“I LIKE MY TOWN THE WAY IT IS”

Plenty of people tell me I’m wasting my time talking about merging Hartford and several surrounding towns.   They say it will never happen.

When I ask them why not, some give me reasons why merging is a bad idea, but it’s pretty easy to show them that it’s actually a good idea.  We derive very little benefit keeping Hartford and seven or ten towns separate, and together we could accomplish some great things that are practically impossible separate.

Ultimately, I’m told that people just “like their town the way it is.”  Of course, the “people” they are talking about are the people who live in towns like West Hartford, Wethersfield, Newington, Windsor, South Windsor.

What does it mean to say “I like my town the way it is”?  What does “the way it is” actually mean?

In a nice town, there are a lot of things one might mean:  I like my town because the taxes are under control, or because the schools are good, or because there’s not a lot of industrial activity.

I’d ask you to consider another possibility.  Consider that in fact, people like their town the way it is because it’s segregated.  That may sound like an outrageous statement, but I’d ask you just to consider whether that isn’t the practical effect of what they mean.

First, let’s understand what “segregated” means.  It means set apart, isolated, or divided.  People can be divided in a variety of ways:  randomly or by wealth or by educational level or by race.  When we’re talking about greater Hartford, it’s clear that we’re not separated randomly.  We’re separated politically, by the boundaries between the towns.  We have separate places we call Hartford, Windsor, etc.  We are separated by wealth – we all understand pretty well where we can find wealthy people and where we can find poor people.  And we’re certainly separated by race.  We know where the white people live and where to find the Blacks.  So, let’s first agree that greater Hartford is segregated.

Second, let’s recognize the substantial overlap of our political separation and our racial and wealth separation.   That is, let’s recognize that to a very great extent, our white population and our wealthy population live in certain towns, and to a very great extent our non-white population and our poor population live in certain other towns.  It’s undeniable.  In other words, by definition, greater Hartford is segregated by race and by wealth, and that segregation largely follows town lines.

Let’s stop there.  No guilt.  I’m just stating the obvious:  Greater Hartford is segregated by race and by wealth, and to a great extent that segregation is defined by town boundaries.

I submit that when we say “I like my town the way it is,” we’re saying that we like the things about our town that result from racial and wealth segregation.

I’m not saying that people actually think and say, “I like my town because there are no Black people.”  We don’t think about it that way, and we’re all too well socialized to actually say that.  I’m asking that we think about what the reality is, not what we say or think.

Let’s look again at those reasons why “I like my town the way it is.”  My taxes are under control.  Why?  Because my town doesn’t share in the cost of maintaining the City of Hartford, the urban area on which my town depends.  My town leaves that cost to be borne by the City, where the people of color live, where the poor people live.  In other words, my taxes are under control because my town is segregated.

I like my town because the schools are good.  Why are they good?  Because my town isn’t spending tax dollars to support Hartford.  Because my town is populated by relatively wealthy people, and schools populated by wealthy children function better than schools populated by poor children – it’s an oft-demonstrated fact.  In other words, I like my schools, well, because my town is segregated.

I like my town because there’s not a lot of industrial activity.  That activity is in Hartford.  No landfills in Wethersfield.  No power plants.  No sewage treatment facilities. I like my town because it’s, hmmm, here’s that word again, because it’s segregated.

I know.  These are all just negative inferences I’m drawing. “I like my town the way it is” could mean any number of things other than “I like living in a white town.”

Whatever reasons we might have for liking it the way it is, let’s not ignore the fundamental fact:  “The way it is” is segregated, with white people in the wealthy surrounding towns and Black people to a very great extent in poor, undefunded towns.

“I like my town the way it is.”

“The way it is” is segregated.

If we don’t like living in segregated towns, if we don’t want to live in segregated towns, we should do something about it.


Discover more from Hartford Today and Tomorrow

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

4 thoughts on ““I LIKE MY TOWN THE WAY IT IS””

  1. Woody –

    Do you mean expand on it more than my earlier essays? If you look back through the essays, starting in September 2019, you will find a few essays entitled why one city would be better (than Hartford and seven towns). And you will find other essays addressing the subject.

    In brief: I estimate we’d save $100 million a year. That would be a LOT better. We’d have one economic development plans for region, instead of eight separate plans. That would give us a realistic chance at attracting significant new employers to the area. We would be able to solve issues like solid waste disposal, issues that we currently argue among ourselves about. We would be able to reassert democratic control over the MDC. We would have more coordinated snow removal in particular, and better integrated public works in general. We would have a powerful, coordinated delegation in the General Assembly, instead of disorganized ineffective group we have now.

