[JGBigGreen]

Philly is your example? It grew close to its current geographic size through annexation back in 1854. Any examples from the 1900’s or 2000’s?

Originally Posted by ryanthegoldengod

Camden is hardly a good example of a city that can or should annex its neighbor. A better example would be Camden's neighbor to the west: Philadelphia. It's 141 square miles. Imagine if if Philly was whittled down to 18 square miles of North Philly. (I.e., imagine it became Hartford). What do you think would become of it? The reason Philly is a real city is because it also contains nice areas with higher property values (which, oh by the way, haven't been devalued by being located within those scary city limits). Hartford can never become a real city so long as it's a decapitated tiny geographical ghetto. Mismanagement is entirely beside the point. You could have the greatest mayor on earth and it wouldn't matter.....unless said mayor was able to annext the inner suburbs like other cities.

[kidyankee764]

Originally Posted by JGBigGreen

Philly is your example? It grew close to its current geographic size through annexation back in 1854. Any examples from the 1900’s or 2000’s?

Exactly. I’m dumbfounded that people think annexation in 2020 will have the same effect that it did in the 1800s.

[Wilton2ParkAve]

Size hasn’t exactly stifled Manhattan. That seems to blow a hole in your strawman. Similar size to Hartford.

[kidyankee764]

Originally Posted by Wilton2ParkAve

Size hasn’t exactly stifled Manhattan. That seems to blow a hole in your strawman. Similar size to Hartford.

You mean to tell me you don’t think Wilton would be better off as North Norwalk?!

[tbanks3]

Most recently, think Columbus, Toronto, Nashville, Raleigh, Charlotte, Louisville. Annexation offers a city the opportunity to rebrand and reimagine itself. With it certainly comes consequences.

Cities are simply a settlement of people, and metro areas serve the function of a “city”. However the arbitrary city lines we currently have strangle our cities in New England. The suburbs are already just an extension of the city but for several reasons they all compete against each other. If the suburbs want to survive long term they need Hartford To survive - they only exist because of Hartford, and without the commerce Hartford provides these places would be poor and/or farmland.

Hartford can probably turn things around, though structurally it is severely disadvantaged due to the above reasons. Same for providence.

[tbanks3]

Originally Posted by Wilton2ParkAve

Size hasn’t exactly stifled Manhattan. That seems to blow a hole in your strawman. Similar size to Hartford.

Manhattan is part of the city of New York. New York is a prime example of annexation, to become all 5 burroughs. As the area developed, it functioned as one gigantic metro, so it became a mega city.

[kidyankee764]

Originally Posted by tbanks3

Most recently, think Columbus, Toronto, Nashville, Raleigh, Charlotte, Louisville. Annexation offers a city the opportunity to rebrand and reimagine itself. With it certainly comes consequences.

Cities are simply a settlement of people, and metro areas serve the function of a “city”. However the arbitrary city lines we currently have strangle our cities in New England. The suburbs are already just an extension of the city but for several reasons they all compete against each other. If the suburbs want to survive long term they need Hartford To survive - they only exist because of Hartford, and without the commerce Hartford provides these places would be poor and/or farmland.

Hartford can probably turn things around, though structurally it is severely disadvantaged due to the above reasons. Same for providence.

Did Nashville or Charlotte have the high percentage of residents living in poverty, an uber high violent crime rate and bankruptcy that Hartford did, coupled with a very wealthy suburb adjacent like West Hartford that was annexed and made the city better? No. None of that was the case.

Originally Posted by tbanks3

Manhattan is part of the city of New York. New York is a prime example of annexation, to become all 5 burroughs. As the area developed, it functioned as one gigantic metro, so it became a mega city.

You do realize that happened in the 1800’s, right?

[tbanks3]

Originally Posted by kidyankee764

Did Nashville or Charlotte have the high percentage of residents living in poverty, an uber high violent crime rate and bankruptcy that Hartford did, coupled with a very wealthy suburb adjacent like West Hartford that was annexed and made the city better? No. None of that was the case.



You do realize that happened in the 1800’s, right?

The idea is that Hartford is structurally flimsy which assisted in creating the mess it has become. The suburbs created such intense poverty in Hartford (and other cities) and was sustained through redlining historically. The fact that these other cities were not identical does not mean that annexation was not a massive reason these cities are “thriving” now. Each city was struggling and has a serious transformation through this process, for better or for worse. Annexation is not a fix, but clearly other fairly recent examples show it as at the very least an opportunity.

And I was not suggesting that New York was recent. Not sure why you are accusing me of that. Others have made a poor comparison that Manhattan is its own small city, which is not true.

[tbanks3]

So keep in mind that if you look at Hartford metro, if the suburbs were incorporated as a “region”, crime rate would stabilize. Most cities have crime in small concentrations on otherwise well functioning, attractive cities for people. Perception is reality sometimes.

[kidyankee764]

Originally Posted by tbanks3

The idea is that Hartford is structurally flimsy which assisted in creating the mess it has become. The suburbs created such intense poverty in Hartford (and other cities) and was sustained through redlining historically. The fact that these other cities were not identical does not mean that annexation was not a massive reason these cities are “thriving” now. Each city was struggling and has a serious transformation through this process, for better or for worse. Annexation is not a fix, but clearly other fairly recent examples show it as at the very least an opportunity.

And I was not suggesting that New York was recent. Not sure why you are accusing me of that. Others have made a poor comparison that Manhattan is its own small city, which is not true.

An opportunity for whom? Certainly not the people of West Hartford or Wethersfield, who worked hard to be able to afford the community which they live and are educated. I’m curious to hear your opinion on how annexing a town will help Hartford proper.

Not only was the NYC annexation not recent, it was over a century ago, when society was completely different than it is today. To use that as an example, knowing full well almost nothing is the same today, is laughable.