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.
I think Decatur tends to get some bad press because of its proximity to Springfield and Champaign-Urbana. Springfield has the obvious political clout, and C-U has the obvious academic clout. Decatur has far more political and economic influence than some want to admit, but unfortunately, it's just sort of stuck in the middle between Springfield and C-U. It tends to get overlooked.
As far as "competing" semi-urban centers, Springfield or C-U aren't vastly superior to Decatur in terms of shopping, culture, schools, and housing. To say so is a fallacy. Like many larger towns in central and southern Illinois, Decatur is in economic and social transition. People are moving to the outskirts. This is not shocking, but it's leaving behind some "urban decay." You see this in all American cities - big ones and small ones. For anyone who can't imagine living anywhere without Kohls, a good mall, Panera Bread and tickytack housing, you can find little squares of that sort of thing on the corporate fringes Decatur. And you'll probably wind up just as jaded by it all in Decatur (and as unconnected to the community) as you would if you moved to suburban Naperville, IL.
More on the topic of Decatur being "in decline:" The declining and seedier parts of Decatur are for sure better off than some of the nasty parts of Peoria. Some would argue that certain parts of the west side of Bloomington are, by contrast, more in decline than seedier pockets of Decatur. As far as schools go, just like everywhere else, big incomes earn nice property, and a nice EAV from classy neigborhoods and snappy box store areas can pay for good school districts. That's Illinoisl; Decatur is no different. Granted, Decatur's school system isn't winning any achievement awards, but it isn't falling apart like some say.
For foodies and artsier types, Decatur has its token share of urban renewal attributes like its artsy, faux-bistro dining downtown district - with a quirky selection of restaurants and a smattering of theatres and galleries. Like like most midsized cities, Decatur's A&E and cultural offerings aren't bad; they're just sort of indiscernable - a dime a dozen (you know every small city is going to brag about how nice their arts and entertainment industry is - becuase, of course, everyone wants to view themselves as a "hotbed for the arts" and a "hospitality and tourism center"). Plus, Decatur has enough mall/big box shopping variety to be considered as "having amenities." In terms of its park district, Decatur's is comparable to a lot of other towns in the 50-80k population range. Not overwhelmingly good, but not bad. It'll get you by.
The worst that can be said about Decatur is that it's in transition - it's an outwardly sprawling small city with some dead pockets that are moving in no discernable direction, and some quickly made-over parts of downtown which come off as done in the key of "champaigne taste on beer pocket money." The worst of bad comments on Decatur is that its schools aren't mind-blowingly spectacular. That said, Decatur's just about like any small city (or any overgrown farm town) of 50-80K; it's sort of snooze - but certainly not dead.
Do you slaughter a racehorse that loses by a nose?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drover
Nah, it gets it on its own merits.
Nah, I still think Decatur gets a bad rap because of its proximity to two cities with a percentage more going for them in terms of political and academic clout. It's about small cities as competing markets. To have three in such proximity means one has to get branded as the odd man out. It's easy to pick on and malign the one that "has bad schools" or "smells like burnt ketchup" - or whatever easy joke about Decatur happens to be the most popular this week.
I think of Central Illinois' "Urban" Centers: Champaign-Urbana, Springfield, Decatur (and Bloomington-Normal if you want to throw it in there) as corporate entities that weigh in across the spectrum with political and economic influence. In those terms, Decatur may rank third (or fourth, for those who claim Decatur and B-N are close enough for commuters)
but it's not by some huge, enormous margin.
And just because a racehorse loses by a nose, doesn't mean it's only fit for slaughter.
In reality, Decatur, Bloomington-Normal and Chambana are all overgrown farm towns with aimless outward development, crumbling infrastructure, middling school systems, a lackluster local job market for the middle class. They all have a typical blend of hick social disorder and "urban" crime issues. And if you picked up towns like DeKalb, Ill., Beloit, Wis. or Mansfield, Ohio (to pick a few) and dropped them into central Illinois you'd get the same faceless mediocrity. Also, you'd see the same same rusty-jaw pride and influence of the old landed gentry, and the same misguided attempts to "revitalize" and "grow" commerce in the "old downtown." This is how things are going in small cities where industry is drying up and service industry/logistics are on the rise. As city planners say, it's going to take a while to see where it all ends up.
