 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / January 2010"Urban cities"?
Heard this on the radio the other day, and Google finds many instances. BUT is there any other kind? Well, maybe St. David's, but other than that...? Perce > Heard this on the radio the other day, and Google finds many instances. > BUT is there any other kind? Well, maybe St. David's, but other than > that...? Obviously "city" has been devalued because people thought "village" or "town" or "wide spot in the road" was somehow deprecating.  SignatureLars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> Warbama's Afghaninam day: 54 1315.0 hours since Warbama declared Viet Nam II. Warbama: An LBJ for the Twenty-First century. No hope. No change. Lars Eighner filted: >> Heard this on the radio the other day, and Google finds many instances. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Obviously "city" has been devalued because people thought "village" or >"town" or "wide spot in the road" was somehow deprecating. Don't know if it's still there, but used to be a sign near where I spent most of the 1970s that read "Silver City Town Limits".... See, in New Mexico, words like "town", "city" and "village" have legal definitions...you can *name* your settlement anything you like, but the category into which it falls (and which determines what goes on the sign) is a statutory matter....r SignatureA pessimist sees the glass as half empty. An optometrist asks whether you see the glass more full like this?...or like this? > Lars Eighner filted: >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > most of > the 1970s that read "Silver City Town Limits".... Don't all cities employ town planners to formulate and oversee the 'town plan'? Or are they known as City planners in some parts? "Fred": > Don't all cities employ town planners to formulate and oversee the > 'town plan'? Certainly not. Why would a city want to me mistaken for a mere town? > Or are they known as City planners in some parts? Yes. Or urban planners. SignatureMark Brader "To err is human, but to really mess things up Toronto you need a timetable planner!" msb@vex.net -- Richard Porter Mark Brader filted: >"Fred": >> Don't all cities employ town planners to formulate and oversee the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Yes. Or urban planners. Or "civic planners"...probably another four or five terms if we look around long enough....r SignatureA pessimist sees the glass as half empty. An optometrist asks whether you see the glass more full like this?...or like this? > "Fred": >> Don't all cities employ town planners to formulate and oversee the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Yes. Or urban planners. http://www.planning.org.nz/Category?Action=View&Category_id=110 >> Heard this on the radio the other day, and Google finds many instances. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Obviously "city" has been devalued because people thought "village" or >"town" or "wide spot in the road" was somehow deprecating. There are dozens of "City of..." in this area that are hardly urban. The term "city" is a legal status based on incorporation as a city. SignatureTony Cooper - Orlando, Florida >>> Heard this on the radio the other day, and Google finds many instances. >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >There are dozens of "City of..." in this area that are hardly urban. >The term "city" is a legal status based on incorporation as a city. In some states "city", "town" and "village" are legally defined, normally as a function of population. In others, there is no distinction. In California an incorporated area may call itself "Town" or "City" as it wishes. There's a kind of fascinating discussion of all this at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City (scroll down to United States). Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * >>>In our last episode, <hjkspm$4gq$1@news.eternal-september.org>, the >>>lovely [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > There's a kind of fascinating discussion of all this at > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City (scroll down to United States). In Massachusetts we have towns and cities, they are legally defined and differ in the type of government. Ray O'Hara filted: >>>There are dozens of "City of..." in this area that are hardly urban. >>>The term "city" is a legal status based on incorporation as a city. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > In Massachusetts we have towns and cities, they are legally defined and >differ in the type of government. I wonder how many of these legal definitions Çatalhöyük could satisfy if it were to come into existence today....r SignatureA pessimist sees the glass as half empty. An optometrist asks whether you see the glass more full like this?...or like this? >> Heard this on the radio the other day, and Google finds many instances. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Obviously "city" has been devalued because people thought "village" or > "town" or "wide spot in the road" was somehow deprecating. Marlborough Mass bills itself as a "County kind of City" >>> Heard this on the radio the other day, and Google finds many instances. >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Marlborough Mass bills itself as a "County kind of City" San Francisco, California, is, by legal definition, "The City and County of San Francisco". When the state was re-organized in the 19th century SF had become so powerful that the state legislature split what was San Francisco County into San Francisco and San Mateo counties, and, to prevent SF from annexing into adjacent counties, defined the county and city to be coterminous. The city and county is so small at only 49 sq mi that it has its main jail in San Mateo County, alogn with a golf course. It's cemetery is alos in San mateo county in the small town of Colma, sometimes called the City of the Dead; its population is about 1200 but has an enormous number of dead people, includint the likes of Wyatt Eartp. There's a web site at http://www.waningmoon.com/gothica/articles/6660009.shtml, it has a small map showing the cemeteries and the small area the population lives in near the top where several streets are shown. Colma alos has a regional shopping mall and an auto row, giving hte tiny population a very large tax base. http://www.sfgov.org/index.asp A number of cities in the US exist outside of any local county, and in Virginia this appears to be true for any conurbation designated "city" by the state. Miami-Dade is a county which merges many of the functions of its individual cities but the cities retain much of their original identity. Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * >>> Heard this on the radio the other day, and Google finds many instances. >>> BUT is there any other kind? Well, maybe St. David's, but other than [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Marlborough Mass bills itself as a "County kind of City" Anyone who mistakes Marlborough for a city... But that just means they have a city council and not a town meeting sort of government, doesn't it? --Jeff SignatureIs man one of God's blunders or is God one of man's? --Friedrich Nietzsche >>> In our last episode, <hjkspm$4gq$1@news.eternal-september.org>, the >>> lovely [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > --Jeff Marlborough is legally a city with a mayor in charge, but you are right it is really a big town in size. {38,000+, if anyone is interested} > Marlborough Mass bills itself as a "County kind of City" I do believe you mean a "country kind of city." The county would be Middlesex but that's beside the point. SignatureBest -- Donna Richoux Donna Richoux filted: >> Marlborough Mass bills itself as a "County kind of City" > >I do believe you mean a "country kind of city." The county would be >Middlesex but that's beside the point. In the movie "The Villain" (aka "Cactus Jack"), Ann-Margret worries when she sees a sign beside the road..."Indian country!"...Arnold Schwarzenegger reassures her that it's actually "Indian County"....r SignatureA pessimist sees the glass as half empty. An optometrist asks whether you see the glass more full like this?...or like this? >Donna Richoux filted: >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >sees a sign beside the road..."Indian country!"...Arnold Schwarzenegger >reassures her that it's actually "Indian County"....r Hey. My wife's in that movie. She was an extra playing a saloon girl. If you ever watch it again, she's in a pink outfit leaning over a table behind Kirk Douglas as he sits at the bar. Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * >> Marlborough Mass bills itself as a "County kind of City" > > I do believe you mean a "country kind of city." The county would be > Middlesex but that's beside the point. oops. letting my Boston accent creep into my writing. ;){just kidding} I do have to watch out for are for our. :-/ > Heard this on the radio the other day, and Google finds many > instances. > > BUT is there any other kind? I live in a city (50,000 population). It is considered to be a suburb. Brian SignatureDay 357 of the "no grouchy usenet posts" project >> Heard this on the radio the other day, and Google finds many >> instances. >> >> BUT is there any other kind? > > I live in a city (50,000 population). It is considered to be a suburb. A suburb of where? If its a suburb of NYC it would make sense. > > > Heard this on the radio the other day, and Google finds many > > > instances. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > A suburb of where? St. Louis. Brian SignatureDay 357 of the "no grouchy usenet posts" project > >> Heard this on the radio the other day, and Google finds many > >> instances. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > A suburb of where? > If its a suburb of NYC it would make sense. I live in the Virginia city* of Alexandria, population c. 125,000, which is often considered a suburb of Washington, DC. There are plenty of rural cities, with populations under 1,000; whether something is a city vs. town in most jurisdictions relates to how an area is incorporated and governed, not what the population is (though there are certainly places like California where there is no legal distinction whatsoever). *Virginia's city and county system is quite different from the majority of the United States; no city in Virginia lies within any county, and vice-versa, and every point in Virginia lies in either a city or county but not both. There are other places in the US that have cities coterminous with a county (e.g. San Francisco) or even cities that include multiple counties (e.g. New York City), but there are only 3 other cities totally independent of any county in other states: Carson City, NV, Baltimore, MD, and St Louis, MO. Given that Baltimore and the (also strange) District of Columbia are the two nearest major cities, many