2020 Census: GR Metro breakdown

[bartonro]

Originally Posted by mjlo

If I understand correctly the commuting patterns have to be into the core MSA, not necessarily the main county. I believe Muskegon is actually considered part of the CSA due to commuting patterns into Ottawa County, not Kent.

The problem for adding Allegan County is more about getting enough commuters into the GR metro. It's more than twice the population of the other rural counties surrounding GR, and it's commuter base it being pulled from both ends (GR and Kzoo). Also the city of Allegan is home to a rather large employment base with Perrigo and all of it's operations, while the south eastern end of the county is more centric to the Benton Harbor area and even Chicago. Clearly at least 15% of it's workforce is commuting to Kent and Ottawa Counties. The growth patterns just aren't enough to suggest it will flip. Though it's all speculative on my end. I'm not sure how to find the actual patterns.

Perrigo actually draws quite a bit of it's work force from Kent and Ottawa Counties. Does this 25% work both ways or does it strictly work in one direction (i.e. Allegan County to Kent County but not the other way around)?

[mjlo]

Originally Posted by bartonro

Perrigo actually draws quite a bit of it's work force from Kent and Ottawa Counties. Does this 25% work both ways or does it strictly work in one direction (i.e. Allegan County to Kent County but not the other way around)?

Kent and Ottawa Counties together comprise about 970k people. I just don't see how there would be enough of a cross commute into Allegan for it to even make a dent. It would have to be the Allegan workforce commuting north for it to be fully added into the MSA.

[michigan lizard]

Originally Posted by mjlo

I apologize for the ensuing rant. Feel free not to read lol. I'm using Roosevelt Park as an example of what I consider to be an overall failed suburbs vs. core city system in Michigan as a whole. I wasn't meaning to suggest that only RP shouldn't exist.

Norton Shores itself is just a larger version of RP in this regard. I would make the same arguement that Norton Shores shouldn't exist as a city but rather be part of a larger city government as well. Norton Shores didn't incorporate until the late 60's. RP was incorporated a full 20 years before Norton Shores, so theoretically you could say Norton Shores should have just been a part of RP The Mona Shores School district was established prior to Norton Shores even incorporating. There are many examples of this. The city of Wyoming has 5 school districts within its borders, and they are older than Wyoming itself. Per the quote, in my opinion all of the urbanized Muskegon communities should be one civic entity. Muskegon should be a city of 100k people that covers 90ish sq mi. I would argue the same for any city because one unified civic government allows for a more cohesive metro area, instead of multiple small governments competing for the same tax dollars and investments.

When you look at the cities who's borders cover the majority of their urbanized portions, you don't find a Muskegon Heights, or Highland Park, or even an East St. Louis. Sure you find bad neighborhoods in every city but they exist in pockets, not entire cities. Look at Muskegon Heights, if it were one unified Muskegon, the city would be forced to find a way to manage the struggling neighborhoods because it would be in the best interest of the region as a whole. Instead because of the current Michigan system, all of the incorporated entities around it just wall it off with their police forces, brand it as toxic, and then become appealing to what little sustainable resident base that's left within its borders. Those invisible political lines create a vacuum by which the struggling entity continues to collapse on itself, while its tax base just crosses the street in to the "safer" cities. It's an unrecoverable collapse for the cities that fall into it. No other state has as many examples of these failing incorporated entities as Michigan.

History doesn't reveal it's alternatives but I would argue with confidence that if Muskegon had one unified city instead of 6 independent entities all competing with each other, there would be no stigmatized boarded up Muskegon Heights. There would still be desirable, less desirable, and some down right bad neighborhoods. But you wouldn't have one three square mile section of the area in total collapse while all of the areas around it politically walled it off. It would be in the areas best interest to try and encourage investment in the struggling portions instead of just watching them die.

Detroit is a Muskegon Heights on a macro scale. As its suburbs incorporated, they walled the city off, sucked away its tax base and wealth, and then branded themselves independent from the city for 3 decades as it utterly collapsed. If Detroit had been able to expand its borders and keep its tax base there would be a very different story in SE Michigan. Only in the last 20 years have Detroit's suburbs realized they need the core city to be sustainable in the modern era which favors "hip" cities. Only they are late to the party and the Detroit area has one of the weakest identities for any Metro it's size. The Detroit model of townships chartering or incorporating to fight against the main city played out over and over again in Michigan. It hinders Michigan cities from truly thinking big even now.

To be clear I do understand why RP exists, I understand the value in it's police force, and the safer neighborhoods they bring. I also agree that if it were merged into a larger entity that the residents would see a disruption in quality of services as the system currently sits. Though I'm not sure those services would really suffer if all six Muskegon entities merged.

If it had just been one Muskegon working together from the beginning would there have a need for a tiny, independent Roosevelt Park to begin with?