On the topic of "merits," it could be said all of these towns "reek like burnt ketchup" in their own way.
Nah, I still think Decatur gets a bad rap because of its proximity to two cities with a percentage more going for them in terms of political and academic clout. It's about small cities as competing markets. To have three in such proximity means one has to get branded as the odd man out. It's easy to pick on and malign the one that "has bad schools" or "smells like burnt ketchup" - or whatever easy joke about Decatur happens to be the most popular this week.
I think of Central Illinois' "Urban" Centers: Champaign-Urbana, Springfield, Decatur (and Bloomington-Normal if you want to throw it in there) as corporate entities that weigh in across the spectrum with political and economic influence. In those terms, Decatur may rank third (or fourth, for those who claim Decatur and B-N are close enough for commuters)
but it's not by some huge, enormous margin.
And just because a racehorse loses by a nose, doesn't mean it's only fit for slaughter.
In reality, Decatur, Bloomington-Normal and Chambana are all overgrown farm towns with aimless outward development, crumbling infrastructure, middling school systems, a lackluster local job market for the middle class. They all have a typical blend of hick social disorder and "urban" crime issues. And if you picked up towns like DeKalb, Ill., Beloit, Wis. or Mansfield, Ohio (to pick a few) and dropped them into central Illinois you'd get the same faceless mediocrity. Also, you'd see the same same rusty-jaw pride and influence of the old landed gentry, and the same misguided attempts to "revitalize" and "grow" commerce in the "old downtown." This is how things are going in small cities where industry is drying up and service industry/logistics are on the rise. As city planners say, it's going to take a while to see where it all ends up.
On the topic of "merits," it could be said all of these towns "reek like burnt ketchup" in their own way.
Yes, you keep saying Decatur's image problem stems from its proximity to cities that don't suck as hard as Decatur does, as if I didn't get your point the first time. It's not that I didn't get your point, it's that I don't agree. You make it sound as if Decatur's problems are merely an image problem compared to its nearest neighbors due to it not having political or academic clout. But the differences are much deeper than that.
For starters, you use Springfield as a basis of comparison. Between you and me, I will agree that Springfield does not offer substantial differences in amenities and overall quality of life versus Decatur. Except for those who have lived there most or all of their lives -- and being attached to one's home town is to be expected -- I don't know of many people who regard Springfield as some glittering jewel in the middle of the corn fields. You don't often hear of people moving to Springfield to seek new opportunities unless it involves government.
But Decatur is simply not in Chambana's or BN's league. The differences in crime levels, population growth, amenities, quality of housing stock, educational attainment, job opportunities, economic vitality, and overall quality of life are substantial. I'll grant that government largesse has given BN and Chambana an advantage that Decatur does not have; and that if U of I or ISU were in Decatur, then Decatur would be one of the economic bright spots of central Illinois and Chambana or BN would be the economic basketcase instead -- that is, if either of those would exist in anywhere close to its current form without the universities there. But the fact is those cities DO have major state universities that have given their respective metro areas a great deal more vitality than Decatur has.
Decatur is a dying city in large measure due to circumstances beyond its control, and I honestly don't know that there's anything in Decatur's power to do anything about it.
I'm going to go ahead and continue being bull-headed on this one, Drover. Again I say the competing city market argument is a main issue at play here. To wit: Decatur's problems do go deeper than a maligned image, but its maligned image isn't helping any, particularly with shifting trends in local commerce. No one wants to put a (figurative) Coldstone Creamery ice cream parlor next to some (figurative) chalk outlines of bodies.
In a big way, a city's image is where it all begins and ends. The dynamics are different, but ask the folks who are fighting this sort of thing in Elgin, Lombard and Addison.
When you read posts on this site, many posters like to use cheap terms like "yucky" or "scary" or "dying" to describe what they perceive as less-than-savory attributes of their town. In the same way, planners, developers and local Republican business coalitions use words like "vibrant" "renwed" and "vitality" to try to pump up a small city's surface image. On both sides of the coin you're getting a lot of skewed, rhetorical baloney.