people from Virginia are surprised to find out that having cities located within (or overlapping) counties is normal throughout the rest of the country. > There are plenty of rural cities, with populations under 1,000; > whether something is a city vs. town in most jurisdictions relates to > how an area is incorporated and governed, not what the population is > (though there are certainly places like California where there is no > legal distinction whatsoever). What I've read indicates that "town" isn't a choice in Missouri. You have villages, cities of various classes, and unincorporated areas. From the state "Official Manual"" Missouri statutes classify municipalities on the basis of population and limit the form of government options of each classification. The statutes provide that a community may incorporate as a city of the third class, fourth class or village on the basis of the population at the time of incorporation. Once a community is incorporated under a given classification, the municipality does not automatically change classification with a gain or loss of population. A municipality may change classification only when the change is approved by a majority vote of the people. There are certain forms of government permitted for each classification of municipality. Villages are permitted only one form of governmentan elected board of trustees, five in number if the village has less than 2,500 population and nine if more than 2,500 population. Fourth-class cities are permitted to have either a mayor/board of aldermen form or a mayor/city administrator/aldermen form. The board of aldermen may adopt a city administrator form by ordinance, without a vote of the people. Third-class cities are granted greater flexibility with the authority to establish a mayor/council form, a council/manager form, a commission form or a mayor/city administrator/council form. Finally, constitutional charter cities may adopt any form of government that the people approve in the charter. Brian SignatureDay 357 of the "no grouchy usenet posts" project >> There are plenty of rural cities, with populations under 1,000; >> whether something is a city vs. town in most jurisdictions relates to [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > constitutional charter cities may adopt any form of government that the > people approve in the charter. There are no unincorporated areas in Massachusetts, every square inch is within a town or city. I gather this is not the norm and may even be unique. among the states. [...] > There are no unincorporated areas in Massachusetts, every square inch > is within a town or city. I gather this is not the norm and may even > be unique. among the states. Is it not so that Massachusetts is one of the two entities of the "United States" that is not, in fact, a "State"? SignatureCordially, Eric Walker, Owlcroft House http://owlcroft.com/english/ > [...] > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Is it not so that Massachusetts is one of the two entities of the "United > States" that is not, in fact, a "State"? One of _three_ commonwealths (the other two being Virginia and Kentucky. --Jeff SignatureIs man one of God's blunders or is God one of man's? --Friedrich Nietzsche >One of _three_ commonwealths (the other two being Virginia and Kentucky. Make that *four*: you rememberd Kentucky, which everyone forgets, but forgot Pennsylvania. Recently, we were treated to the spectacle of His Excellency the Governor making his State of the Commonwealth speech before a joint session of the General Court (formerly Great and General Court) of the Commonwealth. I assume such Council members as could bestir themselves were also there, although they have no input in the proceedings. (On Wednesday evening in Washington, while I am on a plane to San Francisco, the Sergeant-at-Arms of the House of Representatives will make several formal introductions; so far as I'm aware, the only special form of address used is "the honorable". One quirk of procedure, for those not familiar with our system of government: nearly everywhere, in both public and private, the President of the United States is addressed as "Mr. President". But when he is giving the State of the Union, he will address his own remarks to "Mr. President" -- because under the rules of the Senate, anyone speaking before the Senate must address his remarks to the President of the Senate, a job held (ex officio) by the Vice President. Among the groups introduced as they enter the house are, as I recall them, "the United States Senate" (who come first), "the Chief Justice of the United States and the Associate Justices of the Supreme Court", "the President's Cabinet", and "the Diplomatic Corps". After the Senate arrives, the President of the Senate ascends to the Speaker's Rostrum and accepts the gavel from the Speaker; the two then appoint, on behalf of their respective bodies, a committee to escort the President into the chamber. It's about a 2.3-mile drive from the White House to the Capitol.) -GAWollman SignatureGarrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft wollman@bimajority.org| repeated, than the story of a large research program Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993 > In article <Ia-dnbfx7YvV9cPWnZ2dnUVZ_uti4...