Talk:Louisville, Kentucky/archive2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Cheers!

I am honestly surprised and delighted at how much this article (and related articles) have recently seen so much progress. I am honored that my city's article is one of the rare breed of articles to be proclaimed "featured". I am deeply happy for my city and feel very very proud of the work we all did and continue to do. A big "Cheers!" all the way around! — Stevie is the man! Talk | Work 18:53, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

What's Next?

Now that the article has achieved featured article status, I've archived the previous discussions from this page, as many of those items have been addressed. Now, we ask ourselves, what's next? One possibility, is looking at some of the many articles that have sprouted up from this article (linked from here), and work those towards featured article status. For example, I have noticed that the Kentucky Derby article was recently denied FA status, so perhaps we can clean this up, as it is closely related. Any other suggestions? Dr. Cash 18:57, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Good question. I've been thinking about this, and have a few Louisville-related suggested improvements.
  1. Mayor of Louisville needs to be merged with List of Mayors of Louisville.
  2. I think Louisville's Central Park deserves its own article, although I'm not sure what the proper name is. Also, the Great Flood of '37, which affected other cities as well, although I'm not sure what to call that article either. And the Ohio River Valley deserves an article.
  3. Louisville-related articles that seem on their way to FA status include Kentucky Derby (as you mentioned), Kentucky, History of Louisville, Kentucky, Ohio River, Muhammad Ali, and University of Louisville.

– Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 02:01, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

The Kentucky Derby Festival article needs work, it really should be better.--Dp462090 21:41, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

History/ L.E.O.

The line that reads: "The Louisville Eccentric Observer (LEO), Louisville's most popular alternative newspaper, was founded in 1990" is wrong.

How did LEO get voted the most popular alternative weekly? They aren't the most read. ABD Media Audit covers LEO, Velocity and Snitch, and Snitch is the most read. Unless someone did a survey (not counting LEO's annual list issue), then that seems the only way to determine what publication is popular. I really think it needs to come out, but I'm new and have no idea what a featured article is, and don't want to edit it.

Ryan Stultz

Feel free to edit featured articles, just as confidently as you do other articles. All that means is that it's been voted one of the best of Wikipedia, but it can still be improved. In this case, if Snitch is the most read, I guess the statement in the article is incorrect. Thanks for pointing that out. – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 00:51, August 1, 2005 (UTC)
It shouldn't matter which alternative paper is the "most" popular--is that info anyone can use or care about with respect to Louisville, Kentucky? The article should say LEO is "a popular alternative newspaper" (and this can apply to Snitch and Velocity as well) and avoid having an article following changing media ratings to continually elevate one above the others. — Stevie is the man! Talk | Work 18:53, August 1, 2005 (UTC)
Snitch has since gone the way of the Dodo, folks, due to a bunch of legal and financial brouhaha which probably deserves an article of its own.

Use of Figures from the 2000 Census

Is there some reason the facts and figures section quotes the figures from the 2000 Census, which now refer to an entity that no longer exists? As of 2003 Louisville consists of 26 districts, no subset of which corresponds to the old city limits. So the 2000 Census info refers to an entity that no longer exists in any way, shape, or form. Can't somebody just put in the 2000 Census figures for Jefferson county, since Louisville == Jefferson now under Kentucky law (regardless of a soon-to-be-corrected error by the Census bureau)?


The difference between Louisville in the "governmental" sense and "Louisville" in the Census sense is entirely different. I agree that the entire county should be counted, but the Census for some reason excludes the other cities in the county (i.e. Jeffersontown) for numbers purposes only because they still count those cities seperate from the rest of Louisville.

One example is when Jacksonville, Florida consolidated with Duval County in 1968, The 1970 Census counted the entire county, although there were four other incorporated places in the county. For some reason, they seperate Jacksonville from the towns during the 1980 census.

So in actuality, You have "two" populations for Louisville. One for the "entire-county" and the other for "census purposes" only. Hope this will answer any of your questions :)--Moreau36

P.S. I will need to find the 2000 census revision for Louisville, then I'll post it ASAP.

