DOCSLIB.ORG

Population in Iowa's Counties Within and Outside of Incorporated Places

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Population in Iowa's Counties Within and Outside of Incorporated Places Countryside and Town: Population in Iowa’s Counties Within and Outside of Incorporated Places, 1990 - 2010 May, 2011 Sandra Charvat Burke At each decennial census, population information is had at least 40 percent of the population living outside of reported for incorporated places1 as well as for the any town. Davis, Iowa, and Van Buren Counties had more unincorporated2 area of each county. In 2010, 79.0 percent than half their residents living in open country areas in 2010. of Iowans (2,405,529) lived within incorporated places, with For many counties, the two decades between 1990 and the other 21.0 percent (640,826) residing outside the 2010 were periods of population loss. Although Iowa’s boundaries of any incorporated town or city (Table 1). The overall population increased by 120,031 (4.1%) between figures for the incorporated place population in 2010 2000 and 2010, 66 counties experienced population decline. represented an increase in both number and percent of the Some counties had fared somewhat better between 1990 and population from 2000 (2,265,364; 77.4%) which in turn 2000, still, during that decade, 45 counties registered losses were gains from 1990 (2,125,922; 76.6%) (Figure 1). even though the state grew 5.4 percent (Table 2). There The population living in the countryside in Iowa, were varying patterns among the counties during these outside of towns and cities, declined between 2000 and 2010 decades in how losses or gains were distributed between the by more than 20,000 residents. This loss was a reversal of incorporated communities and the unincorporated areas. In the gains made the previous decade when the population in some counties, population was lost from both the unincorporated locations increased by 10,000 (Table 2, unincorporated countryside and from incorporated town Figure 1). In 2000, residents in countryside locations in locations. Other counties registered gains in both types of Iowa numbered 660,960 and were 22.6 percent of the locations while still others recorded gain in one type but loss population. In 1990, those in unincorporated areas made up in the other (Table 2). Although there were county-to- 23.4 percent (650,909) of the state’s residents. county variations, unincorporated areas declined in 75 There are clear and significant differences across the counties between 2000 and 2010 and declined in 56 counties counties in the proportion of residents living within or between 1990 and 2000. Incorporated town locations lost outside of incorporated places. For six counties in 2010, 90 population in 62 counties between 2000 and 2010 and in 29 percent or more of the residents lived within an incorporated counties during the earlier decade. community. These six counties (Black Hawk, Linn, Polk, Even though unincorporated areas are less densely Scott, Story, Woodbury) contain Iowa’s largest cities and, settled than towns and communities, as a broad generality, although they each have large numbers of residents in for many counties the losses experienced in their unincorporated areas, the cities are