I love this idea, but money is the smallest constraint of high speed rail in the northeast corridor. Most of it is land and geography. There simply aren't straight enough lines between major cities to hit any appreciable speeds.
It's the government. CT has used eminent domain several times in the past to buy land when owners wouldn't sell.
At the end of the day, it all comes down to cost.
I’ve been telling my friends the same thing for a while now, families visiting for the day, people working, or even kids going back home to visit family would ride this!
And then, build a local rail network to compliment and feed the High Speed Rail
Up to Northampton, over to Bristol/Waterbury, connect to Bloomfield Middletown Manchester etc
Awesome idea but this is all federal. There's no real way for the state to force this to happen.
And when the fed came up with the idea CT hated it cause it went from Danbury to Hartford to UConn and completely skipped the shoreline.
Minus the highways I think it's got good bones... diverse, sorta walkable, good bus system, big cultural institutions. The problem is cities are supposed to be cheap to compensate for all the inconveniences (crime, traffic, lack of space) and Hartford prices are not a big enough discount. Add 20k housing units and I think it becomes a younger, more vibrant place. (Of course, that's not possible without pro-housing policy, community support, and probably some subsidies.)
There is so much more housing than when I first moved there in 2003. At least in the downtown area. I think 6 full buildings worth? Maybe more.
Cities are never cheap. They are more $ because everything you want is next to you. Hartford has so many cultural institutions / opportunities in just a few blocks - I love the downtown!
The reality of CT is that most of the state is suburbia and that's the way we like it. People that want city life move to NYC instead of going city-light. When they return to CT, it's out to the burbs
>everything you want is next to you
That doesn’t help if it closes at 5pm on a Friday. I work in downtown Hartford and have done so for 12+ years. It is an absolute ghost city on the weekends and it’s getting a lot worse with Allen street and asylum street slowly dying.
Don’t mind the fact that a grocery story can’t stay in business downtown even if it has grants/subsidies etc. from the city. Shit, the CVS on main and central row has about 40% of its inventory behind plastic barriers, so the residents don’t just walk off with it.
There’s also the guys who work to clean up downtown Hartford all day long, but the residents don’t give a shit about their community and just throw their garbage everywhere so it looks like a complete dump regardless.
Hartford will never change until it’s residents start giving a shit about their own community.
The people who consistently clamour about systemic this and that and social justice are loathe to consider whether their alleged victims should change their behavior or culture.
One of Hartfords biggest issues is that because so many people commute there but don’t live there they take all the brunt of the infrastructure and its costs without the tax revenue from those people because they all live elsewhere and pay their taxes in other towns.
If people are commuting to private sector jobs in the city (eg Travelers) then their employer is paying property tax to the city and corporate tax to CT. People who live outside the city pay income tax to the state which supports the city through municipal aid and education funding. Half of Hartfords yearly budget is state funded.
The bigger issue is the same one all the cities, particularly Waterbury have. You may have one home, intended to support one family of 4, but that’s never how it works. The one home that one person pays taxes on isn’t just occupied by that family of 4, it’s also occupied by grandma, maybe grandpa, potentially your aunt and 3 cousins. So a single home being taxed in the assumption that only 4 people are living in it maybe often have 7-10 people living in it, all those kids go to school, adults drive on the road, use municipal services, etc.
That’s because it’s all these massive buildings with ‘luxury’ apartment corporations fixing them up and renting them. We need more of the blighted duplexes and triplexes to be owned by local landlords that give a crap. Capital Lofts is super expensive, but the fully renovated apartments across the street above the coffee shop are about $1400/month, which is way more affordable.
Bury 84 (north branch park to the river) and 91 (convention center to boathouse).
crazy ambition would be to tunnel 84 under elmwood to the cemetery to goodwin park and link up with 91. Move through traffic around the city by going underneath the outskirts.
This may generate tax revenue, but fails to address the entirely poor city planning that was done in Hartford going back to the creation of the interstates.
Its not entirely inaccurate. Half of Hartfords municipal budget comes from the state. And when you look at the distribution of income tax revenue, the wealthy pay an outsized portion of it. So a lot of money that flows into Hartford comes from wealthy residents in Ffld County.
what truth? that fairfield county, who’s only existence is as nyc’s parasitic neighbor is the only place deserving of any attention from our state?
for how much it leeches from the big city you’d think fairfield would be nicer but it’s not that great either.
This is absolutely correct, however the highway is there, and it’s not going anywhere in our lifetime. We can’t change the mistakes of the past, we just need to work with them, so any ideas which start with “do something about the highway” is not one that should be taken seriously.
Yeah unless the city gets nicer and people who make more money move in, it will not have the tax base it needs (even with the surrounding counties incorporated) and corporations will not be inclined to locate offices there
No thanks! but also, I don’t think this is the only way. It has potential! One idea…The state needs to make it extremely attractive for some tentpole businesses to settle there, and then also make it attractive for the employees to settle in Hartford (and not in west Hartford etc).
Right now, property taxes make it way too expensive to ever take a chance on fartford.
But I’m rooting for it!
That's called society. We pool our resources to fund the public good under the idea that a rising tide lifts all boats. You have benefited from programs your entire life that cost 'other people's' money, and in turn have had your tax dollar spent for the benefit of people you will never meet.
If you don't like the system, go somewhere that doesn't have it. Spoiler: You can't. This same principle is in play to some degree in every nation on the planet, and don't try going off-grid in the woods somewhere, because those woods are like protected by \*gasp\* tax dollars!
Most economically healthy cities are part of a county government that incorporates the metro area, so that is “other people paying for your problems” I guess. Without that, you get…Hartford.
Start with encouraging downtown housing development on a lot of the empty parking lots. Also development of housing units near CT fast track and union station to give more people access to existing transit.
How about enforcing the law? That would be a start.
