Jump to content

Should Hartford annex surrounding towns?


MadVlad

Recommended Posts

It's absurd to me that West Hartford, Bloomfield, Newington, East Hartford, etc., aren't all part of the City of Hartford. They could still operate like boroughs, with a great deal of autonomy, but the city would be responsible for master planning, as well as police, fire, sanitation, etc. Why have six police and fire chiefs, when there could be one of each? Same goes for the rest of each fiefdom's administrators. Integrating all of the region's students into a single district would obviously benefit Hartford's students. Of course, the suburbanites will allege that it would do so at their expense, but, frankly, a little integration would help their kids as well, rather than growing up in a bubble. Anyway, I like to dream, so I'd be curious to hear thoughts on this proposal.

Just to make it clear, I don't think this is politically feasible--I'm trying to fend off the inevitable "never gonna happen" posts. Yeah, I get that, but what if? If it could happen, would it be a good thing?

It's the same proposal we all have in our minds. It obviously makes more sense than the current setup. However history is against us, and in New England that's too much to overcome. At least for now. Maybe when our generation gets older we'll take another look at it.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 49
  • Created
  • Last Reply

It's absurd to me that West Hartford, Bloomfield, Newington, East Hartford, etc., aren't all part of the City of Hartford. They could still operate like boroughs, with a great deal of autonomy, but the city would be responsible for master planning, as well as police, fire, sanitation, etc. Why have six police and fire chiefs, when there could be one of each? Same goes for the rest of each fiefdom's administrators. Integrating all of the region's students into a single district would obviously benefit Hartford's students. Of course, the suburbanites will allege that it would do so at their expense, but, frankly, a little integration would help their kids as well, rather than growing up in a bubble. Anyway, I like to dream, so I'd be curious to hear thoughts on this proposal.

Just to make it clear, I don't think this is politically feasible--I'm trying to fend off the inevitable "never gonna happen" posts. Yeah, I get that, but what if? If it could happen, would it be a good thing?

You're preaching to the choir, brother, we've brought this up before and the argument against was "it'll reduce Hartford's density", like anyone really cares about that stat....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's absurd to me that West Hartford, Bloomfield, Newington, East Hartford, etc., aren't all part of the City of Hartford. They could still operate like boroughs, with a great deal of autonomy, but the city would be responsible for master planning, as well as police, fire, sanitation, etc. Why have six police and fire chiefs, when there could be one of each? Same goes for the rest of each fiefdom's administrators. Integrating all of the region's students into a single district would obviously benefit Hartford's students. Of course, the suburbanites will allege that it would do so at their expense, but, frankly, a little integration would help their kids as well, rather than growing up in a bubble. Anyway, I like to dream, so I'd be curious to hear thoughts on this proposal.

Just to make it clear, I don't think this is politically feasible--I'm trying to fend off the inevitable "never gonna happen" posts. Yeah, I get that, but what if? If it could happen, would it be a good thing?

Whaler0718:

Now, I have to say a few things AGAINST annexation and a few things FOR annexation. My feeling is indifference, but you need to get away from New England and look at how other 'LOCAL' government works.

AGAINST:

1) The make up of the town government - should the council have 27 seats (lets say WH, Hartford and EH merged) - or what? How would the district be set? I know for a fact the southeastern part of East Hartford (where I grew up!) would not want to lumped in a district with Mayberry Village and/or the Hockanum area. (Southeastern EH is mostly single family homes in the 250-350K range while Mayberry Hockanum Village is where apartments renters are. Southeastern EH is the area of EH where Republicans are the strongest.)

2) If the annexation were to happen, what would the town employers wages be? Also who would be the chief -- the person from Hartford?

3) Schools -- East Hartford's schools isn't the best, but how will the schools issue be handled? Neighborhood schools or busing?

4) Local issues -- if you have a problem, you can call up a town employee - or chat with him at the local food store (I did many times with Tim Larson at Shop-Rite). Now, what would happen without the local feeling. (Here in Tampa, 4 areas are trying to vote to become incorporated as cities. They don't have control over the land and they want to stop development from ruining their areas.)

For:

1) It would help make Hartford more richer. I mean, WH's Avon Mountain has some 1 million dollars homes, so I guess Hartford wouldn't be the poorest city.

2) It would help Hartford become a city with a more diverse community. Of course, EH is about 50% non-white (blacks and Asians), but Hartford would still be more diverse.

3) Issues could be resolved quicker. I think Hartford would help WH and EH by keeping taxes low. I think Hartford would try to keep WH and EH residents happy.

I doubt you'll see wethersfield or Windsor join, since they are OLDER then the city. I still think you won't see annexation, because people like home rule.

