Am I the only one that's bothered by Fresno being slightly bigger? (San Jose: crime, cost of)

[NickB1967]

Originally Posted by BayAreaDave

South Sac and AA are apart Sacramento, as is West Sac. Just not on paper. Add the 100k from AA, the 100k from AA and SS and you have a city with a population of about 650,000. Just cut the metro from 2.6-2.4 million. Happy now? lol.

Not being part of the City of Sacramento proper does make a difference, when it comes to getting things done, making decisions, etc.

[BayAreaDave]

Originally Posted by NickB1967

Not being part of the City of Sacramento proper does make a difference, when it comes to getting things done, making decisions, etc.

Sure it does, but theres no doubt these areas are apart of Sacramento. For example, if these places were annexed Sacramento wouldn't feel any bigger or smaller than if they stayed independent.

[NickB1967]

Originally Posted by BayAreaDave

Sure it does, but theres no doubt these areas are apart of Sacramento. For example, if these places were annexed Sacramento wouldn't feel any bigger or smaller than if they stayed independent.

Not to re-hash an old point, but actually, yes to re-hash an old point, that is the problem. Sacramento city proper has bigger city ambitions, but lacks the population clout to make them happen.

The contrast with San Jose already was hashed out earlier in this thread, but the contrast with Fresno also should be brought up. Fresno *did not allow* an 'un-City of Calwa', or an 'un-City of Herndon', to grow up around or beside it. Other than Clovis, which was already its own city, virtually all of what is urban or suburban in Fresno--is the City of Fresno.

Should there ever be the desire for an Urban Growth Boundary around the City of Fresno, Fresno can make it happen without dealing with other balkanized jurisdictions, other than Clovis.

[NickB1967]

Originally Posted by wburg

Sacramento went from 14 square miles after World War II to 98 square miles today, and is still playing catch-up with some of those annexed neighborhoods.

Again, San Jose went from about 14 square miles (or less) to 180 square miles. And for a while in the 1970's in 1980's, to again quote Dan Walters, who you despise so much, "There was the bombed-out atmosphere of a city that grew too big too fast and is having trouble coping the the side effects of that growth." Yet still, one large jurisdiction can get things done more effectively than many smaller jurisdictions, let alone "un-City", which I will argue is the worst of both worlds.

Fresno also threw out its city limits and allowed no "un-City".

Some people threw the dreaded race card into earlier discussions about how Sacramento grew and developed. And again, a comparison with San Jose is instructive.

Just east of San Jose proper in 1950, and explicitly outside of city limits there was a sketchy barrio / "Pachuco" or "Zoot Suit" neighborhood called "Sal Si Puedes" (get out if you can), where Cesar Chavez was raised. As the name implies, it was not liked. There was also an almost totally Mexican American hamlet of Alviso, on the edge of the SF bay swamps, again well outside the City of San Jose, probably deliberately.

Did "Dutch" Hamann care? No. As much growth as possible under one municipal roof was his priority, and he enticed those sketchy areas into the city of San Jose with paved streets, a library branch, and the like.

Today, while it is clear that San Jose will get "whiter" (or with large Asian influx, "yellower") if you drive one way and "browner" if you drive another way, there isn't the stark segregation of an "8 Mile Road" like Detroit.

[wburg]

There are still about 800,000 people in Santa Clara County not within the city limits of San Jose, so there are still plenty of little municipalities to deal with. Taken out of context, that Dan Walters sentence implies that San Jose's sprawl wasn't a positive thing. If not for their location in then-nascent Silicon Valley and resulting influx of money, San Jose might not have brought itself back from that bombed-out appearance. About that race card, I think you have it backwards. Sacramento annexed plenty of nonwhite neighborhoods during its era of enormous expansion, including the incorporated city of North Sacramento and Del Paso Heights, along with subdivisions to the south. The resistance was by the residents of the whiter and wealthier neighborhoods to the east, who didn't want to be included with the increasingly nonwhite city of Sacramento. So perhaps save a little ire for the suburbanites, whose actions prevented annexation. Our barrio was within the city of Sacramento, and the racially exclusive residents of Arden Park wanted no part of it. Sacramento, like San Jose, definitely has a "whiter" and "browner" direction (northeast and south) but we're an even more multicultural smear than they are, especially within the city of Sacramento. Arden-Arcade isn't the Caucasian smear it was in the past, so maybe the next time the subject comes up they will change the balance of the votes. Cesar Chavez was raised in Arizona where he was born. He didn't move to the San Jose area until after World War II, when he was in his twenties. He did learn the basics of union organization in the San Jose area, if that's what you meant.