Now, here's the rub. You think central Illinois' competing city markets don't use self-serving regional politics and biased, superficial publicity to lay the smack down on Decatur? Think again. I worked for the media in three of the four city areas we're discussing. You'd be surprised at what gets covered up, what gets publicized, and why.
The entirety of central Illinois is Corn Pone Depot, in a sense. Which is fine. It's just that three of central Illinois' four main, Non-Decatur city areas are stacked with big, political fat cats who can effectively pull strings and keep the curtains shut on their own dirty laundry rooms. Come on, you're from Chicago, man. You should know that's how development works.
You've hit the nail on the head with your comment about certain towns' fortune in having major University clout. I'm saying (and I'm correct in saying it) that you can characterize that clout as having both political and economic penchants. Where would Iowa City be without UI and its Grand Old Hospital? Bet they wouldn't have Coralville Mall and miles of tickytack which, previous to a week ago, was some serious corn. But, then again, what about the 8 or so MURDERS in the Iowa City area last year? In a town of 70,000? That kind of a spike in killings is pretty "yucky," "scary" and particularly non-"revitalized" in and of itself, wouldn't you agree? I haven't researched it, but I wonder what Iowa's Board of Regents makes of all that? Some big political shoulder shrugging on that one, would be my guess.
Another thought, Drover. If I mailed you four photos of random, declining neighborhoods in Decatur, B-N, Springfield, and C-U, would you be 100 percent sure you could label each with the correct town's name? If I sent you a picture of tickytack subdivisions and TIF-type box store development districts in Forsyth, Bloomington, C-U and Springfield, would you be able to label them accurately?
Outside of three of these towns' political strongholds (If you want to split hairs, we'll call them the "state capitol" and the "universities") they're all outwardly sprawling, aimless farm towns with a decaying interior and limited opportunity for non-white collar people. So, it's exactly a half-truth to assert that Bloomington-Normal or Champaign-Urbana are leagues better off than Decatur.
Walk around the west side of Bloomington. Walk around the south side of Decatur. You tell me the big difference.
And while you're at it, define the term "dying city" (which is cheap rhetoric which you've tossed off and then not explained). Back it up. Cite specific examples of how the term applies to Decatur. Then, see if those same terms of definition don't (in part or in whole) apply interchangeably to all of the cities we're discussing.
Please be honest, fair, and don't fall back on some easy loophole of reasoning about "none of this being the point."
Asking people to identify cities based on pictures of a couple buildings is silly. That's like asking me to decide if someone is attractive or not by taking a picture of the back of their head. Impressions are taken as a whole, not based on a picture of a box store.
And no, BN and CU do not have dying inner cores. Their inner cores are doing fine, and that's one substantial factor that differentiates them from Decatur and to some extent from Springfield.
There may be limited opportunities for blue-collar workers in all of these cities. As manufacturing employment happens to be in secular decline everywhere in the industrialized world, that's not a particularly strong indictment of any of the cities you mention. What separates Decatur from B/N, C/U and Springfield is that there are also few opportunities for white collar workers in Decatur. And that is why it is a dying city, and by "dying" I mean its economic opportunities are shrinking rather than growing, and consequently it is suffering long-term population decline. C/U and B/N definitely don't have this problem, neither the cities proper or the metro areas.
You always make great points. But I still defy peoples' ablitiy to disinguish neighborhoods in "declining" Bloomington from "declining" Decatur from "declining" Champaign. There are seedy spots in all three of these towns that you couldn't tell apart. There's really nothing "silly" about that point.
You could argue all day long about whether downtown Bloomington, Champaign or Decatur are "vital," but it doesn't really matter that much to people. On sites like this one, the old downtown market are viewed as a fraction of a town's "liveability." What's more, none of the downtown areas in the towns we're discussing can be said to provide a bulk of the jobs most posters here are looking for. In a lot of respects, "Historic Downtown" in a small city is just trade lingo for "Republican stronghold no one gets in or out of without permission first," or "Part of town where all of a sudden you can get decent craft coffee, croissants, Yoga mats and pottery."