@posted.localnet>, > > >One of _three_ commonwealths (the other two being Virginia and Kentucky. > > Make that *four*: you rememberd Kentucky, which everyone forgets, but > forgot Pennsylvania. It's a fine trivia question, but the above remark that "Is it not so that Massachusetts is one of the two entities of the 'United States' that is not, in fact, a 'State'? " should be answered with "it is not true". All four are, in fact, states under the Constitution; that their state governments opt to name them "commonwealths" internally doesn't change that reality. The Constitution makes no provision for a distinction between "states" and "commonwealths", and the texts (approved by the state itself) ratifying the Constitution in Massachusetts and Virginia (and presumably the others) clearly them as becoming some of the several United States, with no objection to that designation (while still referring to themselves as Commonwealths purely as a matter of internal nomenclature). >>One of _three_ commonwealths (the other two being Virginia and Kentucky. > > Make that *four*: you rememberd Kentucky, which everyone forgets, but > forgot Pennsylvania. . . . Dang. I meant to say three, but was not aware that Kentucky is another. Learn something new every day. And yes, from the federal view they are still "states", but I reckon the distinction might win a bar bet if the amount were not enough to squabble over. SignatureCordially, Eric Walker, Owlcroft House http://owlcroft.com/english/ >>>One of _three_ commonwealths (the other two being Virginia and Kentucky. >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >distinction might win a bar bet if the amount were not enough to squabble >over. Only if you word the bet carefully enough. Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * >> [...] >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > --Jeff The U.S.Constitution does not recognize Commonwealths it only recognizes States,. but commonwealth does appear in many State documents. > There are no unincorporated areas in Massachusetts, every square inch is > within a town or city. > I gather this is not the norm and may even be unique. among the states. It's the norm in New England, where county governments are incredibly weak--consequently, there has to be at least a weak incorporated government to administer even unpopulated rural areas. As Wikipedia says, "Unincorporated regions are essentially non- existent in the six New England states and New Jersey due to the weak or nonexistent county government system." Two more tidbits from that page: "Some American states have no unincorporated land areas; these include New Jersey, Connecticut, and Rhode Island although these states all have communities that are not separately incorporated but are part of a larger municipality..." And: "For example, Hyannis, Massachusetts is an unincorporated village within the town of Barnstable." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unincorporated_area >> There are no unincorporated areas in Massachusetts, every square inch is >> within a town or city. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > weak--consequently, there has to be at least a weak incorporated > government to administer even unpopulated rural areas. True. There isn't any county government out here in Berkshire county except for the Sheriff's office. --Jeff SignatureIs man one of God's blunders or is God one of man's? --Friedrich Nietzsche >>> There are no unincorporated areas in Massachusetts, every square inch is >>> within a town or city. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >True. There isn't any county government out here in Berkshire county >except for the Sheriff's office. Googling for Berkshire County indicates a number of courts; in most states the Superior Courts, or their equivalent, are county functions. Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * >>True. There isn't any county government out here in Berkshire county >>except for the Sheriff's office. > >Googling for Berkshire County indicates a number of courts; in >most states the Superior Courts, or their equivalent, are county >functions. However, in Berkshire County, Massachusetts, neither courts nor sheriffs are county functions. They are merely parts of the state government which, for historical reasons, happen to be organized on county lines. (Berkshire County is one of seven counties that ceased to exist in the 1990s as a follow-on to the insolvency and dissolution of Middlesex County. Counties had the option of abolishing themselves -- as Franklin County in the Pioneer Valley did -- or letting the General Court do it for them, which happened to Middlesex, Suffolk, Worcester, Hampden, and possibly others.) -GAWollman SignatureGarrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft wollman@bimajority.org| repeated, than the story of a large research program Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993 >>>True. There isn't any county government out here in Berkshire county >>>except for the Sheriff's office. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > -GAWollman A few counties still have county administration. My home county Norfolk being one of them but periodically there is a movement to abolish it. My town likes the county as its the county seat and that does bring some business to the town. >I live in a city (50,000 population). It is considered to be a suburb. There is a Town on Long Island (forget the name) which is over a million in population. It contains several Villages (in the specific New York sense) which are in the hundreds of thousands. Meanwhile, I live in a Town of 70,000, which is quite large (in fact, top of the standings,[1] as it were) for a New England town. -GAWollman [1] BrE speakers would say "league tables". And this all assumes that you don't count those towns in Connecticut which are overlaid by cities; otherwise, the towns of Hartford, Bridgeport, and New Haven would be at the top of the list. SignatureGarrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft wollman@bimajority.org| repeated, than the story of a large research program Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993 >>I live in a city (50,000 population). It is considered to be a suburb. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > -GAWollman Framingham ? >>> I live in a city (50,000 population). It is considered to be a suburb. >> There is a Town on Long Island (forget the name) which is over a [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Framingham ? You beat me to it (asking that question). --Jeff SignatureIs man one of God's blunders or is God one of man's? --Friedrich Nietzsche >> Heard this on the radio the other day, and Google finds many >> instances. >> >> BUT is there any other kind? > > I live in a city (50,000 population). It is considered to be a suburb. I live in a town of 200,000, which is definitely not a city. SignatureDavid >>> Heard this on the radio the other day, and Google finds many >>> instances. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > I live in a town of 200,000, which is definitely not a city. What type of municipal government does your town have. Our towns in New England have a Board of Selectmen and a town meeting. Town meetings come in 2 flavors, limited and open, in a limited the members are chosen by the voters in open ones any registered voter can participate. >What type of municipal government does your town have. >Our towns in New England have a Board of Selectmen and a town meeting. Town >meetings come in 2 flavors, limited and open, in a limited the members are >chosen by the voters in open ones any registered voter can participate. Only in Massachusetts and New Hampshire, if I recall correctly. Certainly no such thing exists in Vermont, where even the cities have town meetings.[1] (Unlike in Massachusetts, in Vermont "town meeting" is the name of the meeting, but not a governing body in itself. The governing body of the town is the citizenry as a whole, whose authority is delegated for day-to-day operations to a selectboard. The selectmen must appear before the town meeting annually to justify their budget requests, which are normally voted on by secret ballot.) -GAWollman [1] With one exception, South Burlington -- it has a /sui generis/ charter and doesn't observe any of the standard niceties of Vermont municipal governance. As a result, South Burlington sometimes has to hold three elections a year -- one on Town Meeting Day for various municipal union districts, one in April for the regular city election, and one in November for state offices. All the other towns and cities have one election in odd-numbered years and two in even-numbered years, unless for some reason the voters fail to approve the town or school-district budget on the first round, in which case they have to keep on holding ballots until a budget is proposed that passes. SignatureGarrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft wollman@bimajority.org| repeated, than the story of a large research program Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993 >>>> Heard this on the radio the other day, and Google finds many >>>> instances. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > meetings come in 2 flavors, limited and open, in a limited the members are > chosen by the voters in open ones any registered voter can participate. I'm not sure I understand the question. Warrington is a unitary authority - that is, there is no county/borough hierarchy as there are in many parts of the UK. It has an elected borough council. I think councillors are in post for three years. The powers and responsibilities of local authorities are restricted in the UK - they oversee the running of schools (which are actually run by their board of governors), they organise waste disposal, roads, planning. But they don't have anything to do with police, fire, hospitals, motorways which happen to pass through their area. SignatureDavid >>>>> Heard this on the radio the other day, and Google finds many >>>>> instances. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > in many parts of the UK. It has an elected borough council. I think > councillors are in post for three years. I was very entertained to find that typing "Unitary authority of Warr" into Google is enough for the suggester to offer "unitary authority of warrington cat" as the first option. So the joke (Jasper Fforde originally) has exceeded the source in Googlefame. I like that. SignatureOnline waterways route planner | http://canalplan.eu Plan trips, see photos, check facilities | http://canalplan.org.uk > I was very entertained to find that typing "Unitary authority of Warr" > into Google is enough for the suggester to offer "unitary authority of > warrington cat" as the first option. > > So the joke (Jasper Fforde originally) has exceeded the source in > Googlefame. I like that. The Cat's home is only a couple of miles from my keyboard. SignatureDavid >> "the Omrud"<usenet.omrud@gEXPUNGEmail.com> wrote in message >>> I live in a town of 200,000, which is definitely not a city. >> What type of municipal government does your town have. >I'm not sure I understand the question. Warrington is a unitary >authority - that is, there is no county/borough hierarchy as there are >in many parts of the UK. It has an elected borough council. I think >councillors are in post for three years. To translate that into leftpondian for Ray's benefit: think "Town and County of Nantucket". (It's the only such to exist anywhere in the U.S. -- all the other similar entities are "consolidated *city*-counties".