How to geographically expand New York City ???

Surely if the hidebound UK can recognise urban realities and create the GLC uniting the urban sprawl of London subsuming Middlesex and bits of Surrey etc then the far less hidebound Americans are capable of doing something similar with New York? Admittedly it won't work if there are long standing "animosities" to consider (Humberside and Tyne and Wear for example).
 

tedio

Banned
Surely if the hidebound UK can recognise urban realities and create the GLC uniting the urban sprawl of London subsuming Middlesex and bits of Surrey etc then the far less hidebound Americans are capable of doing something similar with New York? Admittedly it won't work if there are long standing "animosities" to consider (Humberside and Tyne and Wear for example).

It's near impossible. To do so would either require a complete reworking of the Federal system, in which municipalities and counties have no existence independent from the state governments, or for both New York and New Jersey to willingly cede their most economically productive areas to a new state of New York City. Which would never happen in a million years. Frankly, there's no reason for it to happen, either. No one really gains anything by merging the core of the NY metropolitan area into a single municipality.
 
It's near impossible. To do so would either require a complete reworking of the Federal system, in which municipalities and counties have no existence independent from the state governments,

Which is actually the case in most states - most state can create and dissolve municipalities and counties at will; look at how in recent times Massachusetts has been progressively dissolving county governments to make administration of local government easier, splitting the powers between the cities and towns on one hand and the Commonwealth on another.
 

tedio

Banned
Which is actually the case in most states - most state can create and dissolve municipalities and counties at will; look at how in recent times Massachusetts has been progressively dissolving county governments to make administration of local government easier, splitting the powers between the cities and towns on one hand and the Commonwealth on another.

That's exactly my point. Because of the fact that municipal and county governments are integral to and dependent on state governments, they cannot be interstate in principle.
 

Pkmatrix

Monthly Donor
How much more of Long Island could become part of NYC?

Theoretically? All of it, I suppose, if they really wanted to. It's unlikely, though, since the Non-NYC part of Long Island has a distinct culture of its own and tends to lean more conservative the closer you get to the Hamptons (on the far east end of the island).

If I had to pick anything, I'd say Yonkers is the most likely next thing for New York City to annex.

Surely if the hidebound UK can recognise urban realities and create the GLC uniting the urban sprawl of London subsuming Middlesex and bits of Surrey etc then the far less hidebound Americans are capable of doing something similar with New York? Admittedly it won't work if there are long standing "animosities" to consider (Humberside and Tyne and Wear for example).

No, because unlike Middlesex and Surrey both New York and New Jersey are sovereign. This is more analogous to having a city in France expand to annex and administer neighboring communities in Germany, but still have French territories be French and German territories be German. It's legally confusing as a concept and would be difficult to pull off.

The best we could pull off would be New Jersey and New York agreeing to form a jointly administered zone for New York City that would have the ENTIRE city be subject to both New York and New Jersey state law - and I've got NO idea if that is even allowed or if it violates the Federal Government's rights.
 
You could have New york annex the entirety of Westchester County and not have Queens County split up into Queens and Nassau County.
 

tedio

Banned
The best we could pull off would be New Jersey and New York agreeing to form a jointly administered zone for New York City that would have the ENTIRE city be subject to both New York and New Jersey state law - and I've got NO idea if that is even allowed or if it violates the Federal Government's rights.

I'm fairly confident that, at a minimum, it would require ratification by Congress.
 
Theoretically? All of it, I suppose, if they really wanted to. It's unlikely, though, since the Non-NYC part of Long Island has a distinct culture of its own and tends to lean more conservative the closer you get to the Hamptons (on the far east end of the island).

There's even a move for the eastern end of Suffolk County (the Hamptons) to secede from the county to form their own county, Peconic County.
 
You could have New york annex the entirety of Westchester County and not have Queens County split up into Queens and Nassau County.

Yeah, pretty much this. Both of which kind of almost happened - there was certainly no reason aside from political interest for 1898 expansion to go further.
 
Yeah, pretty much this. Both of which kind of almost happened - there was certainly no reason aside from political interest for 1898 expansion to go further.

What are the odds of an earlier bridge spanning the Hudson, linking Newark and such that much more tightly to NYC?
 
Which still doesn't quite explain - except for land reclamation (including levelling down several hills) - how the Shawmut Peninsula, the centre of Boston itself (what is largely now the North End) changed shape over the centuries, and how much of the former landfill was unearthed when the Big Dig occurred.

Oh no I'm not saying that Boston didn't reclaim land from the sea, I'm just saying that most of the city's expansion was through annexation rather than reclamation. Boston was originally just a few square miles on the shawmut peninsula, now it's about 50 square miles.
 
If you simply mean a continuous urban area, then New York City arguably extends well beyond its geographical boundaries into both other parts of New York and into New Jersey. If we mean administratively, then no such thing exists within the US.
True. But not entirely relevant. The fact that none exist iOTL doesn't prevent their existing in some other TL. It suggests low probability, it doesn't prove impossibility,

There's a long series of precedent in US law, however, that limit incorporated municipalities to one state - the federal-state-local system pretty much requires it. Crossing state boundaries for "local" needs is possible - the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey being an obvious example - but they are generally pretty rare and negotiated through what amount to joint power authorities between states, not between municipalities in two different states. It is not the Port Authority of New York City and Newark, for example.
1) So we'd have to change precedent, and/or find a good reason to over turn it. This DOES make the task much harder. I still believe it's not impossible. It may be that doing it long before 1898 would be easier.
2)the very fact of things like the Port Authority existing suggests (but again, doesn't prove) that the states COULD, if they wanted work out a 2 state city.