large and proportionally unincorporated areas were larger than the losses from their dwarf the number of country residents (Table 1, Figure 2). towns. Fifty-four counties had losses in their unincorporated In contrast to these highly metropolitan counties, there are areas during both decades, 22 counties experienced gains in others that continue to have a large proportion of residents unincorporated population both decades, and the other 23 living in unincorporated locations. Twenty-three counties had gain one period and loss in the other (Table 2, Figure 3). Figure 1. Population W ithin and Outside of Incorporated Places, Iowa, 1990 - 2010 Many counties fared better with their populations within Thousands 3500 incorporated towns and cities. Although 24 counties Total W ithin Incorporated Places Outside Incorporated Places recorded losses both decades in their populations within 3000 incorporated places, 32 experienced gains both decades in this group and 43 counties had one decade of growth and the 2500 other of loss (Table 2, Figure 4). For the counties that 2000 experienced one decade of growth and another of loss, the growth almost always came during the 1990 to 2000 period 1500 followed by a reversal into loss between 2000 and 2010. 1000 In the entire 20 years between 1990 and 2010 the state’s incorporated cities and towns gained nearly 280,000 500 residents while the unincorporated areas lost over 10,000 people (Table 3). Twenty-five counties (continued page 3) 0 1990 2000 2010 Table 1. Population Within and Outside of Incorporated Places in Iowa’s Counties, 1990 - 2010. Population Within Incorporated Places Population Outside Incorporated Places Total Population Number % of Total Number % of Total County 2010 2000 1990 2010 2000 1990 2010 2000 1990 2010 2000 1990 2010 2000 1990 Adair 7682 8243 8409 4715 4840 4745 61.4 58.7 56.4 2967 3403 3664 38.6 41.3 43.6 Adams 4029 4482 4866 2040 2209 2306 50.6 49.3 47.4 1989 2273 2560 49.4 50.7 52.6 Allamakee 14330 14675 13855 7837 8205 7449 54.7 55.9 53.8 6493 6470 6406 45.3 44.1 46.2 Appanoose 12887 13721 13743 8138 8942 8847 63.1 65.2 64.4 4749 4779 4896 36.9 34.8 35.6 Audubon 6119 6830 7334 3529 3761 3999 57.7 55.1 54.5 2590 3069 3335 42.3 44.9 45.5 Benton 26076 25308 22429 17016 16268 14160 65.3 64.3 63.1 9060 9040 8269 34.7 35.7 36.9 Black Hawk 131090 128012 123798 120697 117023 112902 92.1 91.4 91.2 10393 10989 10896 7.9 8.6 8.8 Boone 26306 26224 25186 17949 17928 17490 68.2 68.4 69.4 8357 8296 7696 31.8 31.6 30.6 Bremer 24276 23325 22813 17203 16136 15510 70.9 69.2 68.0 7073 7189 7303 29.1 30.8 32.0 Buchanan 20958 21093 20844 12751 12778 12373 60.8 60.6 59.4 8207 8315 8471 39.2 39.4 40.6 Buena Vista 20260 20411 19965 16104 15573 14646 79.5 76.3 73.4 4156 4838 5319 20.5 23.7 26.6 Butler 14867 15305 15731 9279 9413 9420 62.4 61.5 59.9 5588 5892 6311 37.6 38.5 40.1 Calhoun 9670 11115 11508 6870 7949 7757 71.0 71.5 67.4 2800 3166 3751 29.0 28.5 32.6 Carroll 20816 21421 21423 16361 16424 15770 78.6 76.7 73.6 4455 4997 5653 21.4 23.3 26.4 Cass 13956 14684 15128 10406 10776 10958 74.6 73.4 72.4 3550 3908 4170 25.4 26.6 27.6 Cedar 18499 18187 17444 11188 10912 10228 60.5 60.0 58.6 7311 7275 7216 39.5 40.0 41.4 Cerro Gordo 44151 46447 46733 39050 40519 40449 88.4 87.2 86.6 5101 5928 6284 11.6 