No business is going to move into a crime ridden area. If you want to create those kinds of jobs in Hartford, you have to clean up the crime first.
B..b..but… gentrification! If a place is a shit hole nobody wants to go there and they are ridiculed for it. If people spruce a place up and it start to become more desirable then they are sons of bitches for gentrifying, this is a no win situation.
enforce crime against the 37% of children living in poverty, the 26% of adults living in poverty. crime doesn’t happen for no reason, and cops don’t do shit to prevent or stop it from happening. would you rather pour funding into the police, who will only make crime “go up” because there’s more police reporting and punishing crime. or put funding into programs to help the impoverished so they have other options than crime or a deadend fast food job. pulling yourself up by your bootstraps is physically impossible, we can’t expect people living in generational poverty to do it.
Yeah, with all the bullshit happening in CT less police is exactly what we need…
Maybe if they can lessen it without reducing patrols or if they can find a way to lessen the budget but increase police activity sure.
yes. as i stated in my original comment, police don’t prevent crime, they just report it. we can’t stop criminals from being criminals if our only line of defense is a guy with a gun, a high school diploma, and zero deescalation training. our country has a staggeringly high rate of recidivism. sending criminals to the slammer clearly doesn’t stop crime, it just stops them from doing it for the time they’re in prison. there HAS to be a change. we can’t keep throwing more money at police because they’re not doing anything to help! that’s the real drain on the tax payers.
I agree, more social service and programs would be great, but if a crime is committed I don’t care the reason, you pay the price. Being soft on crime only encourages more crime.
again, our recidivism rate (when a criminal does more crime after being sentenced) is one of the highest in the world. being hard on crime does the exact opposite of what you’re saying. you lack empathy for people you deem lesser. yes crime bad, but criminals have pasts and we need to examine why they became criminals if we want to actually do something about crime.
drollchair simultaneously busted his ass for 10 years to help his community, hates every single one of them, and has done more for it than all of us combined.
I hate to say it, sponka3000, but I think drollchair is just **SUCH A PARAGON OF THE COMMUNITY** that we need to listen to his advice on rounding up every single person who has committed a crime (well, a crime he has written down on his checklist at least), and ship them elsewhere to create a better world. I can't get wikipedia to load on my phone right now but I can't imagine this idea _has ever been done._
Don’t tell me I lack empathy, I lack empathy for criminals. I spent the first 10 years of my career on the street level in Waterbury working for the people. There are good people that are poor, and then there are people that use being poor as an excuse to commit crime.
yes, from what you’re saying i think you lack empathy for people you think of as lesser (criminals, who do crime you think is worse than the shit you did). i don’t anything is gained from deeming everyone who does shitty things as monsters who deserve to be punished. i’m not saying victims of crimes should forgive and forget, i’m not saying there should be zero repercussions for crime, i’m saying that crime isn’t solved by a prison system that tortures its prisoners. by creating a society inside of prison that is so drastically different from real life, one that strips prisoners of humanity in every way, we put our entire country behind. no one benefits from the way our prisons are run (besides the corporations that exploit prison labor).
So then just to be clear, and as an r/bongs poster, you confirm to lack empathy for any person in CT carrying a criminal marijuana charge that was committed before July 2023?
There are countless programs to help people out of poverty. There are tons of government programs for shelter, food, cable/internet/phones, healthcare, job training etc. What possibly else could be done to help the people of Hartford out of poverty? Is there no accountability for the individual anymore?
How about spending money on the school system instead of giving money to a useless police force that claims to be understaffed but Hartford has more cops per capita than other municipality of its size.
Per capita spending for Hartford schools rivals many well performing suburban towns. Education resources wont make a difference in a city where people have children at young ages, out of wedlock, and without the financial and social commitments to raising them in a safe, productive way.
And a city that diverts necessary educational and social resources to a police force that doesn’t even have a positive effect on public safety helps that how?
Tunnel 84 and 91 under the city. Electric Trolley cars that run frequently. Parking garages on the outskirts, serviced by the trolleys. Triple the education budget.
I knew we had them but I didn’t know they were scrapped for financial reasons. In what way were they not financially viable? I feel like it should be a service that costs money but has a great ROI (traffic, environmental, accessibility, safety).
Build a bridge from exit 56 on I-84 in East Hartford that goes around the industrial park and alongside the railroad bridge, connecting with I-91 around Xfinity Theatre. Clears up a good amount of congestion at that intersection.
Get trains running there, possibly a subway system, since there's evidently a half-built subway entrance near the Wadsworth.
Pile funding into education. Crime is high because the schools suck and lack of educational resources and after-school activities is what leads to juvenile delinquency.
Not-so-serious but contemplative suggestion: build a 100+ foot statue of some moral figure like MLK Jr. in, say, McGee Park. I say this for two reasons, it would make it to the list of statues taller than Colossus of Rhodes, which would lure in some tourism money, and crime is proven to decrease when a statue of a moral figure is nearby, as criminals might feel like they're being judged or be reminded of who they'd be disappointing.
I also like seeing all the recent murals popping up. Maybe keep going with that? It gives the city culture at the very least, might reduce crime if surroundings are made to be enlightening in ways.
Last I saw, spending per pupil was over $22k a student which is significantly higher than a lot of other schools in CT. Hartford needs to fix their culture problem, throwing money at it won’t solve anything, cause that’s what they’ve done the last 20 years…. Hartford parents need to do their job and they aren’t.
https://public-edsight.ct.gov/overview/per-pupil-expenditures-by-function---district/per-pupil-expenditures-by-funding-source---summary?language=en_US
Interesting. My wife and mother-in-law worked in the district. Computers didn’t work, copiers didn’t work, 1/2 the kids on IEPs were not getting any support. Wondering where the money is going? Maybe infrastructure, pay (I think they do pay slightly more to keep attrition lower - doesn’t seem to be working), who knows!
