There is also the issue of whether joining Boston would actually be good for any of these neighborhoods. For instance, would Roxbury be in as terrible shape as it is if it had stayed independent? I doubt it, it would probably be as bad as Chelsea or Lynn, but Boston's governance likely did far more harm than good. Same with All/Bright. It would likely be a twin of Brookline or Newton today if not for annexation, Watertown at the worst. I'm not saying All/Bright is as "bad" as Roxbury, but it is similar in that city hall tends to not care about the constituents due to the perceived transient nature of the community (something that likely would not have happened if Brighton stayed independent, Brookline has a ton of students but its not a "student ghetto", their ISD actually does it's job).
Say what you will about Brookline, but they get things done. Last week I watched a car take out a sign post at Coolidge Corner and then drive away. Two cop cars were chasing it down in less then a minute, and within five there were two DPW trucks on site installing a new sign. I watched the same thing happen at Comm and Harvard a few years back with a traffic light, and it didn't get replaced for over a year when they repaved the street. And the crushed light was laying there for days, likely stolen by someone eventually.
The other nice thing about having smaller cities clustered together vs one metropolis is that each city is free to try things that would be otherwise impossible to roll out in a large city. Local laws can also be changed to cater to the populous far more effectively than at a neighborhood level. Particularly tax rates; using Brookline as an example again, I don't think their level of services could be supported under Boston's tax structure. No one in the rest of the expanded city would think it is fair they get so much money, but it's also not fair to strip away what makes Brookline unique (its wealth and lushness) just to make a more cohesive Boston. I mean, that's why they resisted annexation in the first place anyway, isn't it? I will say from personal experience as well, opening/operating a business (particularly in food) is worlds easier in Brookline than Boston.
I do think that inside 128 needs a secondary layer of government for things that effect the metro region, but just making the city bigger is not the solution. Transit advocacy for the subway vs commuter rail, taxis, emergency services, cross border coordination of projects like bike paths, etc. It should be voluntary to join, and structured as a council (each city gets a rep, or maybe a few based on population. Belmont shouldn't have the same say as Boston after all). Each member city/town pays X% of money into it and in exchange unloads duplicate services off of the books and gets a powerful voice at the statehouse for regional issues. Even if only Boston, Cambridge and Somerville joined it would be a powerful influence.
I do think the provincial nature of the individual cities helps to drive Boston's uniqueness, and that's a good thing. Don't forget, many people live in one city and work in another, not to mention buying things all over the place. So the taxes do get spread around pretty organically anyway.
Say what you will about Brookline, but they get things done. Last week I watched a car take out a sign post at Coolidge Corner and then drive away. Two cop cars were chasing it down in less then a minute, and within five there were two DPW trucks on site installing a new sign. I watched the same thing happen at Comm and Harvard a few years back with a traffic light, and it didn't get replaced for over a year when they repaved the street. And the crushed light was laying there for days, likely stolen by someone eventually.
The other nice thing about having smaller cities clustered together vs one metropolis is that each city is free to try things that would be otherwise impossible to roll out in a large city. Local laws can also be changed to cater to the populous far more effectively than at a neighborhood level. Particularly tax rates; using Brookline as an example again, I don't think their level of services could be supported under Boston's tax structure. No one in the rest of the expanded city would think it is fair they get so much money, but it's also not fair to strip away what makes Brookline unique (its wealth and lushness) just to make a more cohesive Boston. I mean, that's why they resisted annexation in the first place anyway, isn't it? I will say from personal experience as well, opening/operating a business (particularly in food) is worlds easier in Brookline than Boston.
I do think that inside 128 needs a secondary layer of government for things that effect the metro region, but just making the city bigger is not the solution. Transit advocacy for the subway vs commuter rail, taxis, emergency services, cross border coordination of projects like bike paths, etc. It should be voluntary to join, and structured as a council (each city gets a rep, or maybe a few based on population. Belmont shouldn't have the same say as Boston after all). Each member city/town pays X% of money into it and in exchange unloads duplicate services off of the books and gets a powerful voice at the statehouse for regional issues. Even if only Boston, Cambridge and Somerville joined it would be a powerful influence.
I do think the provincial nature of the individual cities helps to drive Boston's uniqueness, and that's a good thing. Don't forget, many people live in one city and work in another, not to mention buying things all over the place. So the taxes do get spread around pretty organically anyway.