12.8 13.4 Cherokee 12072 13035 14098 8504 8803 9492 70.4 67.5 67.3 3568 4232 4606 29.6 32.5 32.7 Chickasaw 12439 13095 13295 7363 7532 7395 59.2 57.5 55.6 5076 5563 5900 40.8 42.5 44.4 Clarke 9286 9133 8287 5887 5669 5135 63.4 62.1 62.0 3399 3464 3152 36.6 37.9 38.0 Clay 16667 17372 17585 13367 13618 13433 80.2 78.4 76.4 3300 3754 4152 19.8 21.6 23.6 Clayton 18129 18678 19054 9836 10364 10446 54.3 55.5 54.8 8293 8314 8608 45.7 44.5 45.2 Clinton 49116 50149 51040 40787 41162 42131 83.0 82.1 82.5 8329 8987 8909 17.0 17.9 17.5 Crawford 17096 16942 16775 12582 11771 10999 73.6 69.5 65.6 4514 5171 5776 26.4 30.5 34.4 Dallas 66135 40750 29755 55826 30452 20034 84.4 74.7 67.3 10309 10298 9721 15.6 25.3 32.7 Davis 8753 8541 8312 3222 3188 3186 36.8 37.3 38.3 5531 5353 5126 63.2 62.7 61.7 Decatur 8457 8689 8338 5568 5802 5692 65.8 66.8 68.3 2889 2887 2646 34.2 33.2 31.7 Delaware 17764 18404 18035 9323 9583 9277 52.5 52.1 51.4 8441 8821 8758 47.5 47.9 48.6 Des Moines 40325 42351 42614 31443 33093 33240 78.0 78.1 78.0 8882 9258 9374 22.0 21.9 22.0 Dickinson 16667 16424 14909 12511 11763 10584 75.1 71.6 71.0 4156 4661 4325 24.9 28.4 29.0 Dubuque 93653 89143 86403 74635 71501 69959 79.7 80.2 81.0 19018 17642 16444 20.3 19.8 19.0 Emmet 10302 11027 11569 8065 8464 8666 78.3 76.8 74.9 2237 2563 2903 21.7 23.2 25.1 Fayette 20880 22008 21843 14215 14680 14245 68.1 66.7 65.2 6665 7328 7598 31.9 33.3 34.8 Floyd 16303 16900 17058 11029 11445 11489 67.7 67.7 67.4 5274 5455 5569 32.3 32.3 32.6 Franklin 10680 10704 11364 7056 6611 6657 66.1 61.8 58.6 3624 4093 4707 33.9 38.2 41.4 Fremont 7441 8010 8226 4539 4797 4803 61.0 59.9 58.4 2902 3213 3423 39.0 40.1 41.6 Greene 9336 10366 10045 6713 7285 6715 71.9 70.3 66.8 2623 3081 3330 28.1 29.7 33.2 Grundy 12453 12369 12029 8185 7836 7332 65.7 63.4 61.0 4268 4533 4697 34.3 36.6 39.0 Guthrie 10954 11353 10935 5674 6212 5819 51.8 54.7 53.2 5280 5141 5116 48.2 45.3 46.8 Hamilton 15673 16438 16071 11882 12193 11578 75.8 74.2 72.0 3791 4245 4493 24.2 25.8 28.0 Hancock 11341 12100 12638 7623 7707 7834 67.2 63.7 62.0 3718 4393 4804 32.8 36.3 38.0 Hardin 17534 18812 19094 12931 13680 13660 73.7 72.7 71.5 4603 5132 5434 26.3 27.3 28.5 Harrison 14928 15666 14730 8481 9062 8721 56.8 57.8 59.2 6447 6604 6009 43.2 42.2 40.8 Henry 20145 20336 19226 13823 14094 12998 68.6 69.3 67.6 6322 6242 6228 31.4 30.7 32.4 Howard 9566 9932 9809 5626 5761 5557 58.8 58.0 56.7 3940 4171 4252 41.2 42.0 43.3 Humboldt 9815 10381 10756 7301 7329 7536 74.4 70.6 70.1 2514 3052 3220 25.6 29.4 29.9 Ida 7089 7837 8365 4891 5176 5294 69.0 66.0 63.3 2198 2661 3071 31.0 34.0 36.7 Iowa 16355 15671 14630 8041 7650 6923 49.2 48.8 47.3 8314 8021 7707 50.8 51.2 52.7 Jackson 19848 20296 19950 11705 12018 11836 59.0 59.2 59.3 8143 8278 8114 41.0 40.8 40.7 Jasper 36842 37213 34795 24622 24826 24040 66.8 66.7 69.1 12220 12387 10755 33.2 33.3 30.9 Jefferson 16843 16181 16310 11106 10965 11350 65.9 67.8 69.6 5737 5216 4960 34.1 32.2 30.4 Johnson 130882 111006 96119 109539 89533 78732 83.7 80.7 81.9 21343 21473 17387 16.3 19.3 18.1 Jones 20638 20221 19444 12108 12084 11664 58.7 59.8 60.0 8530 8137 7780 41.3 40.2 40.0 Keokuk 10511 11400 11624 6637 7179 7053 63.1 63.0 60.7 3874 4221 4571 36.9 37.0
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Letter Bill 0..3
