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.
Here is an interesting opinion piece on Hartford and people's perception of it verses reality. Makes you wonder why the media seems to like to bash it so often and ignore the good things. Jay
Stats-wise, wouldn't some level of city/county consolidation pretty much negate all of this?
No, because then people would flee the region entirely. If you put Simsbury, Avon, West Hartford, and Glastonbury in a consolidated school district with Hartford, it would be a mass exodus. Property prices would collapse. Tax rates would soar.
The whole advantage of metro Hartford is that for a high cost of living region, you can buy into the leafy suburbs with the gold plated school systems at bargain basement prices. Comparable in metro Boston, Fairfield/NYC tri-state, or DC is easily 2x the housing cost. You can buy a totally reasonable single family home walkable to West Hartford Center for $450K. In metro Boston in a comparable place, it's $1 million.
That is the frustration. There are many positive things happening in Connecticut yet our own politicians tear our state apart in the hopes of using the negative public perception to advance their own political agendas. Money from outside Connecticut has been quietly investing in Hartford for several years now and commercial leases and apartment rentals have very low vacancy rates. Many employers are looking for qualified candidates for high-paying jobs in finance, technology, and manufacturing among others yet cannot get the applicants to come due to the negative image of Connecticut and fears of our future constantly reported by the media and our politicians. We keep hearing about people moving south, especially to Florida and the Carolinas, for a lower cost of living. These moves are distracting and distorted as many of those moving are retirees who are moving not just for lower costs but due to weather-related issues.
Hartford, and Connecticut, have much to offer. The fiscal overhang the plagues the state is amplified in Hartford due to its large number of properties exempt from the tax base as indicated in the article referenced above. The overbuilding of schools and the inefficient magnet/charter school system has also greatly stressed budgets.
I agree. You also see it here on this forum with some naysayers constantly promoting the same negative opinions despite facts that show otherwise.
Hartford was named by Glassdoor as the 5th Best City for finding jobs. Why does the media ignore that but promotes a flawed study by a moving company that says more people are moving out then in.
Why does the media always point out that the state has not regained all of the jobs it lost in the recession but ignore the fact that the state has regained 115% of the private sector jobs lost and that it is the public sector jobs (the ones mostly paid by taxes) that has not recovered. That kind of explanation is too complex for some people and does not sell news media.
Every time I see one of those articles, I now will write the author or media outlet and point this out. You may have noticed some are now actually including this explanation in their article. Jay
Unfortunately, the State of Connecticut lunges from economic crisis to economic crisis and the politicians use Connecticut corporations as a piggy bank for their failures.
Immediately after his election, Malloy pushed through the largest tax increase in state history. It solved NOTHING. Voters still re-elected him and he led the state into another fiscal crisis. He became so unpopular that he couldn't run again. So Connecticut voters elected Malloy 2.0, another Democrat that want to "invest" (invest = spend) in all kinds of government programs.
Until the state government proves it can act fiscally responsible, it will not attract the kind of development to compete with other states. As it is, UHaul puts Connecticut near the top of the list as a place people are moving out of.
Most of the advantages that Connecticut maintains are merely momentum from past of innovation and holding higher education in high regard. It's time to stop treating businesses as the enemy and supporting every anti-business regulation as a triumph. It's long past the time for the "tax rich people they can afford it" mentality and embrace success.
Yep, I like Hartford. It a great city with cultural and historic treasures that are the envy of many places. The quality of life the state provides is very high. But the truth is these are being eroded away but horrible political decisions that have to stop.
Hartford, and Connecticut, have much to offer. The fiscal overhang the plagues the state is amplified in Hartford due to its large number of properties exempt from the tax base as indicated in the article referenced above. The overbuilding of schools and the inefficient magnet/charter school system has also greatly stressed budgets.
You left out the fact that the city has virtually no middle class in the outlying areas. Beyond the shiny downtown high-rises, nearly all of the city housing, including new developments, is low-income housing. And that's another reason why the city's tax base is so sparse. You can't build a city with nothing but Section 8 housing. You need middle-class housing as well, and this is practically nonexistent. Even areas that used to contain middle-income demographics have deteriorated. A perfect example of this is the area south of downtown by Wethersfield Avenue and its side streets, and some of the streets in the West Side south of Farmington Avenue (like Evergreen). When people feel entitled to litter, to engage in open-air drug dealing (as I personally have seen on the Ave), or neglect their properties, this does little to incentivize people to invest in such an area. There is no excuse to justify this behavior. You can throw all the money at it you want (usually in the form of tax dollars, it seems) but at the end of the day, if the existing residents of such an area don't seem to care, then don't expect anyone else to, either.
Here is an interesting opinion piece on Hartford and people's perception of it verses reality. Makes you wonder why the media seems to like to bash it so often and ignore the good things. Jay
Good article for sure--thanks for sharing it. Hartford does have a lot of hidden gems and amenities.
The city gets bashed so much in my opinion, because it is the capital city of such a wealthy state, and the city is in rough shape.
I've been to almost every state capital city in the US--45 of 50. Unfortunately, Hartford is one of the least attractive state capital cities in the US overall, as well as being the most impoverished.
So I think that leads many to scratch their heads and ask "why."
Yep, I like Hartford. It a great city with cultural and historic treasures that are the envy of many places. The quality of life the state provides is very high. But the truth is these are being eroded away but horrible political decisions that have to stop.