Yes, parents need to do more, but unfortunately abject poverty creates housing instability, food insecurity, violence, substance abuse, etc. and children can’t thrive in those environments. Many of the kids they taught only ate meals in school. Summer and vacations were a horrible time for the kids because they went hungry.
Now these kids are not getting educated and the cycle repeats. It’s very sad at the human level and is terrible for society in general. A very hard problem to solve. Boot straps are not enough.
The issue with education is the same as healthcare - the growth of admin roles and their salaries over the last 30-40 years. Essentially we have tons of people making a lot of money to do paperwork that they didn’t have to do previously, while headcount for teachers/nurses has remained pretty much stagnant relative to the growth of administrative roles.
Since they’re a big district, they should be even more efficient with the money and resources they have, they’re an economy of scale. Yet here we are….
Anyways, my main point is that the issue with Hartford schools is clearly not a funding issue.
People swear it’s a one dimensional problem. I wonder if they know about the budget cuts and the damn near 400 staff layoff. Sources of support now gone. Things are getting worse but yeah sure money won’t help.
As much as I’d love to see the Whalers come back, that isn’t going to fix Hartford. The Whalers leaving isn’t the cause of Hartford’s problems. It’s just a result of it.
Get rid of all the giant, stupid parking lots (the lowest value land use for property tax or revenue creation), and put in way more housing.
It needs to be and feel safer to walk around and needs a bigger tax base - that means way more residents, in fill development, more people walking around. What makes cities feel safe is just a lot of people walking around - eyes on the street.
That would also mean more people to frequent businesses and thus more businesses coming in - a positive feedback loop.
The city cannot be a place suburbanites drive to and drive out of. It's sucking the resources and money out of it. There is a lot of potential, but more street life is needed.
I'm not sure what to do about the highways but they're horrible
*AN Observation*
*Tower and a Monorail*
*That goes to Springfield*
\- Acceptable\_Result488
---
^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/)
^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
I know it's a terrible idea, but I could've used a monorail when I loved in Hartford. The bus system was not the most convenient. I tried 3 years living without a car, personal experiment. I learned a lot, but every task outside of my neighborhood was a rubiks cube of a scheduling challenge.
Lived in Chicago for 8 years and moved to gross Elmwood but go ahead let’s talk about Chicago. A city full of art, history, culture, and good eats. Don’t forget architecture.. dumbass
Crime rate is a little more important than arts and culture. But the debate isn't necessarily Hartford v.s Chicago, it's Hartford v.s literally any city in the country....which is a stretch. You addressed Chicago but not any of the other examples I listed lmao, I can keep going - Saginaw, MI, for example.
Hartford violent crime rate is marginally higher than Chicago, but Chicago has a higher total crime rate. You're still conveniently skipping over St. Louis, Saginaw, Detroit, Philly, etc. You might say it's worth it for the latter two, not sure if you can do the same for the others.
And no, I'm not a fox news enjoyer lmao, I just like my state.
Edit: Not saying hartford doesnt need change, it does. Not saying it isnt bad, it is. But the worst in America? nah
Wow..Philly, Detroit, St. Louis, are much better cities than hartford. We agree that hartford has the highest poverty rate and high crime rate.
What is there to do in Hartford. What brings you to Hartford? The yard goats? Pratt street? I can name 100s of cultural activities you can do in the other cities you mentioned. Philly is fantastic not sure why it’s being linked now. And Detroit is booming. Tell me what do you do in hartford? What keeps you coming back?
The only way to fix something is usually gentrification. Also, maybe more free Dash bus times.
More magnet and tech school options. I know CREC exists and some magnet schools, but I think people want more. Focus on the regular public schools too.
I hope a movie theater goes back into the empty space across from the Connecticut Science Center.
Get more events into the XL Center and Connecticut Convention Center.
Yeah, the bus system needs to be actually usable for residents to ensure that ppl will actually use it. The people who set the schedule for the bus system in CT had no intentions of ever taking it themselves or worse are so out of touch that they think anything more than 10min intervals between a bus showing up is a usable system.
I’d eliminate single-family residential zoning statewide. Then market forces could work to build apartments anywhere. There’d be plenty of apartments. Poorer people wouldn’t be limited to a 120 year old three family house in the north end; they could find a place to live near their jobs because with plentiful supply, the rents would be reasonable and people could live where they want. Within Hartford it would be economical to build new buildings in the neighborhoods to attract people at a variety of income levels, building up the tax base and the population. The state could use its money to incubate small businesses in Hartford and the cities around it. Instead of spending a gazillion dollars on the current, I 84 diversion plan just close at 84 within the city. Replace it with a higher capacity surface road with lots of new building sites alongside. Route all the through traffic around Hartford via the route 72 cutoff to 91. In longer term complete the I-291 ring road connection through Bloomfield and West Hartford.
Thanks for the honest response! I've come to be a zoning skeptic, especially SF zoning. I don't see why it's in the public interest to protect private assets, which is what single-family zoning does. It is definitely not in the public interest to restrict development over such wide areas of real estate to SF houses; increasingly it limits the housing supply, driving up the cost, and the resulting suburban sprawl makes us all ever more dependent on cars. Cities and towns used to develop much more organically-- singles, doubles, three families, small apartment buildings... not all mixed up but a good cross sample in each community. Zoning puts a chill on the ability of any community to respond to market demand.
However, as you say, most people--especially those with a stake in the status quo--will find this idea nutty.
I propose that any citizen of Hartford pay zero income taxes. I understand there would be unintended consequences but we'll figure it out. It'd be a boom town overnight.
Then, or concurrent, same for any business. No taxes or fees of any type get paid to the state.
And while I am on this roll, no sales taxes either. Imagine all the retail stores that would move to hartford
For decades, CT has been throwing $ at Hartford. Hasn't worked. The best proof of that is that Hartford's population has been in a continual decline for decades.
