Houston, San Antonio, and Austin are the #2, #3, and #4 fastest growing cities in the U.S. (Dallas: buy, school districts)

[rynetwo]

Originally Posted by imaterry78259

San Antonio, I think is the city in
Texas to watch,it is going to explode

Maybe but not likely San antonio and Austin will be fighting for third place in Texas.

[gabetx]

Originally Posted by rynetwo

Maybe but not likely San antonio and Austin will be fighting for third place in Texas.

I dont think Austin will pass up Dallas for third. At least not in the foreseeable future.

[dallasboi]

Originally Posted by rynetwo

Maybe but not likely San antonio and Austin will be fighting for third place in Texas.

San Antonio is already 2nd in Texas unless we are speaking in terms of Metro population

Originally Posted by gabetx

I dont think Austin will pass up Dallas for third. At least not in the foreseeable future.

And its clear that you are speaking of City population,and I couldn't agree more with your statement.Austins infrastructure won't allow them to.

[savanite]

When you say "city", a better term would be "city government", as in San Antonio is the second largest municipal government in Texas.

When you use the most appropriate terms, you understand the issue better.

You could make a case that these governments should be smaller, not larger, since a large municipal government tends to deliver a slower and inferior level of service.

How? Why? Because it becomes more of a monopoly.

For example, Dallas. The smaller DFW governments, such as Highland Park, Southlake, Plano, Irving, Carrollton, Frisco, all are forced through competitive pressure to deliver better services, better schools, whereas the Dallas government is too ossified to respond quickly to changing trends and conditions. The Dallas government is so bureaucratic that they forced the Megabus company out of downtown Dallas over zoning restrictions. You take an express bus from Houston or Austin and you end up in an industrial zone in Grand Prairie. They were much slower in allowing gourmet food trucks to operate. It has taken them years to reroute just a few downtown streets from one way to two way.

If the Dallas government were to be split into 5 or 10 governments, they would operate much better. On the other hand, if the Dallas government annexed outward to the degree Houston has, it would be even worse in terms of public service.

So the idea that a municipal government needs to get larger, or that getting larger is a good thing... That's bogus.

[gabetx]

Originally Posted by savanite

When you say "city", a better term would be "city government", as in San Antonio is the second largest municipal government in Texas.

When you use the most appropriate terms, you understand the issue better.

You could make a case that these governments should be smaller, not larger, since a large municipal government tends to deliver a slower and inferior level of service.

How? Why? Because it becomes more of a monopoly.

For example, Dallas. The smaller DFW governments, such as Highland Park, Southlake, Plano, Irving, Carrollton, Frisco, all are forced through competitive pressure to deliver better services, better schools, whereas the Dallas government is too ossified to respond quickly to changing trends and conditions. The Dallas government is so bureaucratic that they forced the Megabus company out of downtown Dallas over zoning restrictions. You take an express bus from Houston or Austin and you end up in an industrial zone in Grand Prairie. They were much slower in allowing gourmet food trucks to operate. It has taken them years to reroute just a few downtown streets from one way to two way.

If the Dallas government were to be split into 5 or 10 governments, they would operate much better. On the other hand, if the Dallas government annexed outward to the degree Houston has, it would be even worse in terms of public service.

So the idea that a municipal government needs to get larger, or that getting larger is a good thing... That's bogus.

This is random...

What are you talking about?

[HtownLove]

Originally Posted by gabetx

This is random...

What are you talking about?

Really random.

BTW, in Houston Megabus stops right in the middle of downtown

[savanite]

Originally Posted by HtownLove

Really random.

BTW, in Houston Megabus stops right in the middle of downtown

The abnormal size of Houston government is the reason that the light rail there has such a limited size and got such a late start.

Another problem is that Houston people have the attention on the size of their government. Their attention should be on the size of their metro which is, very remarkably, in the top 5.

There was some comment in the Houston forum about the comparison between the Houston and Chicago governments. The posters thought that if Houston's exceeded Chicago's, the country would be impressed by that fact, and Chicago would die of shame, I guess. Well, I don't think so.

Whatever Houston has, or is worth, is dependent on the population of its metropolitan area, and the economic force it generates. The Houston government adds little, if anything, to the mix. If the Houston government were 500,000 or if it were the 6 million people in the metro, nothing would change, except the quality of government.

As long as Chicago's metro area is close to ten million people, it doesn't matter how the two governments compare.

Look at London, England. The "City of London" has a population of a few thousand people. Greater London is comprised of dozens of boroughs, actually independent governments, of a few hundred thousand each. And yet, Greater London is one of the capitals of the world.

Somehow, Houston likes to brag about things that are meaningless, and ignores things that are significant.

[rynetwo]

Originally Posted by gabetx

I dont think Austin will pass up Dallas for third. At least not in the foreseeable future.

I was speaking in terms of metro population. I just confused the whole thread since it is dealing with city population. City population wise I don't see Austin passing Dallas ever.

[savanite]

Originally Posted by rynetwo

I was speaking in terms of metro population. I just confused the whole thread since it is dealing with city population. City population wise I don't see Austin passing Dallas ever.

If Austin finds a way to annex the populations outside its current boundaries, it could be as large as it wanted to be.

Does that actually mean anything?

These claims take advantage of the public confusion over the word "city" and is pure and simple deception.

[imaterry78259]

San Antonio is the city to watch to many hidden advantages out slowly coming out to the business community outside of Texas. The population of the city is definitely understated, I would guess around 1.7 in CL and 2.5 overall.