if that example fits in with this topic, but that is the info I can provide on it.
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.
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.
Spot on, williem SPOT ON!
