[Stylo]

Originally Posted by elinyc

I'd love to agree that it truly is only perception, but I'm afraid national crime statistics indicate otherwise. I'm not downplaying the fact that New Haven has restaurants or culture, but I am saying that a high crime level trumps all of these positives and is what consistently lands New Haven on the country's most dangerous cities list. It's a real shame and I hope that the urban renewal you speak of will have a positive impact. Like I mentioned, I really think that CT's cities have a lot of potential and it'd be amazing if they could live up to that instead of continuing to wallow in high crime rates & poverty.

This is true. And unfortunately the crime stats make people think if they walk to the Yale Gallery on Chapel they're going to get shot. The truth is most of the crime happens in areas no suburbanite would ever have a need to visit.

At least New Haven's crime dropped quite a bit for 2012 with a 50% reduction in homicides (it will drop down quite a lot on the "most dangerous" lists), hopefully that trend continues. Unfortunately it seems as if Bridgeport's crime increased.

[elinyc]

Does anybody here know the history behind why CT's cities are plagued with such crime? I'm really curious as to how this awful dynamic developed and really hopeful that something can be done in the future to improve the situation.

[Stylo]

Originally Posted by elinyc

Does anybody here know the history behind why CT's cities are plagued with such crime? I'm really curious as to how this awful dynamic developed and really hopeful that something can be done in the future to improve the situation.

My guess is it's a few factors. Loss of industry and "white flight" happened all over the country in cities, but we don't really have that one major city that weathered the storm like Boston and New York did. CT is kind of unique in that it isn't a state with one major city, but several smaller cities. Also, the cost of living is uniformly very high in CT, so the poor get marginalized in small, less desirable areas as it's all they can afford. Crime follows poverty. It's a case of sharp division between have's and have not's.

[Stratford, Ct. Resident]

Originally Posted by Stylo

My guess is it's a few factors. Loss of industry and "white flight" happened all over the country in cities, but we don't really have that one major city that weathered the storm like Boston and New York did. CT is kind of unique in that it isn't a state with one major city, but several smaller cities. Also, the cost of living is uniformly very high in CT, so the poor get marginalized in small, less desirable areas as it's all they can afford. Crime follows poverty. It's a case of sharp division between have's and have not's.

Stamford???

[kidyankee764]

Originally Posted by Stratford, Ct. Resident

Stamford???

Yeah - actually I think Stamford did a lot better than NY and Boston.

[elinyc]

Originally Posted by Stratford, Ct. Resident

Stamford???

Stamford has its own quality issues, such as its low performing schools. Also, it's so tiny that it's really hard to compare it to the other cities mentioned. It's impossible to compare Stamford to Boston, for example, whereas New Haven (were it cleaned up) could be very comparable (as could Hartford). That's JMHO, although I really wish that weren't the case.

[kidyankee764]

Originally Posted by elinyc

Stamford has its own quality issues, such as its low performing schools. Also, it's so tiny that it's really hard to compare it to the other cities mentioned. It's impossible to compare Stamford to Boston, for example, whereas New Haven (were it cleaned up) could be very comparable (as could Hartford). That's JMHO, although I really wish that weren't the case.

Stamford's schools aren't nearly as "low performing" as Hartford or New Haven's. They rank 4-5 out of 10 for GreatSchools, while New Haven's rank 1 and some 2.

[elinyc]

Originally Posted by kidyankee764

Stamford's schools aren't nearly as "low performing" as Hartford or New Haven's. They rank 4-5 out of 10 for GreatSchools, while New Haven's rank 1 and some 2.

Oh, I agree that Stamford beats out New Haven/Hartford in that department, but a 4-5 is hardly something to be proud of. Plus Stamford is smaller, with a smaller walking center and is thus hard to qualify in the same category of cities. Even in Stamford, most of the wealthy seem to flee to the more rural parts (North Stamford) and send their kids to private school. Again, I really feel that CT is missing any cities that are attractive enough to retain the wealthy. That's a real problem, I think, and probably contributes quite a lot to the high crime/bad schools/poverty that most of the cities have. In NYC, plenty of rich people want to stay and buy apartments on Park Avenue, etc. In Boston, the rich occupy many of those gorgeous brownstones in Back Bay. Here in CT, the rich flee to the tiny suburbs/towns/rural areas and that's a huge problem. Again, I'm not sure how this dynamic developed, but I sure wish something could be done to fix it so that we could enjoy our own great cities without having to go to NYC or Boston to fulfill the craving for a good urban experience.

[Stratford, Ct. Resident]

Originally Posted by elinyc

Stamford has its own quality issues, such as its low performing schools. Also, it's so tiny that it's really hard to compare it to the other cities mentioned. It's impossible to compare Stamford to Boston, for example, whereas New Haven (were it cleaned up) could be very comparable (as could Hartford). That's JMHO, although I really wish that weren't the case.

I realize that we don't have a "major" city anywhere in CT. I was addressing Stylo's comments regarding a CT city that didn't lose industry or suffer from "white flight". Stamford definitely qualifies.

[Beeker2211]

Originally Posted by elinyc

Does anybody here know the history behind why CT's cities are plagued with such crime? I'm really curious as to how this awful dynamic developed and really hopeful that something can be done in the future to improve the situation.

Unfortunately there was a large history of Redlining and Blockbusting which kind of set the whole thing into motion, as well the manufacturing as a *mass* employment base gave out. Federal underwriting of mortgages contributed, as did the destruction the old industries did to the land they were sitting on that keeps it from being redeveloped. Then there was the just god awful management of the cities for decades (corruption? You better believe it) which saw the easy money from Urban Renewal projects of the 60's and 70's and the monies for the projects in the 80's that set the seeds of the current situation.

But most most of all, the cities' small footprint makes the comparisons tough: Hartford is barely 18 sq miles. In almost every other state that's completely unheard of. So, even though most neighbourhoods in the state's big 5 are very safe, small pocket areas of inter-personal violence spike it. The Urban Areas of these cities which includes the inner ring "suburbs" would be more comparable to cities nationally within other's city limits. They are also among the safest.

>>Edit: How do we change it? Honestly a lot of the work would pretty much be done automatically if there was a cap on the Mortgage Interest Tax Credit. Or put a lot more money into cleaning up the brownfields.