U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Kentucky > Louisville area
 [Register]
Louisville area Jefferson County
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-09-2016, 10:00 PM
 
6,295 posts, read 13,176,543 times
Reputation: 2789

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by TPetty View Post
No, not exactly. What basically happened is that the referendum demanded a countywide vote and the approval of the merger went accordingly to a majority vote. So what I meant when some suburbs voted against it is that some individual incorporated cities voted against the merger and most folks in the old City of Louisville voted in favor and like I said before the referendum was countywide not citywide.
But wait...last election like 45% of people voted against Obama....yet he is still our president. A vote is a vote.

The majority of Jefferson County supported merger. I was not in Louisville then but I heard that it was fairly contentious.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-10-2016, 01:02 PM
 
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
9,583 posts, read 20,459,831 times
Reputation: 9077
The big selling point to the masses was that merger was needed to prevent Lexington / Fayette Co from becoming the largest municipality in the state by the 2010 Census. Projects predicted that would happen by the mid 2000s but it ended up happening by Census 2000. Sadly I can not find even the percent of how the vote went, I remember news reports and talk shows saying that mainly SW Jefferson Co voted against it. As for "the city of Louisville vote overwhelming the suburban vote" by 2000 the old city was only 37% of the total county population.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-16-2016, 03:02 PM
 
387 posts, read 340,890 times
Reputation: 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by censusdata View Post
The big selling point to the masses was that merger was needed to prevent Lexington / Fayette Co from becoming the largest municipality in the state by the 2010 Census. Projects predicted that would happen by the mid 2000s but it ended up happening by Census 2000. Sadly I can not find even the percent of how the vote went, I remember news reports and talk shows saying that mainly SW Jefferson Co voted against it. As for "the city of Louisville vote overwhelming the suburban vote" by 2000 the old city was only 37% of the total county population.
That wasn't a good enough selling point. Like I said before Louisville along with the rest of the metropolitan area including Clark and Floyd counties in Indiana and Oldham and Bullitt counties in Kentucky could of formed a supraregional government. Every US metropolitan area should have one and it's an excellent alternative to a city-county consolidation. Lexington could of done the same.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2016, 05:24 PM
 
Location: Anchorage, KY
242 posts, read 308,012 times
Reputation: 148
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldhag1 View Post
Mergers, with the funds it brings in by capturing the tax base in the more affluent bedroom communities, can more easily support the more public service dependent inner-city. Of course, that means the suburbs are losing resources and services while still paying as much or more in taxes.

I certainly agree with your opinion about suburbs losing services but still paying for them! Even though the USD was supposed to cover the differences it certainly isn't. Yes it's covering the fire protection and garbage disposal for the old city of Louisville but if not covering the huge percentage of police resources that are allocated to the old Louisville part of the county. This trend continues to get worse every year and nobody in Metro government can even tell you how much of it the USD taxes cover.

 

There's one thing that certainly should of been merged that wasn't and that is the Sheriff's department. It's nothing but a bunch of good old boy cops who can't qualify to become regular Metro police officers. They Sheriff's Department all drive around in SUVs (by Ford) which is totally unnecessary for the duty they do cover. They can do that because they Sheriff's department gets to keep a percentage of the taxes they collect for the Metro government instead of all the money going into a big pot to be distributed equally.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2016, 07:28 PM
 
387 posts, read 340,890 times
Reputation: 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by Msradell View Post
I certainly agree with your opinion about suburbs losing services but still paying for them! Even though the USD was supposed to cover the differences it certainly isn't. Yes it's covering the fire protection and garbage disposal for the old city of Louisville but if not covering the huge percentage of police resources that are allocated to the old Louisville part of the county. This trend continues to get worse every year and nobody in Metro government can even tell you how much of it the USD taxes cover.

 

There's one thing that certainly should of been merged that wasn't and that is the Sheriff's department. It's nothing but a bunch of good old boy cops who can't qualify to become regular Metro police officers. They Sheriff's Department all drive around in SUVs (by Ford) which is totally unnecessary for the duty they do cover. They can do that because they Sheriff's department gets to keep a percentage of the taxes they collect for the Metro government instead of all the money going into a big pot to be distributed equally.
The merger certainly had negative consequences. And for those who live in the USD, they obviously were not cut a fair deal about it. What did they get in return? Higher taxes, and you gotta hate that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2016, 10:32 PM
eok
 
6,684 posts, read 2,946,432 times
Reputation: 8439
Maybe the lesson to learn from this is to never move to a suburb of any city when that suburb is in the same county as that city. Because such suburbs are sitting ducks waiting to be fleeced.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2016, 06:27 AM
 
Location: My beloved Bluegrass
14,052 posts, read 9,787,161 times
Reputation: 18870
Quote:
Originally Posted by eok View Post
Maybe the lesson to learn from this is to never move to a suburb of any city when that suburb is in the same county as that city. Because such suburbs are sitting ducks waiting to be fleeced.
That was the lesson we took from watching it happen. I suspect one of the reasons Bullitt County has experienced such growth after the merger is because others also came to that conclusion.

