U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
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 04-07-2015, 07:06 PM
 
2,388 posts, read 2,960,217 times
Reputation: 1953

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Minato ku View Post
They have almost full power in urban planning (execpt for major strategic places like airports).

There were 1,791,068 people living outside the urban area in Paris metropolitan area (Paris metropolitan area: 12,341,418 inhabitants) in 2012.
I think the difference here is that, at least in the US context, is that most American municipalities are responsible for providing services such as police, fire, schools, local streets, parks, libraries, etc - so most of that funding has to come from a tax on local property owners.

It's my understanding that many of these things in France are handled at the National or Department level. This is also the case in Australia where cities and towns don't have to worry about how they'll fund their schools or police because it's all funded at the state level.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-07-2015, 07:17 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh
7,542 posts, read 8,435,549 times
Reputation: 3483
Quote:
Originally Posted by drive carephilly View Post
I think the difference here is that, at least in the US context, is that most American municipalities are responsible for providing services such as police, fire, schools, local streets, parks, libraries, etc - so most of that funding has to come from a tax on local property owners.

It's my understanding that many of these things in France are handled at the National or Department level. This is also the case in Australia where cities and towns don't have to worry about how they'll fund their schools or police because it's all funded at the state level.
I don't see that as very beneficial, as it reduces the local politicians to the status of beggars at the throne, just trying to get as much as they can- without regards to cost.

In America, the cities can do more if they want, but they have to weigh the costs as the local constituents will be the ones doing most of the ponying up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2015, 07:35 AM
 
1,265 posts, read 2,155,318 times
Reputation: 1430
Quote:
Originally Posted by drive carephilly View Post
I think the difference here is that, at least in the US context, is that most American municipalities are responsible for providing services such as police, fire, schools, local streets, parks, libraries, etc - so most of that funding has to come from a tax on local property owners.

It's my understanding that many of these things in France are handled at the National or Department level. This is also the case in Australia where cities and towns don't have to worry about how they'll fund their schools or police because it's all funded at the state level.
Most muncipalities don't have the money to have a proper police force, so they relie in national police force or gendarmerie (for rural area) but all towns (except the City of Paris) can have their own Police municipal in addition.
Usually the national police deals with serious crime and municipal police deals with little offense and conflict.

Schools, local streets, parks, libraries... those services are in the hand of the municipalities.
About schools, the only teachers are paid and provided at national level but the rest is funded at municipal level.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2015, 09:12 AM
Status: "Summer!" (set 29 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,042 posts, read 102,742,261 times
Reputation: 33089
I hate to veer totally off topic, but I'm going to do it anyway! This article was in The Denver Post on Sunday. Granted, it's an opinion piece, but it does give a good viewpoint.
Hilker: We can do without Grand Rulers - The Denver Post

Here is another article on the same subject by this guy:
Hilker: Give suburbs a DIA deal, Denver - The Denver Post
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2018, 01:35 AM
 
6,066 posts, read 10,865,166 times
Reputation: 3069
Decentralization matters is a gift plenty of opportunities. Although, not overwhelming limits of capacity output. Raising expensive costs when things are all over the place. Not an option to start all the way from scratch, yet there are strategies to make affairs hassle free with distribution of supplies. Diverting attention when core values are suspended in mid air metaphorically. Immediate solutions are realistically abundant. Is there direct correlations between low density into further sprawl versus broken districts with interruption.
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:

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 > General Forums > Urban Planning
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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