    HB0939 *LRB10103319AWJ48327b* 101ST GENERAL ASSEMBLY State of Illinois 2019 and 2020 HB0939 by Rep. Michael J. Madigan SYNOPSIS AS INTRODUCED: 65 ILCS 5/1-1-2 from Ch. 24, par. 1-1-2 Amends the Illinois Municipal Code. Makes a technical change in a Section concerning definitions. LRB101 03319 AWJ 48327 b A BILL FOR HB0939 LRB101 03319 AWJ 48327 b 1 AN ACT concerning local government. 2 Be it enacted by the People of the State of Illinois, 3 represented in the General Assembly: 4 Section 5. The Illinois Municipal Code is amended by 5 changing Section 1-1-2 as follows: 6 (65 ILCS 5/1-1-2) (from Ch. 24, par. 1-1-2) 7 Sec. 1-1-2. Definitions. In this Code: 8 (1) "Municipal" or "municipality" means a city, village, or 9 incorporated town in the the State of Illinois, but, unless the 10 context otherwise provides, "municipal" or "municipality" does 11 not include a township, town when used as the equivalent of a 12 township, incorporated town that has superseded a civil 13 township, county, school district, park district, sanitary 14 district, or any other similar governmental district. If 15 "municipal" or "municipality" is given a different definition 16 in any particular Division or Section of this Act, that 17 definition shall control in that division or Section only. 18 (2) "Corporate authorities" means (a) the mayor and 19 aldermen or similar body when the reference is to cities, (b) 20 the president and trustees or similar body when the reference 21 is to villages or incorporated towns, and (c) the council when 22 the reference is to municipalities under the commission form of 23 municipal government.
    [Show full text]
  • Historic Preservation in Sherborn
    HISTORIC PRESERVATION IN SHERBORN I. Town Facts and Brief History A. Town Facts Sherborn is a small semi-rural community located about 18 miles southwest of Boston. The town is proud of its rural heritage which is still evident in many active farms and orchards, and preserved in Town Forest and other extensive public lands. Open space comprises more than 50% of the town's area. Because all properties have individual wells and septic systems, minimum house lot sizes are one, two or three acres, depending upon location. Sherborn is an active, outdoors-oriented town where residents enjoy miles of trails through woods and meadows for walking and horseback riding, swim and boat in Farm Pond, and participate in any number of team sports. A high degree of volunteerism due to strong citizen support for town projects, and commitment to excellence in public education, characterize the community's values today, as they have for more than 325 years. Some quick facts about Sherborn are: Total Area: 16.14 sq. miles (10328 acres) Land Area: 15.96 sq. miles (10214 acres) Population: 4,545 (12/31/02) Registered voters: 2,852 (12/31/02) Total Residences 1,497 (1/1/02) Single family homes: 1,337 (1/1/02) Avg. single family tax bill: $8,996 (FY03) B. Brief History Of Sherborn Settled in 1652 and incorporated in 1674, Sherborn was primarily a farming community until the early part of the 20th century. It now is a bedroom town for Boston and the surrounding hi-tech area. Sherborn's original land area encompassed the present territory of Holliston, Ashland, and parts of Mendon, Framingham and Natick.