You kind of lost me on this. I'm Boston-centric with a lot of NYC exposure and a fair amount of Philly and DC exposure. I had a Boston Symphony season subscription for many years. I used the theater district a lot and try to get to real theater occasionally. The occasional ballet. All the art museums. All the dining options. I don't see any of this in Hartford. I see a bunch of office towers in the urban core surrounded by a ghetto. There's a bit of a pulse with a few music venues like Arch Street Tavern and the Wadsworth Atheneum but it's not what you'd find for cultural and historic treasures in a "great city".
No, because then people would flee the region entirely. If you put Simsbury, Avon, West Hartford, and Glastonbury in a consolidated school district with Hartford, it would be a mass exodus. Property prices would collapse. Tax rates would soar.
The whole advantage of metro Hartford is that for a high cost of living region, you can buy into the leafy suburbs with the gold plated school systems at bargain basement prices. Comparable in metro Boston, Fairfield/NYC tri-state, or DC is easily 2x the housing cost. You can buy a totally reasonable single family home walkable to West Hartford Center for $450K. In metro Boston in a comparable place, it's $1 million.
I think new englanders are familiar with middle ground. I think if you consolidate at least East Hartford Hartford and West Hartford you come away with a Hamden-New Haven-West Haven feel but as one city. Overall I think property values would drop a little bit in west and east Hartford but would rise in Hartford and there would be a lot more right of way type development that would keep home prices from rising and rents from for quite some time.eventually with a more robusta funding structure and more agnolotti property values would rise. It would be greatly beneficial to the lower middle class and working class. Poor people would be indifferent. Because most young people are lower middle-class am working class it would go along way towards attracting young people, if urban development really picked up in East Hartford-I’m not talking just houses but also urban amenities such as bars nightclubs and otherplaces for sociable people to mix and mingle. With East Hartford and West Hartford that would effectively double its population to just over 250k. The size of the municipality alone would attract private development.
But as I said New Englanders are uncomfortable with middleground...youll face opposition from West Hartford people who do not want to work with a Hartford government and you are faced opposition from East Hartford people who do not want Hartford residence to continue to move it to East Hartford at a rapid clip.
In an alternate universe Wethersfield Rocky Hill Berlin Windsor and Bloomfield are also included in this merger. All are older inner suburbs that are fine but not fabulous and could use some development especially Windsor and Berlin they have lots of open land ripe for development.. Retail growth would take some of the burden off of property tax.
You kind of lost me on this. I'm Boston-centric with a lot of NYC exposure and a fair amount of Philly and DC exposure. I had a Boston Symphony season subscription for many years. I used the theater district a lot and try to get to real theater occasionally. The occasional ballet. All the art museums. All the dining options. I don't see any of this in Hartford. I see a bunch of office towers in the urban core surrounded by a ghetto. There's a bit of a pulse with a few music venues like Arch Street Tavern and the Wadsworth Atheneum but it's not what you'd find for cultural and historic treasures in a "great city".
If you had frequented the Boston Symphony, you may enjoy the Hartford Symphony Orchestra. In addition the Springfield Symphony Orchestra is right up 91. While they may not be as good as the BSO, I have always enjoyed the presentations. You also have the Hartford stage, and likewise, it Is not Broadway, where I went to see shows as a native New Yorker. But then again, it is less that 20 minutes from where I live. It takes that long to go a few blocks, if you are lucky, in Manhattan .
Dining options are plentiful in Hartford, and all around the metro area. Over the past year I attended some concerts at the Infinity Theatre on Front Street. This is a great venue, and when I spoke with Danny Seraphine after his concert, he said it was the best venue they had played in in quite some time. This is where you can feel a " bit if a pulse" for sure. Each time I have went the crowd is friendly, respectful and it is always fun.
There is much more than meets the eye. I have lived in the area for almost half a century, and I am still finding places and things I have never experiences before.
I think new englanders are familiar with middle ground. I think if you consolidate at least East Hartford Hartford and West Hartford you come away with a Hamden-New Haven-West Haven feel but as one city. Overall I think property values would drop a little bit in west and east Hartford but would rise in Hartford and there would be a lot more right of way type development that would keep home prices from rising and rents from for quite some time.eventually with a more robusta funding structure and more agnolotti property values would rise. It would be greatly beneficial to the lower middle class and working class. Poor people would be indifferent. Because most young people are lower middle-class am working class it would go along way towards attracting young people, if urban development really picked up in East Hartford-I’m not talking just houses but also urban amenities such as bars nightclubs and otherplaces for sociable people to mix and mingle. With East Hartford and West Hartford that would effectively double its population to just over 250k. The size of the municipality alone would attract private development.
But as I said New Englanders are uncomfortable with middleground...youll face opposition from West Hartford people who do not want to work with a Hartford government and you are faced opposition from East Hartford people who do not want Hartford residence to continue to move it to East Hartford at a rapid clip.
In an alternate universe Wethersfield Rocky Hill Berlin Windsor and Bloomfield are also included in this merger. All are older inner suburbs that are fine but not fabulous and could use some development especially Windsor and Berlin they have lots of open land ripe for development.. Retail growth would take some of the burden off of property tax.
Gonna be a real hard sell to residents of West Hartford - what's in it for them? Platitudes and promises of additional investment and development versus lower property values and worse schools.
Not to mention there will be resistance from the political class in Hartford, especially if their influence would be diluted in a larger municipality. Its no accident that the cities want regionalization, not consolidation. They want the money, but not the accountability. They know full well that voters in the suburbs wouldn't tolerate the shenanigans that go on in city hall and would vote them out. Much better for them to share "services" with the suburbs and keep their political clout back home.
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.
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.
Jay
