Wordsmith.org
Posted By: dxb Megalopolis? Not always. - 05/12/03 03:16 PM
"A little one-eyed blinking sort o' place" ~ Thomas Hardy

Reading a report today brought a question to mind. Can anyone explain what makes a city in the United States? Quite small communities, Nevada City for example, seem able to call themselves cities. Is there any generally accepted definition, like in the UK, or is it a free for all?

Posted By: Faldage Re: Megalopolis? Not always. - 05/12/03 03:37 PM
That it has the word city in its name does not necessarily make it a city.

Here's a couple of sites that seem to indicate that the legal definition of city in the US is a little hazy.

http://mage.geog.macalester.edu/apgeogdemo/acity.html

http://www.gweep.net/~sfoskett/mqp/mqp_fin2.html#ToC10

It's probably the case that different states and maybe even different counties have different definitions for city.

Posted By: of troy Re: Megalopolis? Not always. - 05/12/03 05:27 PM
Most definately, States control the standard for cities.. Cities are incorporated entities, and in NYS, Cities have to have fire departments. (full fledge ones, not vollunteer ones) --which is why Long Island with a very high population density, has almost no cities... only towns, and villiages. (Glen Cove is only city on in Nassau county, and it was incorporated in the 1800's, when Glen Cove was a thriving city that manufactured starch (and sold it to the NYC market for the most part.)

there are other requirements, like population, and schools--City don't get to use (or pay a premium to use) county service (like what in NY is called BOCS) --county based school services for special education, GED programs, afterschool programs, etc. like city based fire and police, the cost of mantaining all the state and federaly based programs can be expensive. (federal law requires local schools to have a program suited to meet the needs of every student--one severly handicapped student can be very expensive)

Posted By: Father Steve Towns and Cities - 05/12/03 06:27 PM
In Washington State (way out here on the Left Coast) state law defines First Class cities as having 10,000 or more residents, Second Class Cities as having 1500 or more residents, and Towns as having less than 1500 residents, at the time of their incorporation. Thus, it would be possible for a town to be organized as a town, grow to a million residents, and remain, under state law, a town. Likewise, it would be possible for a city to become a first-class city by showing that it had more than 10,000 residents at the time of its incorpation but, through some unfortunate means, lose most of its population, and yet remain a first-class city of 100 people.

There are certain words which pertain only to towns, in Washington law. For example, the chief law enforcement officer of a town is a "marshall" which cities have chiefs of police. Calling the top cop "town marshall" has the ring of the Old West to it and, indeed, these laws were written when Washington was part of the Old West.




Posted By: Bobyoungbalt Re: Megalopolis? Not always. - 05/13/03 02:24 AM
Helen is correct; the definition of a city is controlled by the states.

In Maryland, as in NY, a city is an incorporated area. If I mistake not, the only cities in Maryland are Baltimore and Cumberland.

This makes for some strange situations. One of the newest and largest urban areas is Columbia, a planned city which is not a city; in fact, it's not even a town. Columbia is located at the junction of 4 different counties and is, legally, merely a collection of housing tracts located in each of the 4 counties. In many parts of it, people on one side of the street pay different taxes, have different representatives in the state legislature and U.S. Congress, and have different police and fire depts. than their neighbors on the other side of the street.

Then there is Baltimore (the City of), which is not located in any county; it's a separate subdivision of the state all by itself. There is a Baltimore County, but the City of Baltimore is not part of it. It has its own governmental setup, taxes, etc. which counties have.

Posted By: Bingley Re: Megalopolis? Not always. - 05/13/03 02:36 AM
So, if one fire dept. was fighting a fire which spread into another's territory (e.g. by leaping from one side of the street to the other), would they refuse to fight the portion of the fire outside their own territory?

Bingley
Posted By: slithy toves Re: Megalopolis? Not always. - 05/13/03 03:05 AM
It's a real mish-mash here in Florida. County governments have more structure than in most states. Some counties have combined city and county fire departments, but not consistently. City limits bear no relationship to growth patterns, so you can be on a street in an urban area and find yourself entering or leaving a city in the middle of a block. There are no city schools, only county. Law enforcement is separate. Each city has a police department, and in addition the counties each have a sheriff's department. Not to mention state troopers, who can be found just about anywhere on the major highways. I've always felt that this system was confusing and wasteful. And city residents must pay both city and county taxes, which seems less than fair. Two of the largest cities have incorporated their entire counties: The city of Jacksonville encompasses all of Duval County, and Miami is officially known as Miami-Dade, since it includes all of Dade County. Sometimes it's a challenge to figure out who's in charge.

Posted By: tsuwm Re: Megalopolis? Not always. - 05/13/03 03:34 AM
>Sometimes it's a challenge to figure out who's in charge.

ah, so the 2000 election was just an extension of this. <g>

Posted By: Jackie the 2000 election - 05/13/03 12:59 PM
Oooh--right to the heart! [ouch]

Posted By: of troy Re: Megalopolis? Not always. - 05/13/03 01:22 PM
Re:So, if one fire dept. was fighting a fire which spread into another's territory (e.g. by leaping from one side of the street to the other), would they refuse to fight the portion of the fire outside their own territory?

in theroy yes, but in actuality, no. NYC fire department has responded to disasters in Suffolk county ( eastern end of long island, more than 50 miles distant from east edge of NYC's eastern most border in queens.--plane crashes come to mind)
and when the World Trade center was bombed in '93, those same firedepartments "took over" responsibilty for parts of queens, while the queens firefighters headed into manhattan.

with the destruction of WTC, firemen were paid (on duty) from NYC, many towns in NJ, and Westchester. later, many firemen vollunteered, and NYC was filled with firemen from all over US (and world, we had English, french, and Canadians, and lots of other firefighters. )

likewise, when SF had that bad earthquake, NYC fire fighters were offered (and took) paid leave to go to california, and work.. (so they didn't use vaction time)
there might be formal reciprial agreements, in some places, but here, in NY the things seem to be worked out with fire chiefs, and handshakes.