Probably not once the US becomes independent, unless you have a way for the federal system to include interstate municipalities in some way. It might not be too hard to establish a precedent for it in the early does of the US though, since there would be and still are lots of cities that span multiple counties. Maybe it's set as a compromise for the Toledo War ending in Toledo being divided between Michigan and Ohio along the Maumee but still having a single city government?

Certainly, after the US becomes independent. Even after the ratification of OTL's Constitution.

Interesting idea for the precedent to be set in the territories as they become states. A multi-territorial city might be easier to set up than a multi-state one, and negotiations leading to statehood could keep that city united. Then, when NYC amalgamates, the precedent COULD lead to part of NJ joining,

A multistate unitary municipal authority isn't possible under the current Federal system. You'd have to change the constitution.
Wrong. The constitution is totally silent on the matter of cities. (Well, aside from the special case of DC.)

To the extent that forming a multiple state city would require the approval of both (all) states involved, yes. But that approval is surely possible. (Again, even if it is less likely than not.)
Surely if the hidebound UK can recognise urban realities and create the GLC uniting the urban sprawl of London subsuming Middlesex and bits of Surrey etc then the far less hidebound Americans are capable of doing something similar with New York? Admittedly it won't work if there are long standing "animosities" to consider (Humberside and Tyne and Wear for example).
Quite.

It's near impossible. To do so would either require a complete reworking of the Federal system, in which municipalities and counties have no existence independent from the state governments, or for both New York and New Jersey to willingly cede their most economically productive areas to a new state of New York City. Which would never happen in a million years. Frankly, there's no reason for it to happen, either. No one really gains anything by merging the core of the NY metropolitan area into a single municipality.
Nope. In fact both NY and NJ might allow the expansion to a multi-state NYC precisely to INCREASE their most productive areas.

You would definitely have to get both states to agree, and you might need some formal agreement 'treaty' between them. But it is most certainly not impossible. Improbable, I'll grant. Impossible, I won't.

That's exactly my point. Because of the fact that municipal and county governments are integral to and dependent on state governments, they cannot be interstate in principle.
But once you set up a multi-state city, it's dependent on both, not just one. It would be interesting to see how such an arrangement would work/be worded, but if the agreement between the states were 'perpetual', it might be difficult, at best, for a single state to abrogate the agreement.
 
2)the very fact of things like the Port Authority existing suggests (but again, doesn't prove) that the states COULD, if they wanted work out a 2 state city.

No it doesn't. It suggests that the Constitutional authority to form interstate contracts has occurred. This isn't something revolutionary.

Wrong. The constitution is totally silent on the matter of cities. (Well, aside from the special case of DC.)

To whom does the Mayor of New York City answer? Would the city follow the laws of New York State or New Jersey? How much the city side in territorial and sovereignty issues between the two states? Why would a multi-state city even make sense, considering that taxes and census will be on a state basis anyway? The greater city polity would likely emerge as a figurehead organization even if the overwhelming constitutional complexities were overcome.
 
What if the New Netherlands were never split up into New Jersey and New York?

OR, what if East New Jersey (when it was a separate colony) merged with New York and West New Jersey merged with Pennsylvania?
 

tedio

Banned
Wrong. The constitution is totally silent on the matter of cities. (Well, aside from the special case of DC.)

To the extent that forming a multiple state city would require the approval of both (all) states involved, yes. But that approval is surely possible. (Again, even if it is less likely than not.)

It would require both state governments to cede sovereignty to another authority, something which is not likely to be constitutional.

Nope. In fact both NY and NJ might allow the expansion to a multi-state NYC precisely to INCREASE their most productive areas.

You would definitely have to get both states to agree, and you might need some formal agreement 'treaty' between them. But it is most certainly not impossible. Improbable, I'll grant. Impossible, I won't.

That's not true. It would shrink each states area of control, in their most economically productive area. This is a zero sum situation, for one to gain, another must lose.

This is impossible with a POD which leaves the federal system intact.
 
To whom does the Mayor of New York City answer? Would the city follow the laws of New York State or New Jersey? How much the city side in territorial and sovereignty issues between the two states? Why would a multi-state city even make sense, considering that taxes and census will be on a state basis anyway?

The tax part would be the easiest - people on the NJ side would pay NJ state tax, people on the NY side would pay NY state tax, and city taxes would apply to both. Sales taxes could be tricky, but the two states could designate the city as a special sales tax zone - NYS, at least, has set up such zones more than once.

State contributions to the city budget would be made on a pro rata basis, or else each state could finance the schools, etc. on its own side of the river.

Jurisdictional matters also aren't as impossible as you think. The Port Authority IOTL has a police force, with jurisdiction to enforce NY criminal law in NY and NJ criminal law in NJ. There's no reason why the NYPD couldn't be empowered to do the same thing. And the bi-state agreement that permits the annexation could include a code of ethics and financial oversight for the city government, as exists for the Port Authority.

The Port Authority is a governmental entity - it has police, it issues its own bonds, and it has regulatory bodies. It's a more narrowly focused entity than a city would be, but it isn't terribly different in terms of constitutional status. If NY and NJ can agree to set up a bi-state authority, they can also agree to create a bi-state city if they see an advantage in it.
 
Wasn't there a proposal to annex Yonkers and Mount Vernon as the sixth and seventh boroughs of New York? Maybe if that doesn't fall through, we could have a bigger NYC.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
I'm fairly confident that, at a minimum, it would require ratification by Congress.

From memory, it requires approval of congress and approval of all states involved (NJ and NY) to adjust state borders. There may be a few that have happened. Seems like Texas and OK still argue over some Red River pact. But mostly it is too much trouble to bother with, so most states just don't do it.
 
Top