    [Show full text]
  • CPY Document
    353 OFFICIAL OPINION NO. 89 August 27, 1945. Hon. Clement T. Malan, State Superintendent of Public Instruction, State House, Indianapolis 4, Indiana. Dear Sir: Your letter of August 1, 1945, received requesting an offcial opinion on the following: "The City of Evansvile recently annexed a portion of Knight Township, Vanderburgh County. "A statute, Burns' Indiana Supplement, Section 28- 3305a, Acts of 1935, ch. 158, paragraph 1, page 578, provides for the liabilty of the city or town for the indebtedness of the annexed territory. "Does this statute make the civil City of Evansvile liable for the debts of the school trustee of the annexed territory, or does it make the School City of Evansvile, Indiana, liable?" Section 28-3305a, Burns' 1943 Supplement, saine being Section 1, Chapter 158, Acts 1935, provides as follows: "In all cases where any city or incorporated town of this state has annexed or shall hereafter annex any territory, or where any town has been or shall here- after be incorporated, and where the civil township, or school township, from which such territory was or is taken, is indebted or has outstanding unpaid bonds or other obligations at the time of the annexation or incorporation of such territory, then such city or town, as the case mày be, shall be liable for, and pay such proportion of such indebtedness of such civil township or school township as the assessed valuation of prop- erty in such annexed or incorporated territory is to the valuation of all property in such township, as the same is assessed for general taxation, prior to the annexation of any such territory or incorporation of any such town.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft MRE1-2017 INCORPORATED TOWN of MONROE, NEW YORK
    Draft MRE1-2017 INCORPORATED TOWN OF MONROE, NEW YORK TOWN BOARD ADOPTED LOCAL LAW NO. of 2017 IMPLEMENTING AN EXTENSION OF THE MORATORIUM ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OF THE UNINCORPORATED TOWN OF MONROE, NEW YORK Section 1. Legislative findings and intent. The Town Board (“Board”) of the Incorporated Town of Monroe, New York (‘Town”) previously found that there was a critical and compelling need, in the public interest as set forth in its prior Resolution, to impose a moratorium on the development of all residential property construction in the Town, and, the Town did adopt such a Moratorium. A. The Town previously undertook a Comprehensive Master Plan review in 2005 and enacted Local Laws with regard to the Comprehensive Master Plan (“CMP”) in 2008. The 2005 CMP indicated: In order to remain useful, municipal plans require periodic review and revision, typically at five to ten-year intervals. Economic conditions and business practices, housing and land use needs, transportation conditions and environmental standards are in a constant state of change; so municipal Plans need to be re- evaluated in order to provide for current needs. In 2015, the then Town Board confirmed that the Zoning Regulations were in need of amendment and that a rezoning process had been in effect for over half a decade. Moreover, a Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement (“DGEIS”) was prepared to evaluate proposed 2015 Chapter 57 Zoning Amendments. Accordingly, there was a need for a current CMP that reflects all current land use, socio-economic, community character and other impacts. B. The Town Board previously found that the issues raised in The 2005 CMP adopted in 2008 warranted the Town consider a CMP at this time since economic and social impacts and trends have rendered assumptions and recommendations in the 2005 CMP in need of review and revision and that various ad hoc reviews and attempted amendments to the prior CMP did not provide for a Comprehensive Plan as New York State Town Law Section 272-a contemplates.
    [Show full text]
  • Neighboring Town Early Vital Records
    HAYES-GENOTER HISTORY AND GENEALOGY LIBRARY NEIGHBORING TOWN EARLY VITAL RECORDS The Town of Pelham was first settled in 1720-21. During that time frame the western one third of present day Pelham was included in the Town of Dunstable, Massachusetts, which had been incorporated in 1673 by the Great and General Court of Colonial Massachusetts. The eastern two thirds of Pelham during that time frame were part of Dracut, Massachusetts, which had been incorporated by Colonial Massachusetts in 1701. On January 4, 1731-2, all of Old Dunstable, Massachusetts located east of the Merrimack River, including the western one third of Pelham, was separated from Old Dunstable and became a part of the newly incorporated Town of Nottingham, Massachusetts. The eastern two thirds continued to be a part of Dracut, Massachusetts. In 1741, by Royal Decree of the King of England, all of present day Pelham was determined to be in the British Colony of New Hampshire, not Massachusetts. From the date of that decree until July 5, 1746, the western one third of present day Pelham was governed as part of Nottingham District, New Hampshire. The Nottingham District included all of Nottingham, Massachusetts declared to be in New Hampshire by the King’s decree. The District, although not technically a town, was governed by a Board of Selectmen and slate of other Town Officers until July 5, 1746. From the 1741 royal decree date until July 5, 1746, the eastern two thirds of present day Pelham were governed as part of the combined Dracut/Methuen District of Colonial New Hampshire.