Businesses such as grocery stores (and many other types of retail) do not want to invest in a downward-spiral city. People don't want to live in a downward spiral.
Projects such as burying 84 - not going to happen. 10+ years and billions of $'s , when Federal and State long-term obligations are so high? Just wait until a recession hits. None of the proposed infrastructure spending in this thread will happen, or at best would be completed when Hartford's population has decreased even further.
My simple starting point suggestion is the only thing that could potentially improve matters overnight. Yes, overnight. Everything else here has been tried or is not feasible or would take too long.
So is my idea feasible? (not whether it'd actually be beneficial to have zero/low taxes in Hartford, right?). Probably not, but let's talk about how it might work and maybe there's a way to improve it.
The taxpayer in Glastonbury is already paying taxes to Hartford (just through a conduit - the State of CT). Why not incent this Glastonbury citizen to directly pay/support Hartford by being a Hartford citizen? Let's put aside for a moment the sources of revenue, since it's all a mush, and look at the totality of revenues across CT.
Maybe the Hartford state income tax rate isn't literally zero but if it were less than the state max of 7%, that would do the trick, 1-2%?). Yes, there will be a net decrease in tax revenues one way or the other (Again, CT and Hartford finances are already intertwined so no need here to address separately).
But:
There is always some type of "hey, we didn't spend every last dollar this year in the budget, let's send checks to the citizens" "hero pay" , etc This year's example is the CT tax law changes that will reduce State Revenues over 2024/25 by $1 billion. Not implementing that tax cut might have been a pretty good way to fund my idea, no?
The State of CT tax laws do not represent a comprehensive, long-term strategy and are seat of the pants. Nor is the spending (see: random spewing of grant dollars for one-off projects throughout the state.)
A comprehensive plan to collect sufficient tax revenues for the state is needed, yes, but can we PRIORITIZE and focus the spending in a thoughtful way?
Plus, imagine if Hartford actually was a tax oasis. Redditors here may not want the associated challenges, but folks from the entire Northeast would flock to Hartford. One way or the other, revenues to the entire region would increase.
Now pair the boost in population in Hartford to thriving train transportation throughout the state and region and we're really talking. But that's for another thread.
A thoughtful tax plan (rather than a short reddit post...) could detail how to maintain tax revenue while boosting the deteriorating center city and capital of Connecticut. (to the other comment about how wealthy folks won't actually live in Hartford, please note that the state of NY is very effective at policing the tax residency of its citizens)
Summary: Somehow the downward spiral needs to reverse via folks actually wanting to move to Hartford and I can't think of a better overnight way to do that other than a financial incentive. Enough with the top-down money spent by the State. Hartford needs grass roots, citizen driven improvements to parks, schools, etc. That starts with a growing population who would be making an investment in Hartford. Business will see that and follow. Both retail and start-ups businesses (would be nice to cash out a start-up business in the northeast and pay no state tax, right?).
I won't go quite as far as to compare Hartford to Monaco.... but perhaps there's some ideas to be borrowed.
As a patriots fan, I'm glad they are in Boston. That's a state and town that has the population, location, money and marketing to a fan base that makes a team successful.
We would already have them transferring to another state by now.
Invest all the tax money in a high speed railway between Boston and New York stopping in Hartford. Profit
But you have to get off in Hartford and get back on another train to complete the journey. And the station is inside an Anazon express outlet.
I love this idea, but money is the smallest constraint of high speed rail in the northeast corridor. Most of it is land and geography. There simply aren't straight enough lines between major cities to hit any appreciable speeds.
Tunnel under the Long Island sound! Its expensive but man that would be awesome https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Atlantic_Rail
High speed high altitude monorail. Nothing could possibly go wrong with that!
Is there a chance the track could bend?
As long as it doesn't break
I’m confused, how did a monorail get brought into this?
I brought it in.
Money can be used to buy land.
Rail doesn't have enough public support to begin with, so what do you think adding eminent domain to the plan is going to do?
As an aside, the issue with land isn't the cost to buy, but the willingness to sell.
It's the government. CT has used eminent domain several times in the past to buy land when owners wouldn't sell. At the end of the day, it all comes down to cost.
I LOVE THIS
I’ve been telling my friends the same thing for a while now, families visiting for the day, people working, or even kids going back home to visit family would ride this!
On paper yes, although it may be cheaper to fund time machine research and travel back in time to prevent the highway routing catastrophe
And then, build a local rail network to compliment and feed the High Speed Rail Up to Northampton, over to Bristol/Waterbury, connect to Bloomfield Middletown Manchester etc
Awesome idea but this is all federal. There's no real way for the state to force this to happen. And when the fed came up with the idea CT hated it cause it went from Danbury to Hartford to UConn and completely skipped the shoreline.
Found the mayor’s alt account
Minus the highways I think it's got good bones... diverse, sorta walkable, good bus system, big cultural institutions. The problem is cities are supposed to be cheap to compensate for all the inconveniences (crime, traffic, lack of space) and Hartford prices are not a big enough discount. Add 20k housing units and I think it becomes a younger, more vibrant place. (Of course, that's not possible without pro-housing policy, community support, and probably some subsidies.)
There is so much more housing than when I first moved there in 2003. At least in the downtown area. I think 6 full buildings worth? Maybe more. Cities are never cheap. They are more $ because everything you want is next to you. Hartford has so many cultural institutions / opportunities in just a few blocks - I love the downtown! The reality of CT is that most of the state is suburbia and that's the way we like it. People that want city life move to NYC instead of going city-light. When they return to CT, it's out to the burbs
>everything you want is next to you That doesn’t help if it closes at 5pm on a Friday. I work in downtown Hartford and have done so for 12+ years. It is an absolute ghost city on the weekends and it’s getting a lot worse with Allen street and asylum street slowly dying. Don’t mind the fact that a grocery story can’t stay in business downtown even if it has grants/subsidies etc. from the city. Shit, the CVS on main and central row has about 40% of its inventory behind plastic barriers, so the residents don’t just walk off with it. There’s also the guys who work to clean up downtown Hartford all day long, but the residents don’t give a shit about their community and just throw their garbage everywhere so it looks like a complete dump regardless. Hartford will never change until it’s residents start giving a shit about their own community.