Well, if you had been following the story in the Courier, you would know that the "two populations" situation is the result of a "miscommunication" between the Jefferson county commissioners office, and the Census Bureau. The Census Bureau has already stated that this error will be corrected starting with next year's Census figures (that is, the 2005 figures) at which point Louisville will in fact be the 16th largest city, just like all the road signs say.

  • If other cities within the county were not part of the merger, then they are not part of the city for population figures. The figures for metropolitan areas are entirely different. What's up? Did the other cities join Louisville or not? --JimWae 06:25, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
    • Yes, they were part of the merger, but what happened is a "misreporting" as described above. So, what we had was a "reality/legality vs. federal government recognition" temporary issue; now the reality is recognized. That is, the federal government wasn't reporting what was true because it didn't have the correct information. I think that the legality that Louisville was the 16th largest should override census figures that temporarily showed it as the 26th largest. — Stevie is the man! Talk | Work 09:44, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Is this correct:
    1. The city & county gov't are the same.
    2. Every elector in county gets to vote for the county/city gov't
    3. Those in other cities in county ALSO get to vote for their city gov't
  • How is this different from having no city gov't at all in Louisville, just a stronger county gov't?
  • Doesn't this all point to how "configurable" a rank of cities is. Far more telling regarding where the population centers are is a ranking of metropolitan areas. --JimWae 06:26, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

I inserted a small reference to the 2000 census section referring to the Lexington-Fayette 2000 figure being higher than the 2000 "old" Louisville figure. I left out any commentary on that being any impetus for the ultimate passage of the merger election. That despite a merger plan that dates back quite a while prior. --K3vin 00:32, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

2004 Population Estimates Conflict

I can only relate this situation to that of the former USSR. USSR was a Federal Republic with approx 15 constituant republics. But when it came time for UN designation, it was agreed that Ukraine, and Belarus would also have delegates to the UN so effectively they maintained that the USSR was a country, but so were the Ukraine and Belarus. As I understand this great debate. Jefferson County has municipalities other than Louisville. That the merger of Louisville and the county was with the unincorporated portions of the county. The government would have county functions of the larger territory - sheriff, county taxation etc. Certain the "old louisville and old rural" parts of the county would have city services. To avoid duplication of services formerly incorprated towns were not disolved but retained. They continued their own city services, and the old county services they received are from the new Metro Louisville.

I can see why this is driving statisticians crazy. Is generic Louisville the county population or the county population less the intraterritorial incorporated entities.

When New York City merged with 4 other counties, the counties became burroughs, and if there were any incorporated townlets, they were merged into the Big City. The us vs them compromise which was to alleviate the fears of the outer burroughs of being dominated by "New York" now Manhattan was that each Burrough has a president and they each had a vote in some matters. - Much like the senate of the US. Wyoming and California have the same number of votes in the senate. However. Whith no representational form of the burrow presidential system, it was decided that it denied equal representation to the more populous burroughs.

Louisville/Jefferson's solution was to keep its old suburbs as separate territories. I do not see any way to rectify the debate of how big is Louisville when this issue is still there. I do not think anyone that is paying attention, really thinks city (proper) Population is an indicator of size of metro population any more than geographic area is an indicator of population size. Eg The are of sitka alaska is huge, while its population is tiny.

Lexington was lucky in that it had no incorporated towns to dissolve or absorb. There were "census designated places" as they would be called today, but officially they were all unincorporated county. An odd adendum to this was, prior to the merger, there were pockets of county completely surrounded by the city of Lexington. When a crime was committed within those enclaves, county police or sheriffs would have to respond, not the, often closer, City police. Currently Lexington has a we/them urban rural dichotomy. With zoning laws, the rural will largely stay rural, and the urban services zone should expand and infill.

The passion of this debate reminds me of school boys showing off to each other behind the gym. #16 #26 #1? Its still bigger than Lexington, and isn't that what it was all about in 2004? Not many people in Lexington cared in 2000 when the pop. figures put Lex. slightly ahead of Lou. for the first time since, possibly, the 18th century. I think the 'villians had a regan-head-spinning moment with that reality. Instant Merger - and now the great size debate.