I'm not sure what the answer is though. Urban areas require a plethora of public services, especially if there is a goal to prevent urban blight. However, it becomes a vicious cycle of the services attracting people who need the services, which means those services need increased. Public services are not cheap and are generally used by those who can not pay the taxes needed to support them. Those people also bring with them cultural values that the higher socioeconomic populations find untenable. Between that and the higher taxes, the lower-middle to upper-middle classes (including the HENRYs who generally pay the bulk of taxes) flee away from the big city to bedroom communities. That leaves the two economic extremes to occupy the big city, one which has no money to pay and the other that has enough money to find ways to avoid paying taxes. The little towns meanwhile become fat and happy, only paying for services they actually use such as police who pick up shoplifters and fire departments. Previously, business taxes and the occupation taxes on those worked in the big city helped bridge the gap, but businesses discovered they no longer needed to stay in the expensive city to keep viable so they flew too, taking all that money with them.

Of course, if the big city can figure out a way to get their hands on those suburban tax dollars they will and they have a legal mechanism if they are both in the same county.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.
Helpful links: TOS and FAQ
Why did the moderator.....? A little about deletions and infractions
Moderator - Asia, Kentucky, Lexington, and Louisville
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2016, 07:30 AM
 
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
9,583 posts, read 20,459,831 times
Reputation: 9077
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldhag1 View Post
That was the lesson we took from watching it happen. I suspect one of the reasons Bullitt County has experienced such growth after the merger is because others also came to that conclusion.
Actually the outlying counties have seen growth slow substantially since the 1990s. Jefferson Co growth nearly doubled although percent growth is still small.


% Growth 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s pace (double 10-15 %)
Bullitt 66% 10% 28% 21% 10%
Oldham 89% 56% 6% 30% 14%
Spencer 8% 15% 73% 45% 10%
Shelby 29% 6% 34% 26% 17%
--------------------------------------------------------
Jefferson -1% -3% 4% 7% 6%


I don't think this says as much about merger but rather the changing demographics of the area. The White non Hispanic population is barely growing, most growth is either international immigration or natural increase in the Black population. The vast majority of people who would move to a bordering county are White non Hispanics.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2016, 01:15 PM
 
Location: My beloved Bluegrass
14,052 posts, read 9,787,161 times
Reputation: 18870
Quote:
Originally Posted by censusdata View Post
Actually the outlying counties have seen growth slow substantially since the 1990s. Jefferson Co growth nearly doubled although percent growth is still small.


% Growth 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s pace (double 10-15 %)
Bullitt 66% 10% 28% 21% 10%
Oldham 89% 56% 6% 30% 14%
Spencer 8% 15% 73% 45% 10%
Shelby 29% 6% 34% 26% 17%
--------------------------------------------------------
Jefferson -1% -3% 4% 7% 6%


I don't think this says as much about merger but rather the changing demographics of the area. The White non Hispanic population is barely growing, most growth is either international immigration or natural increase in the Black population. The vast majority of people who would move to a bordering county are White non Hispanics.
As your numbers show, all the surrounding areas have experienced greater growth than Jefferson County. Really, Jefferson County has never fully recovered from the federal school busing mandates. The easing of those mandates probably has helped stem some of the mass exodus. Hopefully, Louisville will continue its revamping of its image. I would love to see it return to its pre-70's glory.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.
Helpful links: TOS and FAQ
Why did the moderator.....? A little about deletions and infractions
Moderator - Asia, Kentucky, Lexington, and Louisville

Last edited by Oldhag1; 08-20-2016 at 01:24 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2016, 10:32 PM
 
6,295 posts, read 13,176,543 times
Reputation: 2789
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldhag1 View Post
As your numbers show, all the surrounding areas have experienced greater growth than Jefferson County. Really, Jefferson County has never fully recovered from the federal school busing mandates. The easing of those mandates probably has helped stem some of the mass exodus. Hopefully, Louisville will continue its revamping of its image. I would love to see it return to its pre-70's glory.
?

There was never a mass exodus from Louisville or Jefferson County. Even -1% in the 1970s is nothing...places like Cleveland, Detroit, etc, still see that even today.

Louisville is doing very well. 6% growth rate for a county with 3/4 a million people...that is pretty healthy. I have researched a lot of history and Louisville has not been a healthier more growing city since probably 1960.....the amount of construction we are seeing here is absolutely unprecedented, and based on my research, the only "recent" period which comes close was 100 years ago, in the 1920s, and maybe a bit post WWII.

The fact is, every city in the nation is getting "smaller" even though most (Like Louisville) are still growing. Households are shrinking and (especially) whites are not reproducing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Kentucky > Louisville area
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top