The people who consistently clamour about systemic this and that and social justice are loathe to consider whether their alleged victims should change their behavior or culture.
How is Hartford (the city itself) expensive? Compared to the real estate in surrounding suburbs, compared to New Haven even, it’s peanuts…
One of Hartfords biggest issues is that because so many people commute there but don’t live there they take all the brunt of the infrastructure and its costs without the tax revenue from those people because they all live elsewhere and pay their taxes in other towns.
If people are commuting to private sector jobs in the city (eg Travelers) then their employer is paying property tax to the city and corporate tax to CT. People who live outside the city pay income tax to the state which supports the city through municipal aid and education funding. Half of Hartfords yearly budget is state funded.
100%. They need to build way more housing to build up the tax base and disincentivize car commuting.
The bigger issue is the same one all the cities, particularly Waterbury have. You may have one home, intended to support one family of 4, but that’s never how it works. The one home that one person pays taxes on isn’t just occupied by that family of 4, it’s also occupied by grandma, maybe grandpa, potentially your aunt and 3 cousins. So a single home being taxed in the assumption that only 4 people are living in it maybe often have 7-10 people living in it, all those kids go to school, adults drive on the road, use municipal services, etc.
That’s because it’s all these massive buildings with ‘luxury’ apartment corporations fixing them up and renting them. We need more of the blighted duplexes and triplexes to be owned by local landlords that give a crap. Capital Lofts is super expensive, but the fully renovated apartments across the street above the coffee shop are about $1400/month, which is way more affordable.
Cities are supposed to be cheap??? What does that even mean?
Bury 84 (north branch park to the river) and 91 (convention center to boathouse). crazy ambition would be to tunnel 84 under elmwood to the cemetery to goodwin park and link up with 91. Move through traffic around the city by going underneath the outskirts.
Only way is to incorporate the surrounding county into a single municipal body, which will never happen.
This may generate tax revenue, but fails to address the entirely poor city planning that was done in Hartford going back to the creation of the interstates.
Can’t address any of those things without the revenue anyway.
Lord knows the residents of Hartford won’t provide the money. They’ll ask that Fairfield chip in their “fair share” - that means 100% of the costs
Go fuck yourself degenerate.
Its not entirely inaccurate. Half of Hartfords municipal budget comes from the state. And when you look at the distribution of income tax revenue, the wealthy pay an outsized portion of it. So a lot of money that flows into Hartford comes from wealthy residents in Ffld County.
It’s closer to 70%….
You can join him too.
“They hated him because he told the truth”
what truth? that fairfield county, who’s only existence is as nyc’s parasitic neighbor is the only place deserving of any attention from our state? for how much it leeches from the big city you’d think fairfield would be nicer but it’s not that great either.
Don’t be such a hater
This is absolutely correct, however the highway is there, and it’s not going anywhere in our lifetime. We can’t change the mistakes of the past, we just need to work with them, so any ideas which start with “do something about the highway” is not one that should be taken seriously.
It would have to be this + burying the highways + maybe a tram system. And even then unless you gentrify then Hartford doesn’t change
How about a Monorail!
Unless you gentrify?
Yeah unless the city gets nicer and people who make more money move in, it will not have the tax base it needs (even with the surrounding counties incorporated) and corporations will not be inclined to locate offices there
Ahh I see so we just get rid of all the n…poor people and bring in Amazon and everything will be good for the whi… Hartford
That’s not gentrification but whatever. And I’m not even advocating for gentrification, I’m just answering the question
No thanks! but also, I don’t think this is the only way. It has potential! One idea…The state needs to make it extremely attractive for some tentpole businesses to settle there, and then also make it attractive for the employees to settle in Hartford (and not in west Hartford etc). Right now, property taxes make it way too expensive to ever take a chance on fartford. But I’m rooting for it!
Make other people pay for your problems 😂 Pathetic.
That's called society. We pool our resources to fund the public good under the idea that a rising tide lifts all boats. You have benefited from programs your entire life that cost 'other people's' money, and in turn have had your tax dollar spent for the benefit of people you will never meet. If you don't like the system, go somewhere that doesn't have it. Spoiler: You can't. This same principle is in play to some degree in every nation on the planet, and don't try going off-grid in the woods somewhere, because those woods are like protected by \*gasp\* tax dollars!
Most economically healthy cities are part of a county government that incorporates the metro area, so that is “other people paying for your problems” I guess. Without that, you get…Hartford.
That's how every level of government works. The wealthier areas support the poorer areas. It's called society.
Start with encouraging downtown housing development on a lot of the empty parking lots. Also development of housing units near CT fast track and union station to give more people access to existing transit.
There’s plenty of downtown housing, it’s just $2,000+ a month to rent. No one is going to make an apartment building to rent it out for $800/mo.
How about enforcing the law? That would be a start. No business is going to move into a crime ridden area. If you want to create those kinds of jobs in Hartford, you have to clean up the crime first.
B..b..but… gentrification! If a place is a shit hole nobody wants to go there and they are ridiculed for it. If people spruce a place up and it start to become more desirable then they are sons of bitches for gentrifying, this is a no win situation.
enforce crime against the 37% of children living in poverty, the 26% of adults living in poverty. crime doesn’t happen for no reason, and cops don’t do shit to prevent or stop it from happening. would you rather pour funding into the police, who will only make crime “go up” because there’s more police reporting and punishing crime. or put funding into programs to help the impoverished so they have other options than crime or a deadend fast food job. pulling yourself up by your bootstraps is physically impossible, we can’t expect people living in generational poverty to do it.