Gosh this got long. sorry 'bout that. --K3vin 00:36, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

All I know is the now entering Jefferson county signs were all replaced with Entering Louisville (with more name junk?), America's 16th largest city. Zotel - the Stub Maker 12:57, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

WOW, there is so much this world has to offer in the "things to know" department :-) but my response to those signs is what is the "Horse Capital of the world?" Both Lexington and Versailles make that claim. Signs do not always make things so, but the do make impressions. I get the distinct impression Louisville is not a city but a county from most of this debate. K3vin 05:42, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Good Work!

Just saying excellent job on the article from a small town down here in Glasgow, KY! The Wookieepedian 00:09, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

16th vs. 26th largest

Louisville is indeed the 16th largest city in the U.S., but we probably need to add info to the article to cover the "controversy". Text from the "Use of Figures from the 2000 Census" discussion above could be used as a start. — Stevie is the man! Talk | Work 16:58, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Population of U.S. Cities over 100,000 in 2004: great source from the U.S. Census Bureau--Moreau36 0147; 2 October 2005 (UTC)
That's great, but we also need a source for the controversy itself that explains why "16th largest" is actually the correct determination. There was an explanatory article in The Courier-Journal at some point, but I've been unable to locate it. — Stevie is the man! Talk | Work 23:51, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
Here is a CJ link, may not be the one you want tho... http://www.courier-journal.com/kyguide/merger03/sweet16.html This one might help too http://www.courier-journal.com/kyguide/merger03/qa.html if you read thru the 2nd link, it has a setion that mentions you have TWO mayors. Maybe you can bean some people over the head with these. Zotel - the Stub Maker 00:37, 9 December 2005 (UTC)


The second Courier-Journal article provides some valuable insights:
Q: How will residents of the 83 suburban cities be affected by merger?
 A: Suburban cities remain intact...
 This appears to be saying that eighty-three (83!) municipalities continue to exist post-merger. Each of these has boundaries, and each has a corresponding estimate by the Census of the number of people living within those boundaries. Those people cannot be counted for both the City of Louisville and for one of the 83 "suburban cities". They can only be rightly counted as part of Louisville's population if the cities no longer exist -- i.e. are no longer "intact".

Q: What happens to my tax bill?
 A:...Residents of small cities will pay their current property taxes and property taxes levied by their cities.
 This statement clearly acknowledges the existence of cities - plural! - i.e., there is Louisville, and there are others besides Louisville. Again, each has a population associated with it, and people can't be counted twice.

Q: I live in a small city within Jefferson County that already has a mayor. Is Metro Mayor Jerry Abramson also my mayor?
 A: You’ll have two mayors. Your small-city mayor will continue to officiate over your community...
This offers further support that incorporated cities in Jefferson County continue to exist post-merger. If they truly were merged with Louisville, the mayors would be out of a job and would no longer be officiating. The Census estimates for cities correspond to entities that have one and only one mayor. In a sense, residents of New York City have "two mayors" - their borough president and Bloomberg, but Bloomberg is the only mayor and the borough presidents are called as such, and not as "mayors". If Louisville was a merger like that of New York City, the 83-odd cities would be converted into boroughs or other subdivisions, and not retain the same status as before.

Q: Can the metro government annex unincorporated county areas and suburban cities?
 A: The metro mayor and the Metro Council cannot dissolve or merge existing suburban cities...
 This is perhaps the most convincing statement of all: the existing cities retain such a degree of independence and "sovereignty", that the Metro Council cannot make any changes to them. It cannot dissolve, i.e. disincorporate them. And if it can't disincorporate them, they remain incorporated as entities separate from the City of Louisville. And each of those entities has a certain population residing within it, which then live outside of the City of Louisville. And people who live outside of the City of Louisville cannot be included in an estimate of Louisville's population. Thus, the City of Louisville's population is not identical to Jefferson County's population!

Considering these statements, how can the Census possibly have made a "mistake" that needs to be "corrected"? Unless there is truly any possibility of this, a claim to 700,000 residents and ranking as the 16th largest city can only be portrayed in the article as that - a claim which is not supported by official Census data and methodologies, and flies in the face of the existence of 83 other cities and their residents!
Denvoran 02:16, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Leeds sister city

I almost reverted that too, though I did find this [1]:

Louisville Mayor Jerry Abramson and the citizens of Louisville recognized Leeds as a “Friendship City” at the Sister Cities of Louisville 2004 Summit. Both cities are working towards a formal Sister Cities agreement with Leeds in the near future.