JimS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't think that annexation would solve the fundamental problems of Hartford. What Connecticut as a whole requires is to have a more powerful state government and less powerful municipal governments. As things stand at the moment cities and towns compete with each other for investment and often set goals that are good for a particular town, but detrimental to the region as a whole. I am thinking specifically of towns like Windsor that entice insurance companies to build on existing farmland, meanwhile adding traffic (and pollution) to the region as a whole.

Towns in Connecticut seem to be very shortsighted in the way they plan for the future. Many towns actively encourage sprawl simply because it adds to their coffers. Also, having education and other municipal services run by town governments seems to be innefficient and creates a great deal of inequality.

My proposal would be to have municipal districts that would cooperate for the benefit of an entire region. For instance a Greater Hartford Regional District, Greater New Haven, Greater Waterbury, etc. The goal needs to be to have people who live in suburbs see how making cities better improves their livability as a whole. For instance, light rail could become a reality in such a scenario or even highspeed trains since the region as a whole would have a say, not just individual towns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never cease to be amazed that little ring towns in New England don't want to have a voting interest in the cities that drive their respective regional economies. Incredibly small-minded and short-sighted, if you ask me.

Exactly. West Hartford wouldn't even exist if Hartford wasn't there. Glastonbury would have 3 farmers living there if Hartford didn't exist. They think they can let Hartford go to pot and it won't affect them. Well, the whole reason the area is anything is due to Hartford, they should have a crucial interest in it's well-being, yet they don't.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I really don't think that annexation would solve the fundamental problems of Hartford. What Connecticut as a whole requires is to have a more powerful state government and less powerful municipal governments. As things stand at the moment cities and towns compete with each other for investment and often set goals that are good for a particular town, but detrimental to the region as a whole. I am thinking specifically of towns like Windsor that entice insurance companies to build on existing farmland, meanwhile adding traffic (and pollution) to the region as a whole.

Towns in Connecticut seem to be very shortsighted in the way they plan for the future. Many towns actively encourage sprawl simply because it adds to their coffers. Also, having education and other municipal services run by town governments seems to be innefficient and creates a great deal of inequality.

My proposal would be to have municipal districts that would cooperate for the benefit of an entire region. For instance a Greater Hartford Regional District, Greater New Haven, Greater Waterbury, etc. The goal needs to be to have people who live in suburbs see how making cities better improves their livability as a whole. For instance, light rail could become a reality in such a scenario or even highspeed trains since the region as a whole would have a say, not just individual towns.

Sorry to be belatedly drawn back to this thread, but I totally agree with your proposal. Meanwhile the state has completely done away with its counties, which now serve as nothing more than geographic areas for the purposes of weather reports! (As far as I can tell at least). We should have some form of regional cooperation and strategic planning at a minimum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A good example for this is what Avon is doing. They are planning smart growth. As it stands now, towns like Farmington, West Hartford, Rocky Hill, Windsor, and Bloomfield are trying to lure the business' out of Hartford to boost their tax base. Of course all you hear from people is how the towns are changing for the worse, a field used to be there, now it's a condo complex etc. If these towns were annexed, they wouldn't have to worry that a large Office Park or strip mall were to pop up, it would have nothing to do with the tax base, which it would now share with Hartford. They could have their suburban/semi-rural town and not have to build on that open land, thereby "ruining" it, they could just direct it to Hartford with confidence....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A good example for this is what Avon is doing. They are planning smart growth. As it stands now, towns like Farmington, West Hartford, Rocky Hill, Windsor, and Bloomfield are trying to lure the business' out of Hartford to boost their tax base. Of course all you hear from people is how the towns are changing for the worse, a field used to be there, now it's a condo complex etc. If these towns were annexed, they wouldn't have to worry that a large Office Park or strip mall were to pop up, it would have nothing to do with the tax base, which it would now share with Hartford. They could have their suburban/semi-rural town and not have to build on that open land, thereby "ruining" it, they could just direct it to Hartford with confidence....