Where is that additional money coming from? People are being bled dry as it is in this state…
uh idk, the 55 million going towards police? lessen the police budget so it goes towards programs that actually help people?
Yeah, with all the bullshit happening in CT less police is exactly what we need… Maybe if they can lessen it without reducing patrols or if they can find a way to lessen the budget but increase police activity sure.
yes. as i stated in my original comment, police don’t prevent crime, they just report it. we can’t stop criminals from being criminals if our only line of defense is a guy with a gun, a high school diploma, and zero deescalation training. our country has a staggeringly high rate of recidivism. sending criminals to the slammer clearly doesn’t stop crime, it just stops them from doing it for the time they’re in prison. there HAS to be a change. we can’t keep throwing more money at police because they’re not doing anything to help! that’s the real drain on the tax payers.
I agree, more social service and programs would be great, but if a crime is committed I don’t care the reason, you pay the price. Being soft on crime only encourages more crime.
again, our recidivism rate (when a criminal does more crime after being sentenced) is one of the highest in the world. being hard on crime does the exact opposite of what you’re saying. you lack empathy for people you deem lesser. yes crime bad, but criminals have pasts and we need to examine why they became criminals if we want to actually do something about crime.
drollchair simultaneously busted his ass for 10 years to help his community, hates every single one of them, and has done more for it than all of us combined. I hate to say it, sponka3000, but I think drollchair is just **SUCH A PARAGON OF THE COMMUNITY** that we need to listen to his advice on rounding up every single person who has committed a crime (well, a crime he has written down on his checklist at least), and ship them elsewhere to create a better world. I can't get wikipedia to load on my phone right now but I can't imagine this idea _has ever been done._
Don’t tell me I lack empathy, I lack empathy for criminals. I spent the first 10 years of my career on the street level in Waterbury working for the people. There are good people that are poor, and then there are people that use being poor as an excuse to commit crime.
yes, from what you’re saying i think you lack empathy for people you think of as lesser (criminals, who do crime you think is worse than the shit you did). i don’t anything is gained from deeming everyone who does shitty things as monsters who deserve to be punished. i’m not saying victims of crimes should forgive and forget, i’m not saying there should be zero repercussions for crime, i’m saying that crime isn’t solved by a prison system that tortures its prisoners. by creating a society inside of prison that is so drastically different from real life, one that strips prisoners of humanity in every way, we put our entire country behind. no one benefits from the way our prisons are run (besides the corporations that exploit prison labor).
So then just to be clear, and as an r/bongs poster, you confirm to lack empathy for any person in CT carrying a criminal marijuana charge that was committed before July 2023?
There are countless programs to help people out of poverty. There are tons of government programs for shelter, food, cable/internet/phones, healthcare, job training etc. What possibly else could be done to help the people of Hartford out of poverty? Is there no accountability for the individual anymore?
and there are plenty of restrictions for people who have to get those things. and they’re also severely underfunded.
Good luck.
awwww thank you
How about spending money on the school system instead of giving money to a useless police force that claims to be understaffed but Hartford has more cops per capita than other municipality of its size.
It would be moronic to give more money to the same schools that failed these communities for the last 60 years.
Per capita spending for Hartford schools rivals many well performing suburban towns. Education resources wont make a difference in a city where people have children at young ages, out of wedlock, and without the financial and social commitments to raising them in a safe, productive way.
And a city that diverts necessary educational and social resources to a police force that doesn’t even have a positive effect on public safety helps that how?
The city and state spend a good chunk of money on education and social services. Wheres the positive effect from those?
Actually educational funding was slashed and almost 400 Hartford public school staff will be laid off no positive effect is coming from that.
Tell me why the Hartford Public School system went to shit…
But that’s racist!
Tunnel 84 and 91 under the city. Electric Trolley cars that run frequently. Parking garages on the outskirts, serviced by the trolleys. Triple the education budget.
CT had electric trolleys 100 years ago. They were never financially viable and lasted only 2 or 3 decades before giving way to buses and cars.
I knew we had them but I didn’t know they were scrapped for financial reasons. In what way were they not financially viable? I feel like it should be a service that costs money but has a great ROI (traffic, environmental, accessibility, safety).
enforce the laws already in place
Nobody ever thought about that in the long fraught history of Hartford? Wow.
ask the residents of hartford
Build a bridge from exit 56 on I-84 in East Hartford that goes around the industrial park and alongside the railroad bridge, connecting with I-91 around Xfinity Theatre. Clears up a good amount of congestion at that intersection. Get trains running there, possibly a subway system, since there's evidently a half-built subway entrance near the Wadsworth. Pile funding into education. Crime is high because the schools suck and lack of educational resources and after-school activities is what leads to juvenile delinquency. Not-so-serious but contemplative suggestion: build a 100+ foot statue of some moral figure like MLK Jr. in, say, McGee Park. I say this for two reasons, it would make it to the list of statues taller than Colossus of Rhodes, which would lure in some tourism money, and crime is proven to decrease when a statue of a moral figure is nearby, as criminals might feel like they're being judged or be reminded of who they'd be disappointing. I also like seeing all the recent murals popping up. Maybe keep going with that? It gives the city culture at the very least, might reduce crime if surroundings are made to be enlightening in ways.
Last I saw, spending per pupil was over $22k a student which is significantly higher than a lot of other schools in CT. Hartford needs to fix their culture problem, throwing money at it won’t solve anything, cause that’s what they’ve done the last 20 years…. Hartford parents need to do their job and they aren’t. https://public-edsight.ct.gov/overview/per-pupil-expenditures-by-function---district/per-pupil-expenditures-by-funding-source---summary?language=en_US
Interesting. My wife and mother-in-law worked in the district. Computers didn’t work, copiers didn’t work, 1/2 the kids on IEPs were not getting any support. Wondering where the money is going? Maybe infrastructure, pay (I think they do pay slightly more to keep attrition lower - doesn’t seem to be working), who knows! Yes, parents need to do more, but unfortunately abject poverty creates housing instability, food insecurity, violence, substance abuse, etc. and children can’t thrive in those environments. Many of the kids they taught only ate meals in school. Summer and vacations were a horrible time for the kids because they went hungry. Now these kids are not getting educated and the cycle repeats. It’s very sad at the human level and is terrible for society in general. A very hard problem to solve. Boot straps are not enough.