As of April 11, 2005 [2] it still doesn't seem to be official. Just putting this here since I went to the trouble of finding it all. --W.marsh 23:06, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

WFPL = jazz?

The article claims jazz is featured on WFPL. I've been away from Louisville for several months, so maybe there's been a format change since I've been gone ... but as far as I know 89.3 no longer features any music. Can someone still in the area confirm this? 68.34.41.188 05:25, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

You are correct. WFPK is jazz and other music. WFPL is all news. – Quadell (talk) 13:45, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Income bit needs some sorting out

"The median income for a household in the city is $28,843, and the median income for a family is $36,696. Males have a median income of $30,608 versus $24,439 for females. The per capita income for the city is $18,193. 21.6% of the population and 17.9% of families are below the poverty line. Out of the total population, 33.5% of those under the age of 18 and 13.2% of those 65 and older are living below the poverty line."

"The median income for a household is $39,457, and the median income for a family is $49,161. Males have a median income of $36,484 versus $26,255 for females. The per capita income for the county is $22,352. 12.40% of the population and 9.50% of families are below the poverty line. Out of the total population, 18.10% of those under the age of 18 and 8.80% of those 65 and older are living below the poverty line."

Which is it?

This is the same problem as all of the other merger issues. The first numbers you have listed (which I think appears second in the actual article) are old City of Louisville numbers. The second ones are county as a while (including Louisville and all other smaller cities' residents). I would say the second ones are correct, for consistency sake with the other statistical changes. Look at other decisions, it seems like with numbers that predate merger, Jefferson County should be used, not the City numbers. Though, this is an interesting tidbit, that meger raised the economic profile quite a bit (I would assume mostly because of the eastern population, which is where a lot of the smaller cities are, having been setup as havens to avoid incorporation into Louisville years ago)-- Ryan Stultz

Most Jews are German?

I'm from Louisville and have a Jewish father and grow up going to the Jewish Community Center and I can tell you that most Jews in Louisville are of Russian and Eastern European origin, including our Mayor Jerry Abramson (comes from the Russian Abramovich). In fact I don't think I have ever meant a Jewish person of German distant in Louisville.

My husband grew up in Loisville and his father is of Russian and Polish Ashkenazic origin. My mother is Sephardic Spanish origin. I am not from there but lived there three years and we have never met a person of german Jewish descent either.--Dakota 21:47, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Keep the blog?

I reverted it the first time but the anon has added it back (without discussion). Does anyone care about the mention of the Downtown Louisville Blog in the external links section? Personally I'd say move it to Downtown Louisville if it's to be kept at all. --W.marsh 03:38, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

No at any rate. The blog was just created this month, and thus has very little content. I can't imagine why anyone would think that it's notable. — Stevie is the man! Talk | Work 05:03, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

New 'Maintained' tag

If you are a regular maintainer of this article, please add your name to the new Maintained template at the top. To add another name, place ", {{user4|YourUserName}}" after "{{user4|Stevietheman}}", and so forth. — Stevie is the man! Talk | Work 05:39, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism - Use of incorrect census figures

I will continue to revert this vandalism. The exclusion of cities within a county-wide government that those cities ARE SUBJECT TO AND PART OF is incorrect and misleading. I will only stop upon a page protection resolution, if it goes against me. I refuse to let a member of the "Flat Earth Society" keep this information in this article, and all "compromise" edits I put forth have been rejected by this person. Let the edit war continue.

Excuse me, whoever you are, this was comprimised by the regular editors of the article and was agreed to a COMPRMISE (see article's history). Read the link next to both figures prior to reverting facts. THAT'S VANDALISM and quite frankly, in which you're doing, whether you know it or not. Please be aware of Wikipedia's three-revert rule in which, if you don't be careful, will be reported to one of the admins without question, so don't push your luck!! Thank You. --Moreau36, 114, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

My vote

Is to not include misleading rubbish, or at a bare minimum, allow it to be noted as disputed, since I consider it to be inaccurate for the reasons that I have stated time and again. I will abide by the decision, but excluding places inside the county goverment that are subject to and a part of said county is the height of lunacy. The population for Lousvile includes ALL persons in the county, since they are ALL subject to that governemenent.