They wouldn't want to bear the burden of Hartford's troubles, but people forget that 1/2 of the city's budget is footed by the state already. Moreover, the region would benefit from a stronger Hartford, and it concomittanly hurts when Hartford struggles. From crime to the economy, it's silly to think that the surrounding communities are completely insulated from the city of Hartford. The biggest issue of all, in the end though, would have to be schools. How do you convince somebody who moved to West Hartford for the school system that it's a good thing to have a unified school system that includes Hartford's schools? Maybe the answer is, at first, not to combine districts. I know, as an example, that the "Park Cities," University and Highland Park, Texas, are technically part of Dallas--Dallas police and fire, Dallas post office, public libraries, taxes, Dallas address, etc., but it's school system is the Highland Park Independent School District. How they've fashioned this hybrid, I'm not sure. And, it's a bit elitist, protectionist, and some might say racist. (I really think that Hartford's suburbs would do well to expose their children to folks of different stripes and actually achieve some level of integration.) Nonetheless, it seems to go some way toward regionalism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They wouldn't want to bear the burden of Hartford's troubles, but people forget that 1/2 of the city's budget is footed by the state already. Moreover, the region would benefit from a stronger Hartford, and it concomittanly hurts when Hartford struggles. From crime to the economy, it's silly to think that the surrounding communities are completely insulated from the city of Hartford. The biggest issue of all, in the end though, would have to be schools. How do you convince somebody who moved to West Hartford for the school system that it's a good thing to have a unified school system that includes Hartford's schools? Maybe the answer is, at first, not to combine districts. I know, as an example, that the "Park Cities," University and Highland Park, Texas, are technically part of Dallas--Dallas police and fire, Dallas post office, public libraries, taxes, Dallas address, etc., but it's school system is the Highland Park Independent School District. How they've fashioned this hybrid, I'm not sure. And, it's a bit elitist, protectionist, and some might say racist. (I really think that Hartford's suburbs would do well to expose their children to folks of different stripes and actually achieve some level of integration.) Nonetheless, it seems to go some way toward regionalism.

And I am wrong. Somebody told me this about the Park Cities, but they are, in fact, entirely separate from Dallas, though surrounded by it, because they resisted annexation. Jackasses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just came across this article. Apparently there is an effort underway by citizens of Fulton County, Georgia--where Atlanta is located--to break off and form a separate county. The suburbs--which, under the proposal, would form Milton County--are largely wealthy and Caucasion. What would remain as Fulton County is largely poor and African American.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070123/ap_on_...s/atlanta_split

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just came across this article. Apparently there is an effort underway by citizens of Fulton County, Georgia--where Atlanta is located--to break off and form a separate county. The suburbs--which, under the proposal, would form Milton County--are largely wealthy and Caucasion. What would remain as Fulton County is largely poor and African American.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070123/ap_on_...s/atlanta_split

As a former resident, I say let them leave if they want to leave. Fulton will be fine. That's where all of the industry, entertainment, educational institutions, ect. are located. Fulton will be fine without them IMO. A good deal of the wealthiest blacks in the nation also live in Fulton County so while there is a good deal of poverty there will still be great wealth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...

Sorry for dragging up an old thread, but I was thinking about annexation today. I fully understand why West Hartford wouldn't want anything to do with Hartford, and I have to say, that if I lived there, I would like things just the way they are too. But what about East Hartford. Aside from some of its far suburbs, East Hartford is, socio-economically, more similar to Hartford than most of the adjoining suburbs. I know the concern is always over the school districts, but they can stay separate if need be. Here is a list of some of the pros for both towns.

1. Right now, East Hartford is a town with many of the same downsides as Hartford, but without many of the upsides. I have to think it would help development in East Hartford if it could market itself, especially the riverfront area, as part of the central business district.

2. Eliminate redundancies in city services. East Hartford benefits from all the state money Hartford gets, Hartford benefits from expanded tax base.

3. Improved transportation connections across the river.

4. Retschler Field becomes more of a draw for events and developments by being in the main city.

These are just a few ideas off the top of my head, but if I lived in East Hartford, I would be all for joining with Hartford. I really think that the two cities would complement each other's strengths quite well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with your idea and have thought the same about East Hartford.

It would be very hard to talk any new england community steeped in history into giving up its independance. I would suspect that school systems would have be kept seperate and a Bourough type government system could be developed. Simular to NYC and Toronto.

Fire, police, sewage, transportation, and water could all be combined for signifigant cost savings.

I honestly think using a stronger county type of government would be more beneficial but adding Hartford and W hartfod would be a fine step in my opinion.

The benefits mainly are an ability to fund larger projects, and cary a larger debt load at lower rates.

I am not totally sure at what point the benefits would be enough to make it conciderable as an option.

We look at things like a combined population of ~174,000 and that certainly looks nice. doubling the land area to 35.3 square miles also looks nice.

Hartfords city budget is 511,781,440.00

East Hartford adds 149,230,350.00

Per capita East Hartford falls short of Hartford proper. So I agree that East hartford might be interested, but would hartford actually want to help support the services in East hartford? Would the savings brought on my merging social services make up the gap?

will the development going into Rentschler make up the difference?

too many questions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know it's a compex idea, and I'm not going to do it justice at the moment since I'm at work, but here goes.....