Posted By: dxb Re: Megalopolis? Not always. - 05/13/03 02:10 PM
Is there any generally accepted definition … or is it a free for all?

I think I can see to which end of the scale it is tending! (Carefully handling the preposition).

Thank you all for the information. There are some surprises there, particularly in the Washington State situation, but I guess historical reasons prevail as they do over here. In general I think the decisions seem to be based on much the same guidelines as here – where at one time you needed a cathedral to be a city, but that changed some time back. In case anyone is interested this link includes the factors involved in making a new city in the UK.

http://www.lcd.gov.uk/constitution/city/cityhome.htm


Posted By: Capfka Re: Megalopolis? Not always. - 05/13/03 06:19 PM
Interestingly enough, Northampton, which has 200,000 people, was refused city status recently. No cathedral. So it remains a borough, the largest, I believe, in Britain. Well, since people from Northampton typically look down on those of us living in Wellingborough as being the country hick cousin types, do I care?

Posted By: TEd Remington Re: Megalopolis? Not always. - 05/14/03 01:00 AM
In the Commonwealth of Virginia, there are a bunch of cities, all of which have one hting in common -- they have received a charter from the State, the consitutiton of which gives the legislature the authority to charter or incorporate a city.

There cities are entirely independent of and not a part of counties. Alexandria, in northern Virginia, is an independent city, while Arlington, the area to the north of it and just as urbanized, is organized as a county.

Right in the middle of Fairfax County is the City of Fairfax, which was incorporated back towards the middle of the last century, somewhere around 1972 or perhaps a bit earlier.

Here in Colorado cities are often superimposed upon counties. In fact Aurora, the city in which I reside, has parts in three different counties, Arapahoe, Adams, and Douglas. Denver, though, is legally entitled the City and County of Denver.

In the US, in the final analysis, a city is what the individual state says it is.

I was interested in the NY definition about the fire department being part of what a city has to have.



Posted By: Buffalo Shrdlu Re: Megalopolis? Not always. - 05/14/03 02:04 AM
back towards the middle of the last century, somewhere around 1972 or perhaps a bit earlier. emphasis added

ok, this one tripped me out.

Posted By: Father Steve Who lives in cities? - 05/14/03 02:46 AM
No one has yet mentioned the important linguistic connection between "city" and "citizen" but I am fairly certain that such a connection exists. Does it mean that townies are not citizens? In a sense, I suppose it does.

Posted By: Bean Re: Who lives in cities? - 05/14/03 10:43 AM
Does it mean that townies are not citizens?

In Newfoundland, townies are residents of the city of St. John's. Go figure. And anyone else is from around the bay.

Posted By: Faldage Re: Who lives in cities? - 05/14/03 10:47 AM
In college towns (whether or not they are cities) townies are year round residents as opposed to college students.

Posted By: dxb Re: Who lives in cities? - 05/14/03 11:06 AM
Spurred on by Father Steve:

These two definitions come from the Online Etymology Dictionary:

citizen - c.1314, from Anglo-Fr. citezein (spelling alt. by infl. of denizen), from O.Fr. citeain, from cite (see city), replacing O.E. burhsittend and ceasterware. Sense of "inhabitant of a country" is 1380s.

I wonder what brought about the sense of "inhabitant of a country"? That is not explained here. It is also interesting that the 'z' came into English from the French, not from the American!

For what it's worth, here is the entry for 'city':

city - c.1225, from O.Fr. cite, in medieval usage a cathedral town, but orig. meaning any settlement, regardless of size (distinction from town is 14c., though in Eng. it always seems to have ranked above borough), from earlier citet, from L. civitatem (nom. civitas) orig. "citizenship, community of citizens," from civis "townsman," from PIE base *kei- "to lie, homestead." The L. word for "city" was urbs, but a resident was civis. Civitas seems to have replaced urbs as Rome (the ultimate urbs) lost its prestige. City hall first recorded 1675; city slicker first recorded 1924 (see slick); both Amer.Eng. Inner city first attested 1968.






Posted By: of troy Re: Who lives in cities? - 05/14/03 12:23 PM
OK, so where does -polis meaning city come from? is it greek? (neopolis=naples=new city) supposedly started by greeks after the trojian war--) but hoi poli--the common people would hint that poli /polis are related --and perhaps related to population?

i'll go look it up after i have read all the other posts..

Posted By: Bingley Re: Who lives in cities? - 05/14/03 02:05 PM
1/2 right, of troy. Polis is the Greek for city. Apart from its use in place names, we also have to thank this root for politics etc. Hoi polloi is Greek for the (hoi) many (polloi). Polloi is the masculine plural of the adjective from which we get our prefix poly meaning many (polygamy, polyandry etc.)As far as I know there's no connection between polis and the poly adjective.

Populus on the other hand comes from the Latin for people (in the political sense). Hence SPQR Senatus Populusque Romanus (the Roman Senate and People).

Bingley
© Wordsmith.org