CHICAGO population grows 2%, remains 3rd largest city (Cicero, Evanston: legally, suburbs)

[Greencheese]

Originally Posted by Ryantheturtle

Because this destroys right wingers favorite point that chicago and illinois are declining sh*tholes and nobody wants to live there. Yet we remain the 5th most populous state and Illinois is set to become the 5th trillion dollar state this year.

The general consensus was early 2010's were good for Chicago but the outmigration trends are accelerating in recent years. Even Illinois Policy, the lead ****ter for club **** on Illinois, acknowledges the beginning of the decade was good for Chicago. But a couple good years can quickly be offset and turn into a deathspiral which this state is in a serious risk of having.

And even with the population increases its clear places like the southside are indeed ****holes as they continue to bleed population while small pockets of the northside continue to explode. Remember everyone, its Chicago as a whole when it comes to affordability but isolated into neighborhoods once we touch on crime and poverty!

[Ryantheturtle]

Originally Posted by Greencheese

The general consensus was early 2010's were good for Chicago but the outmigration trends are accelerating in recent years. Even Illinois Policy, the lead ****ter for club **** on Illinois, acknowledges the beginning of the decade was good for Chicago. But a couple good years can quickly be offset and turn into a deathspiral which this state is in a serious risk of having.

And even with the population increases its clear places like the southside are indeed ****holes as they continue to bleed population while small pockets of the northside continue to explode. Remember everyone, its Chicago as a whole when it comes to affordability but isolated into neighborhoods once we touch on crime and poverty!

Bridgeport, Chinatown, Bronzeville, Mckinley Park, Woodlawn, Hyde Park, Washington Park, Kenwood, South Shore, Oakland, Grand Boulevard, Beverly, West Lawn, Clearing, Garfield Ridge, and Archer Heights are all southside neighborhoods that increased in population. Small pockets on the northside? What northside neighborhoods is losing population? Every neighborhood up north is growing.

[quigboto]

Originally Posted by Ryantheturtle

Because this destroys right wingers favorite point that chicago and illinois are declining sh*tholes and nobody wants to live there. Yet we remain the 5th most populous state and Illinois is set to become the 5th trillion dollar state this year.

I can’t even bother to correct the idiotic takes from people who don’t live in Chicago and don’t know squat about Chicago commenting on Chicago based on what they get from RW media.
Well, I do bother but my comments get deleted. How convenient.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by Maintainschaos

Actually surprised there isn’t a thread about this and the other undercounted states in the General US forum.

Hmm, that is odd. Hawaii was over counted by 7%. Which is crazy.

[personone]

Originally Posted by Greencheese

The general consensus was early 2010's were good for Chicago but the outmigration trends are accelerating in recent years. Even Illinois Policy, the lead ****ter for club **** on Illinois, acknowledges the beginning of the decade was good for Chicago. But a couple good years can quickly be offset and turn into a deathspiral which this state is in a serious risk of having.

And even with the population increases its clear places like the southside are indeed ****holes as they continue to bleed population while small pockets of the northside continue to explode. Remember everyone, its Chicago as a whole when it comes to affordability but isolated into neighborhoods once we touch on crime and poverty!

Not sure I agree with all of this, but I do agree that the early 2000's (probably peaking at about 2005-2010) was the most recent height of Chicago's popularity. During that period, there was growth, and equally important, the perpetual national and international reputation for crime didn't exist like it does now. It helped that social media and the 24/7 digital technologies were still relatively in their infancies, so crime and its negative reputation didn't spread/fast as it does now.

[chicagogeorge]

Originally Posted by Ryantheturtle

Chicago probably has 2.9 million or even 3 million plus people in city limits

Every census undercounts cities especially. Chicago could have +100k more than the official count, but it likely also had more then the official count of the 2010 census.

[Burbmama]

Originally Posted by shredyz

I think annexing Harwood Heights and Norridge first makes more sense, and then the others. But yes this would be a good way to boost population.

I'm not sure if there's a term for it, but detroit is trying to de-annex portions of the city due to the cost of maintaining a larger area. Annexing some areas will add population but that comes with a cost. Several of the mentioned cities have no interest in being part of Chicago.

Cicero govt will never let themselves out of a job, they'd never agree to an annexation.

[Greencheese]

Originally Posted by Burbmama

I'm not sure if there's a term for it, but detroit is trying to de-annex portions of the city due to the cost of maintaining a larger area. Annexing some areas will add population but that comes with a cost. Several of the mentioned cities have no interest in being part of Chicago.

Cicero govt will never let themselves out of a job, they'd never agree to an annexation.

Evanston, Oak Park, Des Plaines, Rosemont, Skokie... none of those gain anything from being annexed by the city. Everyone is well aware any annexations would mean taxes diverted to Chicago's bottomless pit and subpar government services. Failing southside suburbs might benefit from annexation but the fact the city isn't even considering it means its nothing more than a perpetual burden.

[OyCrumbler]

Originally Posted by Don Cuccino

Big reason why Houston has grown is because it keeps annexing land into their city. Chicago's population would undoubtedly grow if it did the same thing. Houston is almost 3 times the size of Chicago. If it annexed just Evanston, Cicero, and Skokie our population would be almost 3 million, and that's just 3 suburbs.

I think this is a common trait among a lot of growth cities where there was a larger level of regional consolidation if not outright annexation or city/county consolidation. In the Midwest, Indianapolis did a city county consolidation while Columbus did massive numbers of consolidation. The Twin Cities early on created a regional planning association that assumed a lot of responsibilities. This isn't just about technically working the numbers by having more area, but having a more streamlined and coordinated regional planning. With that, I think what probably would be best would be city / county consolidation between the municipalities of Cook County (including Chicago) and Cook County, but that's a hard, but possibly very worthwhile hill to climb. Really though, I think the main level of government should be a consolidated Cook County and DuPage County.

[masonbauknight]

Originally Posted by Greencheese

Evanston, Oak Park, Des Plaines, Rosemont, Skokie... none of those gain anything from being annexed by the city. .

Folks, incorporated towns can't be annexed by larger cities. Skokie (inc. 1888), Cicero (1867), Evanston (1863) have town charters and elect their own mayors and councils. Such suburbs can't be annexed -- same as if your neighbor tried to annex your house. The City of Chicago can't annex anything except unincorporated areas, and I don't see any left on its borders. Texas law makes it easier than most to annex, but even then, San Antonio can annex unincorporated areas only. City-county consolidations are even more difficult. In consolidation-friendly states like Georgia, there must be a referendum. Before it even gets to that, state legislators might veto the project. Bottom line: Older cities like Chicago, Boston, and Milwaukee are stuck within their present city limits. That will not change.