[CeJeH]

I think he's talking more about Sacramento's unwillingness to annex South Sacramento.

[NickB1967]

Originally Posted by wburg

There are still about 800,000 people in Santa Clara County not within the city limits of San Jose, so there are still plenty of little municipalities to deal with.

That is because the whole northwestern part of Santa Clara County already had long since incorporated cities like Palo Alto, Mountain View, Sunnyvale, and Santa Clara. Once again, the term *obtuse* comes to mind. :-P San Jose would have been much smaller, and worse, had it allowed itself to be surrounded by Cities--or worse still, un-Cities--of Almaden, Alviso, Alum Rock, Cambrian Park, Evergreen, etc. Ditto for Fresno with respect to Calwa, Easton, Herndon, etc.

Originally Posted by wburg

Taken out of context, that Dan Walters sentence implies that San Jose's sprawl wasn't a positive thing. If not for their location in then-nascent Silicon Valley and resulting influx of money, San Jose might not have brought itself back from that bombed-out appearance.

Get it through your head: The massive post WW2 expansion of West Coast cities was inevitable, especially as their wartime industries such as radar, calculating machines, aircraft, rockets, etc. spawned massive civilian growth fields postwar, and especially once Joe Stalin, Kruschev, Chairman Mao and their sucessors reared their ugly heads, which meant the continuation of defense industry. The postwar returning GI's and Rosie the Riveters were also *not* going to stay living packed into boarding houses downtown sharing a communal bathroom, however much you might wish they had. :-P They wanted a bigger home with a yard to raise their little ones.

Meanwhile, Sacramento state government was going to grow as the state population grew, even if the most conservative limited government types had somehow held sway from 1945 to date, which they obviously did not. Sacramento, which was on the receiving end of plenty of tax money, has no excuse either. Heck, Fresno city proper is better run than Sacramento city proper.

Originally Posted by wburg

About that race card, I think you have it backwards. Sacramento annexed plenty of nonwhite neighborhoods during its era of enormous expansion, including the incorporated city of North Sacramento and Del Paso Heights, along with subdivisions to the south. The resistance was by the residents of the whiter and wealthier neighborhoods to the east, who didn't want to be included with the increasingly nonwhite city of Sacramento. So perhaps save a little ire for the suburbanites, whose actions prevented annexation. Our barrio was within the city of Sacramento, and the racially exclusive residents of Arden Park wanted no part of it.

Which utterly *fails* to explain the non-annexation of Fruitridge, Florin, Rio Linda, Rosemont, North Highlands, and I could go on and on. These lower class communties didn't have the clout of wealthy Carmichael, where strong resistance to annexation is at least plausible.

Originally Posted by wburg

Cesar Chavez was raised in Arizona where he was born. He didn't move to the San Jose area until after World War II, when he was in his twenties. He did learn the basics of union organization in the San Jose area, if that's what you meant.

Correction: where Cesar Chavez came to raise his kids, not where he was raised. Oops.

[NickB1967]

Originally Posted by CeJeH

I think he's talking more about Sacramento's unwillingness to annex South Sacramento.

Bingo. As well as quite a few other neighborhoods I can think of.

[CeJeH]

Originally Posted by wburg

There are still about 800,000 people in Santa Clara County not within the city limits of San Jose, so there are still plenty of little municipalities to deal with.

To expand on this a bit, Santa Clara County does have 4 or 5 more cities than Sacramento does, this is true. However, Santa Clara covers 400 more square miles than Sacramento County. On top of that, the "youngest" city in Santa Clara was incorporated in 1957! Most of the cities in Santa Clara County were incorporated prior to the 1950s, and none since. So they did not necessarily have a Balkanization effect to deal with. Many of these cities were incorporated in 1800s and early 1900s, so they were long established, and there was more room between them for San Jose to expand into.

[Majin]

Originally Posted by NickB1967

Once again, the term *obtuse* comes to mind.

On many issues.