I think part of the controversy can be culled directly from your statement. The government is indeed a county government. The towns that still exist within the county have city or town governments. The rest, is what I would call urbancounty - which is what Lexington considers itself. I do not think the census is trying to undercount the residents of Jefferson County, I just think some people think counting a person twice is not correct nor fare to the cities that do not have even the remotest justification for doing so. If for example, three cities merged with one half of each other. each city has a population of 100,000. the metro has a population of 300,000. But to use the "subject to the government" argument, each city would now have 200,000 people. They would have their own 100,000 original, and 50,000 from each of the other two. But there are still only 300,000 people total. But if you count each of the three cities populations you would get 600,000 because in each of the 200,000 figure there are people counted twice. Just like with Metro Louisville. One county of 500,000 people cannot rightfully have a city (L-Vill) with a population of 500,000 and 99 lesser cities with a range of 199 to 35,500, totalling say 150,000 people. Doing so would suggest the county would then have 650,000 people, which no one says is the case. Some people say - since the county is the city, the county population should be the population. Others are saying, until the other enclave municipalities are not also counted as cities, then only the portions of "old Louisville" and the formerly unincorporated territories are the "city" population. I do not think it is fair to have it both ways. What seems to be at stake is a bragging rights of how big a city is. Metro pop is what counts or msa csa or what not. True city population is an inherently deceiving statistic. K3vin 09:38, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

As K3vin notes, population figures should not count the same person toward the population of two or more cities. In the 2004 Census estimates, a certain population is given for Louisville and also, for example, Jeffersontown. Either a person is a resident of Louisville, or s/he is a resident of Jeffersontown, but s/he cannot be both. Some are arguing that Jeffersontown has become a part of Louisville, along with other incorporated places in Jefferson County. That may be the case. Yet the Census DOES recognize that Jeffersontown still exists as a municipality, and so it does not include Jeffersontown's population with that of Louisville.

If the Census is "wrong" in recognizing that these municipalities continue to exist, then they must act to change their estimates. Until they do, however, the current estimates must stand, so that "apples to apples" comparisons can be made with the estimates provided for other cities. There is no reason why they should not be mentioned in the article - except to satisfy what could be described as vain delusions of grandeur. Why is it so important for some that the absolute greatest population figure be assigned to Louisville, with no mention of possible caveats - are they suffering from feelings of inadequacy? are they living out their feelings of low self-esteem through the city? A reasonable person should be able to accept an article that tells both sides of the story until the Census does fix it - and I suspect that the Census really didn't make a mistake and is treating Louisville the same way it does other consolidated city-counties within which independent, separate municipalities continue to exist.

Please recognize that there is a difference between being subject to a county government alone and being subject to both a city and county government. If Jeffersontown continues as an entity, a resident of Jeffersontown is still living in Jefferson County and is "subject" to that government. S/he, however, also continues as a resident of Jeffersontown. So Louisville cannot claim the residents of a still-incorporated Jeffersontown as its own, even if the Louisville city government and the Jefferson County government have become one and the same. That is double counting!

For those who maintain that "incorrect" Census figures should not appear in the article, I submit that there are no "wrong" Census figures. In the U.S., population figures come exclusively from the Census Bureau - if a certain figure is "wrong", then what figure is right? The Census Bureau cannot have contradictory figures. The "wrongness" comes about only through interpretation. The reader should be empowered with all of the information available to make his/her own interpretation. If a reader accepts the arguments that Louisville and Jefferson County have merged into a coextensive entity with no further municipalities continuing to exist in the county, then the county population of 700,030 is supplied. However, a reader should also know that that figure is assigned to Jefferson County, while a different figure, 556,332, is given for the City of Louisville. Why is there this discrepancy? This is a question the reader has a right to know about, and get an answer for. Instead of an Orwellian approach that would hide certain data and supply only one interpretation, the article should supply all data in a fashion that is as transparent as possible.
Denvoran 18:26, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

