Predictions for the Future of Grand Rapids

[Rizzo]

I believe they add them according to traffic/commuting patterns. Say 25 percent of the population of Muskegon County travels to Grand Rapids/Kent county that would have Muskegon county included in Metro Grand Rapids... I can't remember the exact threshold or percentage of people that have to commute to GR inorder for the place to be added. I think I once read somewhere that is was 25 or 26 percent.

[GR8scott]

I agree the the mtro area should be defined as the area that is urbanized all the way from DT, so that area would include ONLY the south-western portion of Kent county and MAYBE a little bit of eastern Ottawa and northern Allagan counties. But I think the current deffinition of our MSA is that of which ppl commute to and associate with which is also true many ppl from the lakeshore commute to GR and if asked where they are from they might say GR, ever thought they live in the next county 30 min from GR

The ONLY way that GR can have ANY significant growth is to annex, which I hope happens in the not so distant future. A 44 square mile city is actually SMALL, the only ones that are bigger with an area of this size or smaller are OLD large urband cities ( jersy city, sam fran, miami, minniapolis, boston). The only area that I see that can be developed is in the NE section of the city which is not growing fast at all at this time. I hope GR annexes some of the older urbanized areas of kentwood wyoming, walker and northwiew aeras to better represent its acual size and shape. And also some of the suburbs annex some of the surrounding townships. I hate the fact that east kentwood high school is not in the eastern portion of kentwood and is not even in Kentwood, it should be named North Gains Twns. High. I also hope that GR ( which is already pretty dense) can build on density with taller housing buildings especially DT but also outskirts ( maybe a 10 story building that is not in the downtown area wouldnt destroy the cities small town attitude) I just dont like the donut ring sprall we have currently

[Picture Michigan]

MSA's drive me absolutly nuts! I hear some that include Holland, some that include Muskegon, some that don't. I don't really get it. It seems to me that whoever is compiling the statistics will add or subtract what cities they want to get the stats to show the desired results (my cynical side coming through). When I look at GR, I see GR, EGR, Wyoming, Kentwood, Walker...just the immediate area. I don't see why they include some cities that are 30 miles or more away. If anyone can help answer this, please enlighten me.

It has to do with economics and what would be considered "same market" trade. Commuting is a perfect example. The boundries go to counties. To exclude Ottawa Countie from the GR MSA is absurd! Drawing an economic line between Jenison and Grandville may as well be the Berlin Wall. Generally speaking, enough people in Kent County commute to Ottawa County and vice-versa. Enough to consider it the same economic market.

It may seem odd that Holland and GR are considered the same MSA because of all the farm land between the two, but when you consider Elgin to Chicago -- it is a greater distance, but way less farm land.

I *sense* things were rearranged after the 2000 census because one cannot exclude Barry County because of those Middleville commuters or Ionia County because of those Saranac commuters.

It's overly simplified, but that's the general basis of definition.

[torgo]

The ONLY way that GR can have ANY significant growth is to annex, which I hope happens in the not so distant future.

Don't get your hopes up on this one. I belive GR tried to annex Wyoming in the 60s and it resulted in major problems of cooperation between the two cities, some of which probably still exist today

[Rizzo]

If you annex, I think there would be an exoudous of Wyoming, Kentwood, Walker, Forest Hills, etc.. folks who don't want to live in Grand Rapids and pay a city income tax. There seems to be an apeal of living in a city while not having to pay income tax, why would they want to start now? Logie I think, is a champion for annexation, I believe he said I would be vital for Grand Rapids.

I don't think annexation will happen until the inner ring more aligns with Grand Rapids culturally and politically. You can't sell annexation to someone that has pride in their individual communities. Each city has its own culture and identity. With annexation, I am sure that thoes residents in the surrounding communities would feel encroached upon.

I guess it would have to be the citizens of thoes cities to join in and share resources in a Metro wide police and fire. The concept of pooling resources and using them properly may benefit the overall community.

With the larger population, the end result could give us considerably more power in most arenas. I wouldn't mind seeing more federal monies, more opertunity to be recognized on a population fact sheet, or a larger tax base.

Forgive me, but I'd like to see Grand Rapids united in bouroughs while leaving each of the communities their own identities while under one government. It would seem to make sense especially when Metro Grand Rapids is growing.

[Picture Michigan]

Forgive me, but I'd like to see Grand Rapids united in bouroughs while leaving each of the communities their own identities while under one government. It would seem to make sense especially when Metro Grand Rapids is growing.

I think this is perfectly plausible and a good idea. Frankly, I think the entire county of Kent could viably become GR. But, you're right about hold-outs. Could you seriously see EGR or Wyoming considering this?