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Sanbornton Zoning Ordinance
    Town of Sanbornton Zoning Ordinance Town of Sanbornton, New Hampshire ZONING ORDINANCE 2021 Edition Town of Sanbornton Zoning Ordinance ZONING ORDINANCE TOWN OF SANBORNTON, NEW HAMPSHIRE 2021 EDITION* * The “2021 Edition” of the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Sanbornton NH supersedes all previous editions of the Zoning Ordinance document, no matter in what medium such previous editions were provided. * The “2021 Edition” of the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Sanbornton NH remains in effect until such time as it is amended, at which time the “2021 Edition” will be replaced with an up-dated edition of the Zoning Ordinance document which will include all subsequent amendments and will be identified by the year in which such amendment took effect. This Zoning Ordinance is subject to typographical and formatting corrections. Town of Sanbornton Zoning Ordinance TABLE OF CONTENTS ARTICLE 1 PREAMBLE………………………………………………………………………………………. 1.1 ARTICLE 2 DISTRICTS……………………………………………………………………………………….. 2.1 ARTICLE 3 DEFINITIONS………………………………………………………………………………... 3.1-3.7 ARTICLE 4 GENERAL PROVISIONS………………………………………………………………...... 4.1-4.47 ARTICLE 5 GENERAL AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT……………………………………………………. 5.1 ARTICLE 6 GENERAL RESIDENCE DISTRICT…………………………………………………………... 6.1 ARTICLE 7FOREST CONSERVATION DISTRICT…………………………………………………….…. 7.1 ARTICLE 8 RECREATIONAL DISTRICT……………………………………………………………… 8.1-8.2 ARTICLE 9 HISTORICAL PRESERVATION DISTRICT………………………………………...………. 9.1 ARTICLE 10 COMMERCIAL DISTRICT………………………………………………...………….. 10.1-10.2 ARTICLE 11 HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT………………………….………………..….…… 11.1 ARTICLE 12 AQUIFER CONSERVATION DISTRICT……………….…………………………….. 12.1-12.2 ARTICLE 13 FLOODPLAIN CONSERVATION DISTRICT………………….……………………. 13.1-13.8 ARTICLE 14 SHOREFRONT DISTRICT……………………………………………………………. 14.1-14.2 ARTICLE 15 WETLANDS CONSERVATION DISTRICT…………………………………………. 15.1-15.5 ARTICLE 16 STEEP SLOPE CONSERVATION DISTRICT………………………………………. 16.1-16.2 ARTICLE 17 NON-CONFORMING USES, BUILDINGS AND LOTS……………………………..…… 17.1 ARTICLE 18 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT…………………………………………………………...
    [Show full text]
  • Incorporation of a North Carolina Town
    David M. Lawrence and Kara A. Millonzi Incorporation of a North Carolina Town Third Edition 2007 School of Government University of North Carolina The School of Government at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill works to improve the lives of North Carolinians by engaging in practical scholarship that helps public offi cials and citizens understand and strengthen state and local government. Established in 1931 as the Institute of Government, the School provides educational, advisory, and research services for state and local governments. The School of Government is also home to a nationally ranked graduate program in public administration and specialized centers focused on information technology, environmental fi nance, and civic education for youth. As the largest university-based local government training, advisory, and research organization in the United States, the School of Government offers up to 200 classes, seminars, schools, and specialized conferences for more than 12,000 public offi cials each year. In addition, faculty members annually publish approximately fi fty books, periodicals, and other reference works related to state and local government. Each day that the General Assembly is in session, the School produces the Daily Bulletin, which reports on the day’s activities for members of the legislature and others who need to follow the course of legislation. The Master of Public Administration Program is a full-time, two-year program that serves up to sixty students annually. It consistently ranks among the best public administration graduate programs in the country, particularly in city management. With courses ranging from public policy analysis to ethics and management, the program educates leaders for local, state, and federal governments and nonprofi t organizations.
