Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [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)
 
Old 08-17-2008, 08:59 PM
 
Location: Princeton, New Jersey
937 posts, read 864,745 times
Reputation: 177

Advertisements

Why can't independent cities annex land?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-17-2008, 09:46 PM
 
2,507 posts, read 8,563,032 times
Reputation: 877
In Minnesota, as in many states I suppose, the general rule is that organized cities can only annex unorganized townships. Two orgaized cities could merge, but it is rare. This is the reason why alot of eastern cities cannot annex land and post "population growth." Cities like Boston, Chicago, Minneapolis or Phila., almost without exception, can't grow geographically.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-17-2008, 09:55 PM
 
Location: The 12th State
22,974 posts, read 65,522,515 times
Reputation: 15081
Two cities goverments working together and have mutual understanding to merge their services together.. I like to see the day that goes along smoothly.

I understand your question but I have seen like above cities annexing unincorporated cities and there usually a battle there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2008, 08:55 AM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
382 posts, read 1,054,033 times
Reputation: 148
Charlotte, NC has been annexing land like mad- check out its map.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2008, 09:56 AM
 
6,342 posts, read 11,089,409 times
Reputation: 3090
It depends upon local laws. Overland Park, KS and the city of Kansas City, MO both have been annexing land around each respective city for quite some time.

It is more difficult or impossible for communities in New England and NY to annex land because of provisions written into state and local law. Also, virtually every part of southern New England is already incorporated into a city or town. Northern New England still has some unincorporated territories though I have not heard of any annexation of land taking place in recent history.

Last edited by WILWRadio; 08-18-2008 at 10:18 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2008, 10:07 AM
 
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
11,974 posts, read 25,476,450 times
Reputation: 12187
Because surrounding communities don't want thousands of dollars per yer added to their taxes
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2008, 10:14 AM
 
11,289 posts, read 26,199,461 times
Reputation: 11355
Cities have no problems annexing farmlands or vacant land, but once you already have people living in those areas it can get much more complicated. Many people live in the country to avoid city costs and taxes, so they're not going to be happy when a city comes marching along and wants to swallow them up.

Then there's situations like Chicago where other little towns/cities incorporated over the years, and are completely sealing off a city from expanding into empty land. Chicago can't just eat up an independant city/town unless everyone agrees to that, which is probably quite rare. Chicago has been sealed in by suburbs for almost 60 years now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2008, 11:07 AM
 
Location: Youngstown, Oh.
5,510 posts, read 9,493,295 times
Reputation: 5622
Quote:
Originally Posted by censusdata View Post
Because surrounding communities don't want thousands of dollars per yer added to their taxes
I haven't seen the figures myself. But, I've been told that, if Youngstown were to annex some of its surrounding suburbs, they would have lower taxes.

I guess this is because, currently, their property taxes are sky-high. (in the thousands of dollars a year) Most of this goes to pay for services such as police, fire, etc. If they were annexed, their property taxes would fall dramatically, but they would then have an income tax to pay for those services from the city. The savings occur because, instead of having multiple police, fire, etc. entities, there is only one provided by the city. (much more efficient, IMO)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2008, 11:34 AM
 
Location: New England & The Maritimes
2,114 posts, read 4,916,925 times
Reputation: 1114
Boston annexed a lot of neighboring towns in the 1860s and 70s but that was and will be the last of it. Brookline refused to be "Suffolk-cated" in 1873 and I could only imagine what the response would be from them (or other cities like Cambridge, Newton, and Quincy) now. It wouldn't fly.

Brookline-Boston annexation debate of 1873 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 > U.S. Forums > General U.S.

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top