I support the compromise that existed before. Louisville is the 16th largest city, but due to the providing of incorrect data to the Census Bureau, it's currently listed as the 26th. This is a temporary glitch in the Census data that will be corrected the next time they release figures. This was reported in the Courier-Journal, as noted above. Perhaps a better approach to all this will be to thoroughly explain the dispute in the article--not to pretend the dispute doesn't exist. — Stevie is the man! Talk | Work 04:25, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

"Stevie", what is this article you are referring to, the one that explains the "glitch" in Census data? The Courier-Journal articles mentioned above make repeated references to multiple cities continuing to exist within Jefferson County. If there are other cities in the county besides Louisville, then the population of Louisville is less than the population of the entire county, which is used to make the 16th largest claim. Denvoran 23:47, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Here is evidence:

[3] : "Q: I live in a small city within Jefferson County that already has a mayor. Is Metro Mayor Jerry Abramson also my mayor? A: You’ll have two mayors. Your small-city mayor will continue to officiate over your community. The law allowing merger protects the small cities. The metro mayor will preside over the entire county, somewhat similar to the way the judge-executive used to function." In other words, the new city and the county are one and the same, and the pre-existing cities are now like cities within a city. Louisville Metro = Jefferson County.

[4] : Announcement of Louisville becoming 16th largest -- this story has not been retracted, as far as I know.

[5] : Government document that shows Louisville as 16th largest.

The C-J article about the reporting glitch isn't available online, as the C-J now charges for access to old articles. But another editor saw the article, and that was referenced above.

Overall, I see no impropriety with "counting citizens twice". They can be citizens of their incorporated minor cities as well as citizens of Louisville Metro, Jefferson County, the Commonwealth of Kentucky and the United States of America. Just because the Census Bureau is misreporting doesn't deny the fact that Louisville Metro is indeed the 16th largest city in the U.S. But I also don't object to reporting about the Census Bureau's currently incorrect numbers.

— Stevie is the man! Talk | Work 21:47, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

This "evidence" does not fit with Census methodologies. The Census does not define ANY "cities within cities" - they don't exist. That's like having a "state within a state" or a "country within a country" - this just doesn't happen. Either a place like Jeffersontown is indeed a city; or it is a district, neighborhood, or section of a city. But it cannot be a city that is within another city. When Brooklyn merged with New York City, it lost its status as a city. Brooklyn is not a city within a city, but a borough of New York City. Brooklynites could make the claim that they live in the 4th largest city, but the Census does not put Brooklyn in the rankings because Brooklyn does not have the status of a city anymore. Here we have perhaps the reverse situation: Louisville wants to claim other cities to inflate its population, but as long as they retain their status as cities, the Census will report their populations separately and not include them with Louisville's.

Newspaper articles and reports released by the new metro government might have stated that Louisville has become the 16th largest city, but this is similar to statements like "California is the world's sixth largest economy". This is only true hypothetically, i.e., IF California were an independent country, it would rank 6th among the nations with regard to their economies. But California is part of the United States, and so it doesn't get ranked with other countries. Similarly, Louisville would be the 16th largest city IF no other cities existed in Jefferson County. But when the Census ranks cities, it ranks cities, apples with apples - not a mix of cities and counties and city-county consolidations. If a county appears in the rankings, it is because a city and county are coextensive (e.g. San Francisco and Denver). If a city-county consolidation appears in the rankings, it is the county minus any incorporated cities that remain in the county. And this is exactly why the population of Louisville is estimated as 556,332 and not as 700,000 - Louisville is no different than any other city-county consolidation. Why is Louisville so special that the entire county's population should be counted, when this is not done for Indianapolis, Jacksonville, or Nashville? Bottom line: Louisville is only hypothetically the 16th largest city; only if no other cities existed in Jefferson County.

The Census ranking of cities does not count people twice. And it also does not recognize a difference between so-called "minor incorporated cities" and other cities - either a place is an incorporated city, or it is not. Yes, of course, a person can be a resident of a city, county, state and of a country - all four of them - but not a resident of two or more cities. Again, a person is either a resident of the City of Jeffersontown, or s/he is a resident of the City of Louisville, but s/he cannot be both!

