Proposed new maps for Massachusetts House and Senate districts focus on strengthening minority communities (Worcester: title, office)

[MassNative2891]

Originally Posted by BostonBornMassMade

Youre demography is off. Stoughton is 61.0% white and 17.3% Black per 2020 Census https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/08/...n-has-changed/, about 21% when you include mixed-race blacks. Quincy is also only 54% white.

Dorchester is 35.7% Black now and 22%White. Brockton is 35.0% Black as well. Hyde Park is 46% Black and 24% white. http://www.bostonplans.org/getattach...4-0c51c325b216

Hyde Park is a city neighborhood but its a bedroom community with industry and commercial centers of suburban character. Just like Randolph and Stoughton.

Dorchester and Quincy are much more urban and contain over 100k people.

Hence why you saying Randolph is a combination of those two places is frustrating. Feel like you're adding something that isn't there. As much as people like to act like it, Randolph has been and is a suburban bedroom community. Nothing urban about it. HP is a bedroom community but absolutely has urban characteristics (as does Stoughton within the downtown area). Ain't a triple decker neighborhood anywhere in this town. And if we have any it's that one house on South Main.

Thanks for the numbers, I was trying to figure out why the Black and Mixed race number for Stoughton was so different from what I remember. That being said, we're comparing a Majority Black town to a Majority White town. I don't see White folks leaving Stoughton behind anytime soon.

[BostonBornMassMade]

Originally Posted by MassNative2891

Hence why you saying Randolph is a combination of those two places is frustrating. Feel like you're adding something that isn't there. As much as people like to act like it, Randolph has been and is a suburban bedroom community. Nothing urban about it. HP is a bedroom community but absolutely has urban characteristics (as does Stoughton within the downtown area). Ain't a triple decker neighborhood anywhere in this town. And if we have any it's that one house on South Main.

Thanks for the numbers, I was trying to figure out why the Black and Mixed race number for Stoughton was so different from what I remember. That being said, we're comparing a Majority Black town to a Majority White town. I don't see White folks leaving Stoughton behind anytime soon.

1. Randolph is a city. It voted to become a city recently. Stoughton is a town.

2. Stoughton lost (literally) 3000+ white people from 2010 to 2020. They are leaving in pretty large numbers, 1 out of every 7 white residents in Stoughton left permanently from 2010-2020. There is almost no chance its not a majority-minority community by 2030. Stoughton went from 80% white to 60% white in 10 years.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by BostonBornMassMade

1. Randolph is a city. It voted to become a city recently. Stoughton is a town.

In the same sense that Braintree and Weymouth are, former bedroom towns that voted to become cities due to their large populations and for practical reasons. For all intents and purposes, they are still suburbs though. Mostly suburban in makeup, although Braintree and Weymouth have pockets of urban. Randolph has less.

[BostonBornMassMade]

Originally Posted by massnative71

In the same sense that Braintree and Weymouth are, former bedroom towns that voted to become cities due to their large populations and for practical reasons. For all intents and purposes, they are still suburbs though. Mostly suburban in makeup, although Braintree and Weymouth have pockets of urban. Randolph has less.

Can you say you became a city for practical reasons but are a suburbs “for all intents and purposes”. That seems contradictory.

I certainly wouldn’t say Stoughton is “urban” not even when compared to Randolph.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by BostonBornMassMade

Can you say you became a city for practical reasons but are a suburbs “for all intents and purposes”. That seems contradictory.

Not at all. A "city" is merely a form of government. One can very much be a "suburban city". It seems to be one of those things particular to Mass./NE where people get all up in arms over these designations. Your precious bedroom community isn't going to become the next Manhattan, because you now have a mayor and city council making your decisions as opposed to a town meeting.

[BostonBornMassMade]

Originally Posted by massnative71

Not at all. A "city" is merely a form of government. One can very much be a "suburban city". It seems to be one of those things particular to Mass./NE where people get all up in arms over these designations. Your precious bedroom community isn't going to become the next Manhattan, because you now have a mayor and city council making your decisions as opposed to a town meeting.

I’d consider that a pretty big deal tbh. One promoted by city/urban concerns or planning issues. We could Google why Randolph opted for the change as I recall that’s why they did it. More “urban challenges” they thought could be better managed as a city govt.

[Lampert]

I don't know if it makes that much of a difference in term of efficacy of the government. Brookline is a town and a big chunk of it is basically as urban as it gets in MA.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by BostonBornMassMade

I’d consider that a pretty big deal tbh. One promoted by city/urban concerns or planning issues. We could Google why Randolph opted for the change as I recall that’s why they did it. More “urban challenges” they thought could be better managed as a city govt.

Yes as the population grows to a certain level, a town government becomes more inefficient and inadequate for dealing with the more complex challenges. A town government (with town meeting, etc.) also relies on a certain level of civic participation that is waning everywhere, particularly in a town like Randolph where much of the current population lacks any real ties to. But I think this has more to do with population size, than whether it has urban vs. suburban characteristics. A good example is Newton. It's a large city (relative to the area), a goof 3 X the size of Randolph. Yet, I don't think anybody would mistake it for being anything other than suburban. Quincy is semi-urban. Cambridge is urban. Newton, Quincy and Cambridge are all around the same size.

[Lampert]

Originally Posted by massnative71

Yes as the population grows to a certain level, a town government becomes more inefficient and inadequate for dealing with the more complex challenges. A town government (with town meeting, etc.) also relies on a certain level of civic participation that is waning everywhere, particularly in a town like Randolph where much of the current population lacks any real ties to. But I think this has more to do with population size, than whether it has urban vs. suburban characteristics. A good example is Newton. It's a large city (relative to the area), a goof 3 X the size of Randolph. Yet, I don't think anybody would mistake it for being anything other than suburban. Quincy is semi-urban. Cambridge is urban. Newton, Quincy and Cambridge are all around the same size.

Is a representative town meeting that much more inefficient than a city council-manager?

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by Lampert

Is a representative town meeting that much more inefficient than a city council-manager?

In a community with 30K+ people, most of the time yes. There are exceptions like with anything else.