The outward sprawl of "palatable" housing stock (which has come to mean affordable cookie cutter subdivision housing outside of town proper), office space and "quality" shopping is not a clear indicator of the overall health of a small city. See if some of this development and "growth" doesn't end up shooting B-N and C-U in their figurative feet years down the road. Most of the "economic growth" from this type of development is funneled into coffers of developers, builders and real estate bigwigs. And that creates a pretty closed economic loop. How does that money get reinvested? More tickytack. Historically, that hasn't proven to be the most sustainable long-term model for economic growth.
I'd also argue that when 40% of a town's population works in service industries created by enterprise zone development, the city's economy is still on thin ice - no matter how many shiny new things seem to appear each week. Middle class taxpayers in Bloomington or Champaign are the ones who feel the sting of keeping that kind of house of cards "growing". Decatur residents don't feel that much of a bite in that regard. So there's at least that. On top of that, IT, Insurance and Corporate Banking industries (areas in which B-N and C-U once boasted jobs aplenty) aren't exactly vital, growing markets at present. So in that way, a few of the big advantages you've cited B-N and C-U as having have shrunk noticeably.
I'm not saying Decatur is or should be happy about its comparitive lack of IT, Insurance, Banking, and Panera Bread/IKEA-type opportunities. But it would be a lie to say Decatur's not working towards getting there. Maybe it's true that Decatur can't really defibrilate its own heart RIGHT NOW without having all of that stuff RIGHT NOW. But seriously, B-N and C-U aren't growing in the same leaps and bounds as you saw in 1998-2004, either. So who's REALLY winning?
Slow and steady's never been flashy; and it can really make you look like crap in comparison. But a town is really only as nice as its worst street. And boy, does that lead us back to my silly photograph point.
The issue isn't whether the seedy parts of Decatur are any better or worse or different than the seedy parts of B-N or C-U. The point is what proportion of the respective towns are seedy, and what is the quality of life like in the parts that are not seedy, and what is the quality of life like in each city overall. Objective observers can tell the difference even if you can't. People "vote with their feet" as the saying goes, and they're voting with their feet for B-N and C-U, and they're voting with their feet against Decatur.
"A town is only as nice as its worse street" is fatuous, reductionist nonsense. That's like saying there's no difference between East St. Louis and Des Moines Iowa, because certainly there's at least one street in Des Moines that sucks pretty bad. The only people who want to pretend like there's no difference are those who live in places like East St. Louis. Those who live in Des Moines -- and just about everyone else for that matter -- know the difference, and know that those differences matter.
I don't want to insert myself into this running debate, but I would like to express an opinion on the quality of public schools in Champaign-Urbana (C-U). I don't have kids in the public schools (indeed I don't even have kids), but I do live in C-U and am deeply entrenched in the university community both professionally and personally.
So with that caveat, I would like to say that many--probably most--of the professionals in the C-U area that have school-age kids do not like and do not use the C-U public schools. There are small exceptions, but in general most of the public schools in C-U have major problems. In my research arena, most of my colleagues have their children in University Laboratory school (known as "Uni") in Urbana (technically it's a public school but it's entirely separate from the rest of the C-U school system and is run by the university). Uni is both a high school and a middle school, is highly selective, and is considered one of the best college prep programs in the country. Colleagues with children not enrolled in Uni generally either send their kids to private schools or live out-of-town, generally in Mahomet, Monticello, and St. Joseph, in that order, and use the public schools in those towns. I have heard nothing but positive things about the academic quality of public schools in Mahomet and Monticello and, to a lesser extent, St. Joseph (and the private schools in C-U are quite good). Plus, these other schools are extremely safe and pleasant, not plagued by the Chicago-style problems pervasive in the C-U public school system.
And speaking for myself, if I had kids there's absolutely no way I would send them to the public schools in C-U, with the exception of perhaps one or two elementary schools in the southern parts of C-U and of course Uni. I've been searching my memory and I cannot think of a single colleague that let their kids go to the public middle and high schools in C-U.
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.
Do you slaughter a racehorse that loses by a nose?