Look at it this way: as a city, Jeffersontown has to fall somewhere in the rankings of the largest cities of the United States. Let's say that its 26,232 residents place the city as the 312th largest city in the country. Those 26,232 people cannot contribute to making Jeffersontown the 312th largest city at the same time they are contributing to make Louisville the 16th largest city!

The claim as 16th largest is based entirely on Census data - i.e., the populations that the Census has determined using its methodologies. One only knows to place Louisville ahead of Austin because of information provided by the Census. If you're going to use Census data to say that Louisville is larger than Austin, then you have to "play" by the Census' "rules" - which are that consolidated city-counties are ranked by the population of the county minus incorporated cities that remain in the county. One cannot accept the ranking of cities 1 through 15, which is done using consistent Census methodologies, and then say, "For number 16, we're going to bend the rules. We're going to look at #16 differently. We'll include the *entire* county population for the 16th largest city, even though there are many cities in that county." That's ridiculous! One cannot say, yes! yes! we will accept the Census estimate for Jefferson County, no questions about that, but then accuse the Census for "misreporting" or making an "error" when - using its own consistent methodologies - it reports a different estimate for the City of Louisville.

If mentioned in the article, claims to be the 16th largest city and to a population of 700,000 must be couched in a hypothetical phrase, such as:

"The most recent Census estimate for Louisville is 556,332, placing it as the 26th largest city in the U.S. For consolidated city-counties like Louisville, the Census does not include other incorporated places in the county. If these other places were included, Louisville would have the same population as Jefferson County - 700,030 - and it would be the 16th largest city. While this ranking has been widely reported in the local media, and even appears on road signs posted at the city limits, it is not supported by Census methodology."

Denvoran 08:12, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

The U.S. Census Bureau is the main source for population data and has set definitions. many resources from almanacs to world atlases use the U.S. Census as their main source of U.S. Population information. On that issue, for the census to ignore other incorporated places in consolidated city-counties is like a "slap to the face" for those muncipalities, who in part need those numbers for funding needed for those cities/towns/villages. If look carefully. many consolidated city-counties with other independent municipalities within them will have the word (balance) in the title, which means the population of the respective city's boundaries prior to the merger and the population of former unincorporated communities (or in some cases, Census Designated Places). Consquently for Louisville, you have many other small incorporated towns and villages other than Jeffersontown and Shively, that the census did not ignore (83 in total). In the upcoming census (2010) the place's title heading will likely be Louisville-Jefferson County (balance), Kentucky, just like Nashville-Davidson (balance), Tennessee. If Louisville was the only incorporated city in Jefferson County, then the entire county would be counted by the census due to the fact that no other muncipalities would be "in the way".

A hypotheical example: IF Los Angeles city and Los Angeles County were to consolidate as of today, Do you think that the U.S. Census and the State Census of California would ignore other large cities such as Long Beach, Pomona, Pasadena and the other 84 cities that are in existance in the county? In my personal opinion, no, because although they are consolidated in to LA City-County, they would likely still have their own city governments and the residents of their respective cities would likely to be subjected to their city laws, thus Los Angeles would only be counted for the "pre-merger"boundaries plus the unincorporated communities that city annexed.

Besides, the jump from 61st in 2000 to 26th in 2004 is HUGE and I don't think that the average Louisvillian is complaining.

--Moreau36; 2317, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm an outsider to this argument (I just happened to bump into it while looking around). I sympathise with you. The UK government completely screwed up the English sense of a city and town sizes in the 70s (some have doubled in size by including the surrounding rural districts). These balance statistics seem to be an odd invented concept by the U.S. Census to balance the books (hence the name I guess). Most articles of cities that have been consolidated seem to happily use the county figures (note Nashville). The only one that doesn't in Indianapolis which uses the balance figure grugingly. However, the reference used refers to Jefferson county, which is confusing in an article about Louisville. It should probably say something along the lines of "since the merger of the two governments the city population is now analogous to the county population of ..." (without spelling mistakes). josh (talk) 08:20, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Any info about US Alt 60?

Does anyone know exactly when the route US Alternate 60 was authorized or why? I would like to put more detailed info about it on the US Highway 60 page. User:Brando03 123105

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../l/o/u/Talk%7ELouisville%2C_Kentucky_archive2_570f.html"