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.
Because New York City annexed entire other counties. It was originally just the southern third or so of Manhattan but expanded by annexing. Most other cities have expanded by annexing as well, some to include pieces across county lines, especially in the South (though sometimes county lines were moved instead, as with Boston's annexations), but no others annexed entire other counties the way NYC did.
Why only 5 and why is their powers so limited when compared to other cities in the world with boroughs like London, Montreal, Oslo?
Quote:
Originally Posted by nybbler
It's not subdivided into boroughs, it's comprised of them.
Similar to what Nybbler said but expanding on or clarifying it:
What are called "boroughs" here are, in fact, COUNTIES (though the borders for what constitute those counties has been modified various times over time). That is, they function as what are legally and politically considered to be counties. So, to draw upon Nybbler's quote and enhance it: New York City is not subdivided into 5 counties but rather comprises 5 counties (i.e., the land areas of what constitute those individual counties has been ABSORBED over time into the larger singular political entity which we call the "City of New York").
As to the statement above saying that the borders for what constitute those counties has been modified various times over time:
For example:
Note that what now comprises Queens County used to be much larger. That is, all of what is now Nassau County used to be part of Queens County and the county seat of Queens County was in Hempstead (and before this, what is called Long Island politically consisted only of what we now call Suffolk County). Around 1898 or 1899, Queens spun off its easternmost portion and that portion became the newly-formed Nassau County.
Similarly, what is now called The Bronx was land spun off from Westchester County to form a new county (Bronx County).
So, in summary: It is not that NYC is subdivided into 5 counties but rather that it absorbed 5 counties over time (and what land areas were or are considered to constitute those individual counties has modified various times over time) to become what we now consider to be the present incarnation of the "City of New York". It is a more clarified way to think about it. New York City didn't subdivide itself into smaller semi-autonomous units but rather absorbed pre-existent political units or jurisdictions (cities, towns, villages). Hence, while they are called boroughs or counties and have their own borough presidents and borough halls, their powers are very limited and hence are really dictated and decided upon by (in the true sense) by the overarching "City of New York" municipal government. It might be said that the powers of the boroughs do not really constitute that these boroughs or counties function as autonomous units analogous to the USA states having their own states' rights and powers apart from the federal powers of the United States government but rather that the powers of the boroughs/counties of NYC are mostly symbolic or minor. So Manhattan or Brooklyn or Queens or the Bronx or Staten Island cannot really make laws or regulations that override what the City of New York municipal government decrees or wants. In this sense, the boroughs or counties which comprise the "City of New York" at-large really function more like what we think of as PRECINCTS rather than like autonomous governmental entities analogous to how the U.S. states function in their relation to the U.S. federal government.
Similar to what Nybbler said but expanding on or clarifying it:
What are called "boroughs" here are, in fact, COUNTIES (though the borders for what constitute those counties has been modified various times over time). That is, they function as what are legally and politically considered to be counties. So, to draw upon Nybbler's quote and enhance it: New York City is not subdivided into 5 counties but rather comprises 5 counties (i.e., the land areas of what constitute those individual counties has been ABSORBED over time into the larger singular political entity which we call the "City of New York").
As to the statement above saying that the borders for what constitute those counties has been modified various times over time:
For example:
Note that what now comprises Queens County used to be much larger. That is, all of what is now Nassau County used to be part of Queens County and the county seat of Queens County was in Hempstead (and before this, what is called Long Island politically consisted only of what we now call Suffolk County). Around 1898 or 1899, Queens spun off its easternmost portion and that portion became the newly-formed Nassau County.
Similarly, what is now called The Bronx was land spun off from Westchester County to form a new county (Bronx County).
So, in summary: It is not that NYC is subdivided into 5 counties but rather that it absorbed 5 counties over time (and what land areas were or are considered to constitute those individual counties has modified various times over time) to become what we now consider to be the present incarnation of the "City of New York". It is a more clarified way to think about it. New York City didn't subdivide itself into smaller semi-autonomous units but rather absorbed pre-existent political units or jurisdictions (cities, towns, villages). Hence, while they are called boroughs or counties and have their own borough presidents and borough halls, their powers are very limited and hence are really dictated and decided upon by (in the true sense) by the overarching "City of New York" municipal government. It might be said that the powers of the boroughs do not really constitute that these boroughs or counties function as autonomous units analogous to the USA states having their own states' rights and powers apart from the federal powers of the United States government but rather that the powers of the boroughs/counties of NYC are mostly symbolic or minor. So Manhattan or Brooklyn or Queens or the Bronx or Staten Island cannot really make laws or regulations that override what the City of New York municipal government decrees or wants. In this sense, the boroughs or counties which comprise the "City of New York" at-large really function more like what we think of as PRECINCTS rather than like autonomous governmental entities analogous to how the U.S. states function in their relation to the U.S. federal government.