    [Show full text]
  • An Investigation of the Origin of Place Names of Towns in Penobscot County, Maine
    The University of Maine DigitalCommons@UMaine Electronic Theses and Dissertations Fogler Library 8-1956 An Investigation of the Origin of Place Names of Towns in Penobscot County, Maine William F. Fox Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/etd Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Fox, William F., "An Investigation of the Origin of Place Names of Towns in Penobscot County, Maine" (1956). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 3328. https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/etd/3328 This Open-Access Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UMaine. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UMaine. For more information, please contact [email protected]. AN INVESTIGATION OF THE ORIGIN OF PLACE 2 NAMES OF TOWNS IN PENOBSCOT COUNTY, MAINE By WILLIAM F. FOX A«B., Harvard College, 1950 A THESIS Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts (in History) Division of Graduate Study University of Maine Orono August, 1956 AN INVESTIGATION OF THE ORIGIN OF PLACE NAMES OF TOWNS IN PENOBSCOT COUNTY, MAINE By William F. Fox An Abstract of the Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts (in History). August, 195&* A study was made of the origin of place names of towns in Penobscot County, Maine. Each of the sixty-one town names is taken up in chronological order. A list of the previous designations of each town, beginning with the survey designation, is included and an attempt has been made to find the origin of these wherever possible as well as the name used today.
    [Show full text]
  • Illinois Revised Cities and Villages Act: a Study
    Chicago-Kent Law Review Volume 21 Issue 2 Article 1 March 1943 Illinois Revised Cities and Villages Act: A Study J. Stanley Stroud Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/cklawreview Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation J. S. Stroud, Illinois Revised Cities and Villages Act: A Study, 21 Chi.-Kent L. Rev. 129 (1943). Available at: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/cklawreview/vol21/iss2/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Commons @ IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Chicago-Kent Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarly Commons @ IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. CHICAGO-KENT LAW REVIEW VOLUME 21 MARcH, 1943 NUMBER 2 THE ILLINOIS REVISED CITIES AND VILLAGES ACT: A STUDY J. STANLEY STROUD* PRIOR LEGISLATION B EFORE 1870 most, if not all, cities, villages, and incor- porated towns in Illinois were organized under special charters granted to each of them separately by special act of the General Assembly. Much of the time of the early legislators was devoted to the enactment of such legisla- tion.' While the general provisions of the various special charters, were, for the most part, reasonably similar, there was nothing like universal uniformity, some municipalities receiving a much more liberal grant of powers than others. After the prohibition, by the Illinois Constitution of 1870, of this type of special legislation, the General Assembly, in 1872, enacted the Cities and Villages Act.2 This Act, con- stituting as it did the general charter of all municipali- ties incorporated thereunder, authorized new cities and vil- lages to be incorporated under its provisions, and author- ized already existing cities, villages, and incorporated towns to abandon their prior organization and become incorporated as a city or village under the provisions of the Act.