[1] The forms of government applicable to towns in Massachusetts would never scale to a population that large -- it has trouble even in towns of 60,000, which resist reincorporating as a city mainly out of orneriness.) -GAWollman [1] A few of these, like Columbus, Ohio, are made even more confusing by having separately-incorporated enclaves within the otherwise consolidated county. SignatureGarrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft wollman@bimajority.org| repeated, than the story of a large research program Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993 >>> "the Omrud"<usenet.omrud@gEXPUNGEmail.com> wrote in message >>>> I live in a town of 200,000, which is definitely not a city. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > -GAWollman Like Framingham? >>> "the Omrud"<usenet.omrud@gEXPUNGEmail.com> wrote in message >>>> I live in a town of 200,000, which is definitely not a city. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >U.S. -- all the other similar entities are "consolidated >*city*-counties".[1] Well, there is the City and County of San Francisco. The same thing in principle. Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * >>To translate that into leftpondian for Ray's benefit: think "Town and >>County of Nantucket". (It's the only such to exist anywhere in the >>U.S. -- all the other similar entities are "consolidated ^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>*city*-counties".[1] ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >Well, there is the City and County of San Francisco. The same >thing in principle. I think you skipped over an important part. And no, it's not the same thing "in principle", because California doesn't have the status of "town" -- all municipalities are cities. -GAWollman SignatureGarrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft wollman@bimajority.org| repeated, than the story of a large research program Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993 >>>>> Heard this on the radio the other day, and Google finds many >>>>> instances. [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > they don't have anything to do with police, fire, hospitals, motorways > which happen to pass through their area. In the U.S. towns are responsible for their schools, police and fire dept. and local roads. Larger motorways are either state or federal responsibility. It's not uncommon to see a sign saying "State highway ends here" even though the road continues on, it just means the town/city maintains its upkeep from there on. >>>>>> Heard this on the radio the other day, and Google finds many >>>>>> instances. [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > >In the U.S. towns are responsible for their schools, Uh, no. Not towns in many states. In Arizona and California schools are the responsibility of independently elected school boards and the districts don't usually match any town or city boundaries. Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * >>In the U.S. towns are responsible for their schools, > >Uh, no. Not towns in many states. In Arizona and California >schools are the responsibility of independently elected school >boards and the districts don't usually match any town or city >boundaries. In Florida the schools are run by a county school board. SignatureTony Cooper - Orlando, Florida > >>>>> Heard this on the radio the other day, and Google finds many > >>>>> instances. [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > In the U.S. towns are responsible for their schools, police and fire dept. > and local roads. This is very locale-specific. For instance, in Maine a city or some of the larger towns may indeed run their own school departments (or cooperate with neighboring towns/cities to form Community School Districts), but the majority of towns are located within larger School Administrative Districts. SADs are a sub-state level of organization that are funded by the towns within, but they're geographically larger units. Maine's counties (like most of New England's) are pretty vestigial and limited almost strictly to running the Sheriff's department, court, and jails. On the other hand, in Virginia the counties are generally responsible for running the schools, police, and fire departments. In the town of Vienna, for instance, there is a local volunteer fire department that works with Fairfax County Fire & Rescue--but even that department is staffed 24 hours a day by Fairfax County firefighters who manage the local volunteer crew. Likewise, Vienna Elementary School and Oakton high scool in town are run (and funded) by the Fairfax County Public Schools system. That's not just a byproduct of Virginia's odd county/city system, either--when my parents lived in Maryland in the town of Chevy Chase, they were served by the Montgomery County Fire & Rescue service and the Montgomery County Public School system; the town had no such services. On the other hand, Bethesda, MD--which is neither a town nor a