CT allows for municipalities within municipalities, the way that the City of Groton is a unit within the Town of Groton. What if we created a new City of Hartford, combining Hartford, W Hartford, E Hartford, Bloomfield, Windsor, Newington, and Wethersfield and kept all of the municipal governments intact? They can choose which services they would like to share and hire a City Manager or CEO. The entire unit could be governed by a board made up of the Mayors of the city and towns. It's needs to be developed a little more, but it's the basis to the only idea I see that could even dream to provide many of the benefits of annexation to our region. Nothing would change in most people's daily lives, except they now live in a large and higher profile city. I would also guess that such a move that would bring our population to about 360,000 and could potentially allow us to incorporate more territory into our MSA, depending on the numbers of commuters to these towns from the Springfield area. Insead of being the smaller city with the bigger metro to the south, we would now the the large city with the large metro to the south.

I'm sure there would also be discussion of simply choosing a new name altogether for the newly combined city. I obviously would want to stick with Hartford, but would be satisfied with a good new name if the governmental change could be accomplished. In that case Hartford simply becomes the equivalent of Manhattan and I'm cool with that. In the beginning you can go slow and little by little more integration of the municpalities could occur.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A new city likely wouldn't work for anyone. But the concept is there. The better way to look at this is to think of other North East cities that have distinct "towns" within their incorporated city.

New York is an obvious example.

There are 5 boroughs. Each borough is a distinct legal entity much like a county in fact each borough is also a county. Within these boroughs there are additional distinct legal entities. I am not familiar with their structure, but I would assume they are much like towns. In NY vernacular they are neighborhoods. Like Astoria Queens.

I am not suggesting the City of Hartford annex other counties, but I think the city of Hartford should include MOST of Hartford County. Each town would change legal designation from town into Neighborhood. Hartford City would become Hartford CBD and have the same status as the other neighborhoods.

Obviously it would likely take great negotiation as to how this phase in would take place, and it would be on a town by town basis.

The legal fees would be crazy! :)

A possible first step would be a Hartford tax district that would include areas of Tolland and Middlesex counties in an effort to begin covering the cost of some services at a unified level. The key thing from my thinking is finding a way to help Hartford support its infrastructure while having the resources to lure more jobs to the area. Some of this burden should be on the suburbanites.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A new city likely wouldn't work for anyone. But the concept is there. The better way to look at this is to think of other North East cities that have distinct "towns" within their incorporated city.

New York is an obvious example.

There are 5 boroughs. Each borough is a distinct legal entity much like a county in fact each borough is also a county. Within these boroughs there are additional distinct legal entities. I am not familiar with their structure, but I would assume they are much like towns. In NY vernacular they are neighborhoods. Like Astoria Queens.

I am not suggesting the City of Hartford annex other counties, but I think the city of Hartford should include MOST of Hartford County. Each town would change legal designation from town into Neighborhood. Hartford City would become Hartford CBD and have the same status as the other neighborhoods.

Obviously it would likely take great negotiation as to how this phase in would take place, and it would be on a town by town basis.

The legal fees would be crazy! :)

A possible first step would be a Hartford tax district that would include areas of Tolland and Middlesex counties in an effort to begin covering the cost of some services at a unified level. The key thing from my thinking is finding a way to help Hartford support its infrastructure while having the resources to lure more jobs to the area. Some of this burden should be on the suburbanites.

I think the largest obstacle would be convincing people to let their town become a neighborhood. I don't even think it would go over very well in Hartford. That's why my suggestion was to let the towns and cities remain as is and form a new city around them. It's a crazy concept, but not unheard of in CT. See Groton as an example. The city was incorporated to be a seperate entity than the town, but about 100 yrs later was reintergrated with it. Similar to what was done with Willimantic and Windham, except in Windham there are no city departments for Willimantic remaining. I think that's the only way it could even be seriously discussed in this area.

City of Groton

Town of Groton

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

Tom Condon goes there regarding annexation and I completely agree with him. Since local control of schools is such a big deal we could keep the town school districts separate, at least at first and keep local town and city councils and mayors for now. The current city of Hartford could be devolved into a town or towns or be a city within a city and a component of a larger metro city government. We need to create a consolidated police force and economic development office and have a metro CEO and metro council. Maybe we could have the current city and town councils appoint members to the metro council so nothing really changes at the local electoral political level. This is something that obviously can be done but in CT I don't see it ever happening no matter how much sense it makes or how much it would improve things.

Hartford Courant

It is interesting to speculate that creating a single city out of the eight members of the Metropolitan District Commission would produce a population of nearly 375,000, competitive with the likes of Miami, St. Louis, Cincinnatti, Raleigh and Minneapolis. That's not the league we play in now. Perhaps we could get a big-league sports team, such as the Jacksonville Jaguars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.