Which is why the mind reels as to why the borough president office still exists which should have been eliminated along with the Board of Estimate. It is nothing but a patronage mill and can easily be eliminated with the functions given over to elected council members representing each borough.
It is just a name son--- in a place like New Orleans they are called parishes--- in most cities they are neighborhoods but in this dam city there are just too many people who don't like each other so they had to come up with a novel way to keep them apart. Hence the divisions are made.
I think parishes are the equivalent of counties down there, but I'm not sure. (I don't think New Orleans occupies more than one parish).
Though I know in Paterson & Newark, they divide the city into wards (and I know that Paterson actually has council members representing each ward. Not sure about Newark offhand). But I don't think it's quite analogous to the boroughs in NYC. (I mean, aside from the fact that NYC is a lot larger than Newark or Paterson).
Why only 5 and why is their powers so limited when compared to other cities in the world with boroughs like London, Montreal, Oslo?
In those other cities boroughs are not counties. Plus, the boroughs are a lot smaller than they are in NYC, seeing that the boroughs in NYC are actual counties.
Another poster mentioned the South. In Virginia, there are Independent Cities, which blurs the line between city and county as both are the same physical size and comprise of the same boundaries, but the names are different. Hampton Roads in particular is like what New York City was like 150 years ago in that there are indeed seven distinct cities here, just with no plans of any of those seven cities annexing the other. People here would actually like for that to happen, so that we can be recognized as a major city, rather than be recognized as a major metropolitan area.
As you can imagine the cities are incredibly large and quite suburban. Norfolk would be our "Manhattan" in this respect, and if it annexed Virginia Beach, Virginia Beach would be "Brooklyn" as it is already built up and is its own city (but is not as urban, and not as dense). It will never happen though because, though suburban, Virginia Beach has more people than Norfolk; if anything Virginia Beach is trying to increase density throughout their own footprint (which would ultimately result in higher population densities than Norfolk, whether or not that translates into "more urban" is a matter of opinion). Plus it could happen the other way around, but ultimately the State would have to revisit the rule that created the Independent Cities in the first place, and remove those restrictions, and the State is more interested in what is going on in Northern Virginia, than anything.
Personally I think it is a horrible idea for this day and age. First because it is not the 19th century, and second, because I doubt that the effect would be the same that it was for NYC. At best you would end up with a city of close to 2 million people, but we would have the largest city in the MidAtlantic.
If you're really want to be confused you should check out the political structure of Tokyo.
You have Tokyo, the City of Tokyo, and the Tokyo Metropolis. There are 23 special wards, and 47 prefectures of Japan. The special wards are ran like individual cities. The smallest special ward, Chiyoda, has over 43 thousand people and the most populous, Setagaya, has over 855 thousand people. Population density is no less than 3,000 per square kilometer in any of the wards; I'm not so sure this type of arrangement could work in NYC. Add up the population of the wards and you arrive at 8 million, which is 5 million less than the total population of the city.
Does anyone know why the boroughs of London, Mexico City, Montreal, Oslo, Berlin, etc., are different than NYC's?
The differences vary with each of the cities you've mentioned. There is no "one size fits all" approach. What works in London does not work in Mexico City, and did not work in Berlin or Paris, and so on and so forth. You are looking for generalizations for different, disparate cities across country and cultural lines.
Plus a big part of it could be due to the fact that NYC is a city in America, and in America we at least try to run a city like one administrative unit, rather than allow each political subdivision, like a borough, to be ran as its own city.
Mexico City in particular is more of a Washington DC than it is its own city in that it is not part of a state. It is also the capital of the country. I think you are looking for political similarities among Alpha cities, when there is a lot more to what went into the creation of those cities than their size and political and cultural influence.
Why do people refer to Long Island like Bklyn and Qns aren't sitting on Long Island?
Either they never lived/visited there or they don't do their research.
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.