    Most importantly, all of our population, white and non-white, wealthy and poor, would participate politically in one local government, so that all voices were heard with respect all community problems, including education and housing.

  2. Woody –

    Do you mean expand on it more than my earlier essays? If you look back through the essays, starting in September 2019, you will find a few essays entitled why one city would be better (than Hartford and seven towns). And you will find other essays addressing the subject.

    In brief: I estimate we’d save $100 million a year. That would be a LOT better. We’d have one economic development plans for region, instead of eight separate plans. That would give us a realistic chance at attracting significant new employers to the area. We would be able to solve issues like solid waste disposal, issues that we currently argue among ourselves about. We would be able to reassert democratic control over the MDC. We would have more coordinated snow removal in particular, and better integrated public works in general. We would have a powerful, coordinated delegation in the General Assembly, instead of disorganized ineffective group we have now.

    Most importantly, all of our population, white and non-white, wealthy and poor, would participate politically in one local government, so that all voices were heard with respect all community problems, including education and housing.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Browse additional essays below

  • All
  • Buffalo Bills and More
  • Hartford and the Region
  • This and That

YOUR SEGREGATED GREATER HARTFORD – JUST THE FACTS

It's do-it-yourself week.  I give you the data; you do the thinking.  Don't worry; it isn't hard, and I'll help you along a bit.  Just something for you to think about. A couple of preliminaries.  First, ...
Continue Reading

LETTERS FROM WHITE AMERICA

After one of the briefest retirements in modern history, I’m back. Just two weeks ago I announced that I would take a break from HartfordTodayandTomorrow.com. I received some nice emails in response, including a few encouraging ...
Continue Reading

TAKING A BREAK

I’m taking a break from writing a blog about regionalism. With all that’s going on in our world and our country, it just feels like now is not the time to write about fixing local government ...
Continue Reading

DUMB LUCK ISN’T THE ANSWER

I’ve been been writing for several months now about one issue, the only issue I think matters for greater Hartford. I believe that unless and until greater Hartford begins to govern itself as one community, our ...
Continue Reading

PASSION

It was sometime around 1995, between periods at a Whalers-Bruins game in the Hartford Civic Center. I was standing in line outside the men’s room. Immediately behind me were two Whalers fans, both about my age. ...
Continue Reading

REORGANIZING DOESN’T WORK

Over the course of my professional career, one thing that I came to understand is that administrative reorganization does not fix organizations. I saw it often: The members of an organization elect new leadership because they ...
Continue Reading

WHY ONE LARGE CITY GOVERNMENT WOULD BE BETTER

Better Services Would the Hartford region be better off with one large core city of, say, 300,000 people than the current municipal structure of a small city surrounded by ten independent towns, each with its own ...
Continue Reading

CHANGE

As I finished meandering through The Hartford Courant (Sunday, April 26, 2020), I had one lasting impression: It seems we are at one of those special points in world history, a time of dramatic change, a ...
Continue Reading

4 thoughts on ““I LIKE MY TOWN THE WAY IT IS””

  1. Woody –

    Do you mean expand on it more than my earlier essays? If you look back through the essays, starting in September 2019, you will find a few essays entitled why one city would be better (than Hartford and seven towns). And you will find other essays addressing the subject.

    In brief: I estimate we’d save $100 million a year. That would be a LOT better. We’d have one economic development plans for region, instead of eight separate plans. That would give us a realistic chance at attracting significant new employers to the area. We would be able to solve issues like solid waste disposal, issues that we currently argue among ourselves about. We would be able to reassert democratic control over the MDC. We would have more coordinated snow removal in particular, and better integrated public works in general. We would have a powerful, coordinated delegation in the General Assembly, instead of disorganized ineffective group we have now.

    Most importantly, all of our population, white and non-white, wealthy and poor, would participate politically in one local government, so that all voices were heard with respect all community problems, including education and housing.

  2. Woody –

    Do you mean expand on it more than my earlier essays? If you look back through the essays, starting in September 2019, you will find a few essays entitled why one city would be better (than Hartford and seven towns). And you will find other essays addressing the subject.

    In brief: I estimate we’d save $100 million a year. That would be a LOT better. We’d have one economic development plans for region, instead of eight separate plans. That would give us a realistic chance at attracting significant new employers to the area. We would be able to solve issues like solid waste disposal, issues that we currently argue among ourselves about. We would be able to reassert democratic control over the MDC. We would have more coordinated snow removal in particular, and better integrated public works in general. We would have a powerful, coordinated delegation in the General Assembly, instead of disorganized ineffective group we have now.

    Most importantly, all of our population, white and non-white, wealthy and poor, would participate politically in one local government, so that all voices were heard with respect all community problems, including education and housing.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top