Cripes, look at the uproar that occurred when 49321 (Comstock Park) pawned off half to Belmont. A sense of community pride is tantamount. Perhaps leaving school districs in tact would help in that.

Economically, particularly for fed allocations, this would be an overall plus.

[Rizzo]

What I would like to see is keep thoes communities intact by having school boards over their own districts. District lines would be drawn by the already existant lines for city and townships. People want control over their school system and to be associated with GRPS would not go over to well for thoes parents living in the areas to be annexed.

Maybe we can start a new thread about this and get some ideas rolling?

[blueradon]

I'm gonna have to search in the articles, but I remember reading in Greenville's daily news, something about the state giving regions amounts of money based on their alliance for some type of funding, and Greenville at the last minute got shoved into the GR msa and then got screwed out of getting any money because of it. And all of the opinion sections were bashing the GR MSA for not helping out. I could be wrong but I swear I saw this.

If anyone knows what I'm talking about, please elaborate lol

[GR8scott]

IMO, I was thinking GR shoul start annexing just parts of the surrounding cities, so for example the split neighborhood in the SW GR and north Wyoming Lee area. That area has a lot of hispanics and similar housing, it makes sense to me to have GR annex that. Also further south on Division parts of Kentwood and Wyoming that are older, more urbanized areas. Cities like EGR and Grandvill have an old history and strong sense of community and should not be changed. Also areas like the wyoming panhandle and sprall areas of kentwood should still remain in their cities.

The results would be a larger area and population for GR and downsized suburbs, to better represent the true region. There are not very many cities the population size of GR 190k with suburb cities like wyoming with 70k and kentwood 45k as well as other sizable communities (I can only think of salt lake city)

[Rizzo]

I wonder if people would consider annexation a viable solution to the decreasing funds from revenue sharing?

[allbusiness]

I wonder if people would consider annexation a viable solution to the decreasing funds from revenue sharing?

The days of annexation are essentially over. You may see the occasional act 425 agreement. Townships now have a larger lobby in Lansing than do cities, and the annexation laws make it nearly impossible, unless the township being annexed is willing -- which rarely happens.

[torgo]

I wonder if people would consider annexation a viable solution to the decreasing funds from revenue sharing?

I also wonder if it would even be a good idea from a budgetary standpoint. Most of the land that would be annexed is low-desity residential and one-story strip malls smeared all over the place. Would the taxes actually help the budgetary problems, or would is cost more to fund all that crap (roads, utilities, policing, etc), thereby exacerbating the problem? I would think its the latter.

But I think allbusiness is right. There are several 425 agreements in the area, but annexation is rarely used.

[Rizzo]

I'm wondering not with cities annexing townships, but cities annexing cites.

[allbusiness]

I'm wondering not with cities annexing townships, but cities annexing cites.

I'm not as familiar with the "Home Rule Cities Act" as I should be, but I imagine that IF the voters of each city decided this was a good idea -- and the ego's of all the elected officials could be set aside -- then this would be a possibility. It would probably result in fairly large layoffs, since the economies of scale would be the most attractive part of the equation. That being said, it would be a rare occurance.

[Rizzo]

So if I read that right, there would be large layoffs of city workers?

[MJLO]

I think Grand Rapids missed out on annexation. The state of Michigan Made it all but impossible back in the 20's and 30's. Back then the fear was Detroit would get to powerful, because it was, and had been experiencing explosive growth for decades at that point. Grand Rapids is only 45 square miles, it's got much less land to draw from, when compared to cities of like size. For instance, there has been talk about Des Moines, on here today, Des Moines is 77 sq mi and almost has the exact population that grand rapids has, If you expanded GR to that land size, It could easily be one of the 60 largest cities in the country.

Annexation could never happen at this point. The city of Wyoming for as personality free as it is would never let itself be ceded to Grand Rapids. In fact that's half the reason it was made a city. Two townships banding together to fight annexation from Grand Rapids. Although It would benefit both cities, if they were to merge and collude public services, both cities are having budget problems.

I think that's also a big reason why Michigan has so many cities in that mid 100,000 population range, they all have such a small land area to draw population from. Flint, Lansing, and Ann Arbor If they were to be expanded even a small bit, would appear much larger.

[allbusiness]

So if I read that right, there would be large layoffs of city workers?

Yes. Good clarification. Municipal workers.

Police and fire would see some cutbacks, plus some public works employees, etc., due to economies of scale. Plus yu would close down one city hall building, etc.

Then there's the whole issue of "identity". There's a lot of pride involved...especially in cities like Wyoming, Grandville and Kentwood -- and EGR would probably die first!

[Rizzo]

Well, if annexation is a viable answer to any one problem facing Metro Grand Rapids, the issue will have to be delt with. Just how it can be an answer and how to deal with it is beyond me.