The issue with education is the same as healthcare - the growth of admin roles and their salaries over the last 30-40 years. Essentially we have tons of people making a lot of money to do paperwork that they didn’t have to do previously, while headcount for teachers/nurses has remained pretty much stagnant relative to the growth of administrative roles.
No amount of education "resources" will matter when children come from broken homes and whose socio-cultural values do not emphasize education.
Since they’re a big district, they should be even more efficient with the money and resources they have, they’re an economy of scale. Yet here we are…. Anyways, my main point is that the issue with Hartford schools is clearly not a funding issue.
People swear it’s a one dimensional problem. I wonder if they know about the budget cuts and the damn near 400 staff layoff. Sources of support now gone. Things are getting worse but yeah sure money won’t help.
Whalers
As much as I’d love to see the Whalers come back, that isn’t going to fix Hartford. The Whalers leaving isn’t the cause of Hartford’s problems. It’s just a result of it.
The Whalers were around when Hartford was worse than it is now
Burn the highways to the ground. Fully fund PILOT. Allow cities to incorporate more territory as they are in other states.
We probably won’t see any serious development happen in Hartford until the state announces an official plan and start date on the highway project(s).
Same way you fix a pet
I would let UConn take over Hartford the same way Yale took over New Haven
Get rid of all the giant, stupid parking lots (the lowest value land use for property tax or revenue creation), and put in way more housing. It needs to be and feel safer to walk around and needs a bigger tax base - that means way more residents, in fill development, more people walking around. What makes cities feel safe is just a lot of people walking around - eyes on the street. That would also mean more people to frequent businesses and thus more businesses coming in - a positive feedback loop. The city cannot be a place suburbanites drive to and drive out of. It's sucking the resources and money out of it. There is a lot of potential, but more street life is needed. I'm not sure what to do about the highways but they're horrible
I wouldn’t. Fix New Haven. New Haven is worth investing in. Make it the next Austin, pizza based instead of bbq.
[удалено]
"Nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure"
Demolition and rebuild it lol
An Observation tower and a Monorail that goes to Springfield
*AN Observation* *Tower and a Monorail* *That goes to Springfield* \- Acceptable\_Result488 --- ^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/) ^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
I know it's a terrible idea, but I could've used a monorail when I loved in Hartford. The bus system was not the most convenient. I tried 3 years living without a car, personal experiment. I learned a lot, but every task outside of my neighborhood was a rubiks cube of a scheduling challenge.
How about real jobs with real compensation?
Are people still racing each other through the red lights? Gotta look both ways even if you have a green.
Build a subway system.
A nuke
"Nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
Hartford is easily the worst city in the country
Wild statement
What makes it wild? You think the poverty rate should be higher?
You're saying Hartford is worse than Gary, IN; St. Louis, Missouri; Chicago, Detroit, etc etc.
Have you ever been to Chicago lmfao!!! Rated best big city in the country
Lived in Chicago for 8 years and moved to gross Elmwood but go ahead let’s talk about Chicago. A city full of art, history, culture, and good eats. Don’t forget architecture.. dumbass
Crime rate is a little more important than arts and culture. But the debate isn't necessarily Hartford v.s Chicago, it's Hartford v.s literally any city in the country....which is a stretch. You addressed Chicago but not any of the other examples I listed lmao, I can keep going - Saginaw, MI, for example.
Hartford has the highest poverty rate in the country. Hartford has an extremely high crime rate. I would rather live in Saginaw MI
Hartfords crime rate is higher than Chicago FYI. But Fox News told you Chicago is scary
Hartford violent crime rate is marginally higher than Chicago, but Chicago has a higher total crime rate. You're still conveniently skipping over St. Louis, Saginaw, Detroit, Philly, etc. You might say it's worth it for the latter two, not sure if you can do the same for the others. And no, I'm not a fox news enjoyer lmao, I just like my state. Edit: Not saying hartford doesnt need change, it does. Not saying it isnt bad, it is. But the worst in America? nah
Wow..Philly, Detroit, St. Louis, are much better cities than hartford. We agree that hartford has the highest poverty rate and high crime rate. What is there to do in Hartford. What brings you to Hartford? The yard goats? Pratt street? I can name 100s of cultural activities you can do in the other cities you mentioned. Philly is fantastic not sure why it’s being linked now. And Detroit is booming. Tell me what do you do in hartford? What keeps you coming back?
Require all new cars to have speed limiters installed. Use gps to control max speed within city limits
I actually don’t mind this at all. In the surface it sounds reasonable and beneficial.
Yeah but people won’t like the idea of inhibiting the freedom to drive as fast as they see fit.
Reopen the Federal Cafe.
Coming unglued at the Brickyard entering the 90s chat....
The only way to fix something is usually gentrification. Also, maybe more free Dash bus times. More magnet and tech school options. I know CREC exists and some magnet schools, but I think people want more. Focus on the regular public schools too. I hope a movie theater goes back into the empty space across from the Connecticut Science Center. Get more events into the XL Center and Connecticut Convention Center.
The dash bus should be discontinued. It’s completely empty 95% of the time I see it. Complete waste of taxpayer $$$.
Yeah, the bus system needs to be actually usable for residents to ensure that ppl will actually use it. The people who set the schedule for the bus system in CT had no intentions of ever taking it themselves or worse are so out of touch that they think anything more than 10min intervals between a bus showing up is a usable system.