    [Show full text]
  • Middleton, NH
    Middleton, NH Community Contact Town of Middleton Board of Selectmen 182 King's Highway Middleton, NH 03887 Telephone (603) 473-2261 Fax (603) 473-2450 E-mail [email protected] Web Site www.middletonnh.gov Municipal Office Hours Selectmen: Monday through Thursday, 8 am - 4 pm; Town Clerk, Tax Collector: Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, 9 am - 5 pm, Wednesday, 9 am - 3 pm County Strafford Labor Market Area Dover-Durham, NH-ME Metropolitan NECTA Tourism Region Lakes Planning Commission Strafford Regional Regional Development Wentworth Economic Development Corp. Election Districts US Congress District 1 Executive Council District 1 State Senate District 3 State Representative Strafford County District 1 Incorporated: 1778 Origin: This territory was first granted by the Masonian Proprietors in 1749. It may have been named for Sir Charles Middleton, Lord Barham, an admiral of the Navy who had served in the West Indies. Middleton was situated on the road between Exeter and Wolfeboro, the location of Governor John Wentworth's summer home, Kingswood. Neglect of the road caused the Governor to bill the proprietors for repairs that he had to make for safe travel to Kingswood. In 1785, residents of the northern portion of Middleton and part of Wolfeboro petitioned for a separately incorporated town. The first petition was at first denied, but then was granted in 1794 as Brookfield. Villages and Place Names: Middleton Corners Population, Year of the First Census Taken: 617 residents in 1790 Population Trends: Population change for Middleton totaled 1,408 over 49 years, from 430 in 1970 to 1,838 in 2019. The largest decennial percent change was a 71 percent increase between 1970 and 1980, followed by a 66 percent increase between 1980 and 1990.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 2A Municipal Incorporation Part 1 General Provisions
    Utah Code Effective 5/12/2015 Chapter 2a Municipal Incorporation Part 1 General Provisions 10-2a-101 Title. (1) This chapter is known as "Municipal Incorporation." (2) This part is known as "General Provisions." Enacted by Chapter 352, 2015 General Session 10-2a-102 Definitions. (1) As used in this part: (a) "Feasibility consultant" means a person or firm: (i) with expertise in the processes and economics of local government; and (ii) who is independent of and not affiliated with a county or sponsor of a petition to incorporate. (b) (i) "Municipal service" means any of the following that are publicly provided: (A) culinary water; (B) secondary water; (C) sewer service; (D) storm drainage or flood control; (E) recreational facilities or parks; (F) electrical power generation or distribution; (G) construction or maintenance of local streets and roads; (H) street lighting; (I) curb, gutter, and sidewalk maintenance; (J) law or code enforcement service; (K) fire protection service; (L) animal services; (M) planning and zoning; (N) building permits and inspections; (O) refuse collection; or (P) weed control. (ii) "Municipal service" includes the physical facilities required to provide a service described in Subsection (1)(b)(i). (c) "Private," with respect to real property, means taxable property. (2) For purposes of this part: (a) the owner of real property shall be the record title owner according to the records of the county recorder on the date of the filing of the request or petition; and (b) the value of private real property shall be determined according to the last assessment roll for county taxes before the filing of the request or petition.
    [Show full text]
  • Voluntary Municipal Disincorporation: Creative Solutions for Counties of the Second Class by Aaron Lauer Voluntary Municipal Disincorporation
    Voluntary Municipal Disincorporation: Creative Solutions for Counties of the Second Class By Aaron Lauer Voluntary Municipal Disincorporation 2 Table of Contents 3 Letter from Co-chairs 4 Creating Robust Communities 4 What is Disincorporation? 5 Disincorporation across the Country 6 Disincorporation in Pennsylvania 7 Recommended Task Force Disincorporation Plan 10 Voluntary Municipal Disincorporation Task Force Membership 12 Appendix: State Municipal Disincorporation Statutes 2 Voluntary Municipal Disincorporation Letter from Co-chairs Municipal governments have a far more profound effect on the Municipal Disincorporation Task Force. The Voluntary quality of our daily lives than any other level of government. Municipal Disincorporation Task Force was composed of Through the delivery of essential public services, municipal elected officials, state government officials with an expertise governments give us a unique sense of place and community. in local government affairs, local government practitioners, Municipal governments shape the character of our neighborhoods, academics, and business leaders. The group convened regularly they provide gathering places in parks and libraries, and they over nine months to deliberate on issues surrounding deliver the public services that ensure our families’ safety and municipal disincorporation. The result of the task force’s effort health. This is why we call the municipalities in which we is a clear and concise roadmap for municipal disincorporation. live “home.” The proposal defines not only the criteria for determining when disincorporation is an appropriate strategy but also the However, these are difficult times for municipalities. Municipal steps for implementation. It is the consensus of the committee governments are being asked to deal with more and increasingly that, given the myriad challenges facing Allegheny County complex challenges at a time when local revenue sources are municipalities, it makes sense to expand eligibility for stagnant or declining.
    [Show full text]