Like I said, before I lived in RP, I agreed with you, but I now see the benefit of having more localized control. RP isn't a wealthy suburb, and not large enough to even make a dent with the hollowing out of the city of Muskegon or Muskegon Heights. I believe Norton Shores was spun out of Muskegon Heights. I do not know why Muskegon Heights chose to do so.

I do know that both Muskegon and Muskegon Heights were in much better shape back in the 80's and 90's, until many businesses moved out, along with their jobs. It has little to do with people choosing to build in the suburbs, which they tend to do because that is where most empty land is located. Factories and large corporate offices moved to southern states (or Mexico), or completely shut down. That's your hollowing out. There's a reason my husband and I are employed in Holland and grand rapids, because decent jobs in muskegon are scarce and most pay significantly less than Holland/GR. Our commutes were not fun, prior to WFH, and made it tempting to move a little closer--Spring Lake, perhaps. Living in downtown Muskegon would be even more inconvenient for our commutes.

I get the connection you're trying to make with Detroit, but recognize there is still fallout there from the 60's that is probably not comparable on the West side, though the industrial and corporate businesses moving out is. Yet, I remember downtown Grand Rapids was hollow in the 80's and 90's, yet look at it now (despite its suburbs). I guess you just need the investments of a few billionaires to make a thriving city downtown.

As for other states, I read of many that deal with home owners associations and gated communities that seem to try to emulate what little RP has. I've read that HOA's in Texas, for instance, are necessary to have any sort of meaningful order maintained. It seems like its fairer to deal with a small city instead of an HOA, while it would much too easy to be overlooked in a big city.

(I'm sorry if this reply is a bit disjointed--trying to type on a tablet. )

[bartonro]

Originally Posted by mjlo

Kent and Ottawa Counties together comprise about 970k people. I just don't see how there would be enough of a cross commute into Allegan for it to even make a dent. It would have to be the Allegan workforce commuting north for it to be fully added into the MSA.

So rather than continue this in the national thread where I saw your recent post, I'll address this here. Wouldn't the cross commuting between Kent, Ottawa and Allegan counties be very close? Thus the fastest growing parts of Allegan County could potentially add it to the GR MSA soonish? Additionally, I think the answer to my question upthread is that Ottawa County is not considered a core county of the GR MSA.

I guess this doesn't answer my other question in terms of if it's commuting one way or a sum of each way. But, it appears that the cross commuting from Kent County into Allegan County (if added in addition to Allegan County into Kent) could be enough to add it into the GR MSA soon if it's the sum of the two.

Forgot to mention as well, but I love your analysis and it fascinates population nerds like me.

[mjlo]

Originally Posted by bartonro

So rather than continue this in the national thread where I saw your recent post, I'll address this here. Wouldn't the cross commuting between Kent, Ottawa and Allegan counties be very close? Thus the fastest growing parts of Allegan County could potentially add it to the GR MSA soonish? Additionally, I think the answer to my question upthread is that Ottawa County is not considered a core county of the GR MSA.

I guess this doesn't answer my other question in terms of if it's commuting one way or a sum of each way. But, it appears that the cross commuting from Kent County into Allegan County (if added in addition to Allegan County into Kent) could be enough to add it into the GR MSA soon if it's the sum of the two.

Forgot to mention as well, but I love your analysis and it fascinates population nerds like me.

So I just posted another response in the main forum regarding my questions. As it stands more than 41% of Allegan counties workforce commutes into either Kent(22.5%) or Ottawa(19%) Counties. Kent and Ottawa are consider dual cores because they both cross the 50% urban threshold required. Theoretically that should be enough for Allegan County to already be added to the GR MSA. It could be that there is a standard requiring a minimum of 25% into one core county but I can't find it.

I can also say with certainty that the requirement is not for Kent County alone because Muskegon County is included into the CSA based commuting patterns into Ottawa County 16.1% vs. 14.5% into Kent. It's commuting patterns into Kent would not even qualify it as a part of the CSA.

Additional questions I've discovered. Almost 30% of Barry County's workforce commutes into Kent County, more than the amount of people who both live and work in the county. Also the commuting ties between the two have increased over the last 10 years not decreased. I can't figure out why Barry County was removed from the GR MSA. This is the same for Newaygo County where 28% of the workforce commutes into Kent.

Perhaps there's someone at the OMB I could ask but based on their data and standards the GR MSA should potentially be Kent, Ottawa, Allegan, Ionia, Montcalm, Barry, and Newaygo counties from commuting patterns alone. Allegan County at least has an urban cluster large enough to be considered an independent statistical area which may place a role in why it's independent and only in the CSA. However Ionia County also has an urban cluster that meets this criteria and it is no longer independent as of 2018.

Clear as mud.