city, but is a "census designated place"--is located in Montgomery County yet runs its own fire department (Bethesda is significantly larger than Chevy Chase). It's still served by the Montgomery County school system, though. > In the U.S. towns are responsible for their schools, police and fire > dept. and local roads. As others have noted for their locales, that's not the case in my area for schools. It's also not the case for fire protection. There are number of Fire Protection Districts that often include just parts of cities and portions of unincorporated county. For police, in St. Louis county most municipalities have their own, although some contract with the county for the service. The county polices unincorporated areas. Brian SignatureDay 359 of the "no grouchy usenet posts" project >> In the U.S. towns are responsible for their schools, police and fire >> dept. and local roads. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > county most municipalities have their own, although some contract with > the county for the service. The county polices unincorporated areas. You guys have some odd practices west of the Berkshires. ;-) In Mass smaller towns might get together and form a Regional High School, but many of those have broken up over the last few years. > > > In the U.S. towns are responsible for their schools, police and > > > fire dept. and local roads. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > In Mass smaller towns might get together and form a Regional High > School, but many of those have broken up over the last few years. As years go by, there are fewer unincorporated areas in the county. At one time, a lot of the county was unincorporated, in fact a lot of it farmland. The post-WWII housing boom lead to expansion of the existing cities. Brian SignatureDay 359 of the "no grouchy usenet posts" project >> > > In the U.S. towns are responsible for their schools, police and >> > > fire dept. and local roads. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > farmland. The post-WWII housing boom lead to expansion of the existing > cities. my Sister lived in unincorporated areas in NC {Chowan County} and just outside DC ,{next to Greenbelt} neither horrible remote. > > As years go by, there are fewer unincorporated areas in the county. > > At one time, a lot of the county was unincorporated, in fact a lot [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > my Sister lived in unincorporated areas in NC {Chowan County} and > just outside DC ,{next to Greenbelt} neither horrible remote. There's been a move of late for cities in my area of the county to snap up the remaining unincorporated areas. Often multiple cities vie for the same parcel. The closer you get to St. Louis city, the more incorporated it gets. St. Louis city is not part of the county. Brian SignatureDay 359 of the "no grouchy usenet posts" project >> > As years go by, there are fewer unincorporated areas in the county. >> > At one time, a lot of the county was unincorporated, in fact a lot [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > the same parcel. The closer you get to St. Louis city, the more > incorporated it gets. St. Louis city is not part of the county. It's a grab for taxable lands. Do you pay a county income tax,? My sister paid one in N.C. and I see that there is a spot for that on W2 forms. > > There's been a move of late for cities in my area of the county to > > snap up the remaining unincorporated areas. Often multiple cities > > vie for the same parcel. The closer you get to St. Louis city, the > > more incorporated it gets. St. Louis city is not part of the county. > > It's a grab for taxable lands. Of course. Where I live still had operating farms not too long ago, then there was a move a while back to put up McMansion developments. > Do you pay a county income tax,? No, just property tax. Only the City of St. Louis has a separate earnings tax that I'm aware of. Brian SignatureDay 359 of the "no grouchy usenet posts" project >> > There's been a move of late for cities in my area of the county to >> > snap up the remaining unincorporated areas. Often multiple cities [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Of course. Where I live still had operating farms not too long ago, > then there was a move a while back to put up McMansion developments. The town next to mine passed a law requiring new homes to be on 2 1/2 acres, what they discovered was the open land was used up faster than before. > Heard this on the radio the other day, and Google finds many instances. > > BUT is there any other kind? Well, maybe St. David's, but other than > that...? I've heard of rural cities. I suppose that those are cities that are surrounded by countryside. Hmm, that almost makes sense. It distinguishes them from cities that collide with neighbouring cities without any buffer zone. SignaturePeter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org For an e-mail address, see my web page. > Heard this on the radio the other day, and Google finds many instances. > > BUT is there any other kind? Well, maybe St. David's, but other than > that...? I live four miles outside the *City* of Ritzville, Washington State, pop. 1,750 (and no suburbs). And it's the County seat, though not the largest "City" in the County, which County has a total population of about 16,000. SignatureCordially, Eric Walker, Owlcroft House http://owlcroft.com/english/ |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.