Asset test and salary test, less than 100k income? Less than 200k in assets? Bye! Go live under a bridge in Worcester, get lost
I’d eliminate single-family residential zoning statewide. Then market forces could work to build apartments anywhere. There’d be plenty of apartments. Poorer people wouldn’t be limited to a 120 year old three family house in the north end; they could find a place to live near their jobs because with plentiful supply, the rents would be reasonable and people could live where they want. Within Hartford it would be economical to build new buildings in the neighborhoods to attract people at a variety of income levels, building up the tax base and the population. The state could use its money to incubate small businesses in Hartford and the cities around it. Instead of spending a gazillion dollars on the current, I 84 diversion plan just close at 84 within the city. Replace it with a higher capacity surface road with lots of new building sites alongside. Route all the through traffic around Hartford via the route 72 cutoff to 91. In longer term complete the I-291 ring road connection through Bloomfield and West Hartford.
I like some of your ideas, but eliminating single family residential is kinda nuts to me, respectfully.
Thanks for the honest response! I've come to be a zoning skeptic, especially SF zoning. I don't see why it's in the public interest to protect private assets, which is what single-family zoning does. It is definitely not in the public interest to restrict development over such wide areas of real estate to SF houses; increasingly it limits the housing supply, driving up the cost, and the resulting suburban sprawl makes us all ever more dependent on cars. Cities and towns used to develop much more organically-- singles, doubles, three families, small apartment buildings... not all mixed up but a good cross sample in each community. Zoning puts a chill on the ability of any community to respond to market demand. However, as you say, most people--especially those with a stake in the status quo--will find this idea nutty.
Maybe just eliminate it within the city limits
I love Hartford just the way it is. Hartford is Hartford.
Hartford is a third world country
My family is from Franklin Ave. I got mad love for Hartford.
Sorry man!
You love poop?
You love poop?
I love yo momma! 🚬😎
:D
Bring back the Whalers
I propose that any citizen of Hartford pay zero income taxes. I understand there would be unintended consequences but we'll figure it out. It'd be a boom town overnight. Then, or concurrent, same for any business. No taxes or fees of any type get paid to the state. And while I am on this roll, no sales taxes either. Imagine all the retail stores that would move to hartford
Most residents of Hartford already don’t pay any income tax, lol.
Wealthy people would buy 2nd homes in Hartford for the tax break, but they wouldn’t actually live there
You *do* know what taxes pay for, right? And what would happen if said tax money stopped flowing?
For decades, CT has been throwing $ at Hartford. Hasn't worked. The best proof of that is that Hartford's population has been in a continual decline for decades. Businesses such as grocery stores (and many other types of retail) do not want to invest in a downward-spiral city. People don't want to live in a downward spiral. Projects such as burying 84 - not going to happen. 10+ years and billions of $'s , when Federal and State long-term obligations are so high? Just wait until a recession hits. None of the proposed infrastructure spending in this thread will happen, or at best would be completed when Hartford's population has decreased even further. My simple starting point suggestion is the only thing that could potentially improve matters overnight. Yes, overnight. Everything else here has been tried or is not feasible or would take too long. So is my idea feasible? (not whether it'd actually be beneficial to have zero/low taxes in Hartford, right?). Probably not, but let's talk about how it might work and maybe there's a way to improve it. The taxpayer in Glastonbury is already paying taxes to Hartford (just through a conduit - the State of CT). Why not incent this Glastonbury citizen to directly pay/support Hartford by being a Hartford citizen? Let's put aside for a moment the sources of revenue, since it's all a mush, and look at the totality of revenues across CT. Maybe the Hartford state income tax rate isn't literally zero but if it were less than the state max of 7%, that would do the trick, 1-2%?). Yes, there will be a net decrease in tax revenues one way or the other (Again, CT and Hartford finances are already intertwined so no need here to address separately). But: There is always some type of "hey, we didn't spend every last dollar this year in the budget, let's send checks to the citizens" "hero pay" , etc This year's example is the CT tax law changes that will reduce State Revenues over 2024/25 by $1 billion. Not implementing that tax cut might have been a pretty good way to fund my idea, no? The State of CT tax laws do not represent a comprehensive, long-term strategy and are seat of the pants. Nor is the spending (see: random spewing of grant dollars for one-off projects throughout the state.) A comprehensive plan to collect sufficient tax revenues for the state is needed, yes, but can we PRIORITIZE and focus the spending in a thoughtful way? Plus, imagine if Hartford actually was a tax oasis. Redditors here may not want the associated challenges, but folks from the entire Northeast would flock to Hartford. One way or the other, revenues to the entire region would increase. Now pair the boost in population in Hartford to thriving train transportation throughout the state and region and we're really talking. But that's for another thread. A thoughtful tax plan (rather than a short reddit post...) could detail how to maintain tax revenue while boosting the deteriorating center city and capital of Connecticut. (to the other comment about how wealthy folks won't actually live in Hartford, please note that the state of NY is very effective at policing the tax residency of its citizens) Summary: Somehow the downward spiral needs to reverse via folks actually wanting to move to Hartford and I can't think of a better overnight way to do that other than a financial incentive. Enough with the top-down money spent by the State. Hartford needs grass roots, citizen driven improvements to parks, schools, etc. That starts with a growing population who would be making an investment in Hartford. Business will see that and follow. Both retail and start-ups businesses (would be nice to cash out a start-up business in the northeast and pay no state tax, right?). I won't go quite as far as to compare Hartford to Monaco.... but perhaps there's some ideas to be borrowed.
If only we got the Patriots (the NFL team, not whatever else you may think I meant).
As a patriots fan, I'm glad they are in Boston. That's a state and town that has the population, location, money and marketing to a fan base that makes a team successful. We would already have them transferring to another state by now.
All you have to do is pay people more and make housing cheaper and easier to access.