Cities that belong in other states

[Cirrus]

One might argue that culturally speaking,

• Jacksonville belongs in Georgia
• Toledo belongs in Michigan
• El Paso belongs in New Mexico

What else? What cities feel like they're in the wrong state?

[3rd&Brown]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

One might argue that culturally speaking,

• Jacksonville belongs in Georgia
• Toledo belongs in Michigan
• El Paso belongs in New Mexico

What else? What cities feel like they're in the wrong state?

This is a good topic though thank god Jacksonville isn't in Georgia. Jacksonville is in the state in which it belongs, which continues to go back in time, while Georgia is moving forward.

The other two seem spot on.

[L41A]

The north Florida city that is more like the adjacent area of Georgia is Tallahassee.
Jacksonville is more Florida than Georgia in many ways. While the synergy between Tallahassee and SW Georgia is much stronger.

Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown

This is a good topic though thank god Jacksonville isn't in Georgia. Jacksonville is in the state in which it belongs, which continues to go back in time, while Georgia is moving forward.

The other two seem spot on.

[Crawford]

Mobile in LA, Memphis in MS, Charleston in GA.

[Steely Dan]

Kansas City, MO into Kansas.

Michigan City, IN into Michigan.

If for no other reason than to end the confusion surrounding their names.

[jmecklenborg]

Buffalo should be somewhere where buffalo roam.

[pj3000]

Philadelphia belongs in New Jersey.

It's the very reason for the state of Pennsylvania's existence, but an uninformed visitor to Philadelphia would barely know that it's the primate city of a state that stretches 300 miles to the west. Somewhat akin to the relation of NYC to the rest of New York state on a much smaller scale.

And among the very first attributes of Philadelphia that denizens cite about their city is not even integral to the city itself. Very often, the first thing a Philadelphia-area local mentions when talking about his city is its proximity to New York, followed by the Jersey shore.

I happen to think that Philadelphia is a great city on its own... but it always feels like locals want to almost immediately tout that NYC is 2 hours away or the shore is 60 miles away. It's clear that, at least subconsicously, they want to be part of Jersey.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by pj3000

Philadelphia belongs in New Jersey.

It's the very reason for the state of Pennsylvania's existence, but an uninformed visitor to Philadelphia would barely know that it's the primate city of a state that stretches 300 miles to the west. Somewhat akin to the relation of NYC to the rest of New York state on a much smaller scale.

And among the very first attributes of Philadelphia that denizens cite about their city is not even integral to the city itself. Very often, the first thing a Philadelphia-area local mentions when talking about his city is its proximity to New York, followed by the Jersey shore.

I happen to think that Philadelphia is a great city on its own... but it always feels like locals want to almost immediately tout that NYC is 2 hours away or the shore is 60 miles away. It's clear that, at least subconsicously, they want to be part of Jersey.

I was going to say that NYC would fit in as part of New Jersey. There is far more cultural overlap between NYC and NJ than there is between NYC and upstate NY.

[UrbanRevival]

Originally Posted by pj3000

I happen to think that Philadelphia is a great city on its own... but it always feels like locals want to almost immediately tout that NYC is 2 hours away or the shore is 60 miles away. It's clear that, at least subconsicously, they want to be part of Jersey.

I really don't think that's accurate, not at least amongst any Philadelphian I've met. I think this really gets to more of the quintessential "East vs. West" divide in PA.

And it's not as though New Jersey itself is homogenous; there's very distinct different between North and South Jersey. If anything, "Piedmont PA"--which encompasses the Philly area, the Lehigh Valley, and South-Central PA--really forms its own distinctive region, economically, demographically and politically.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Kansas City, MO into Kansas.

Michigan City, IN into Michigan.

If for no other reason than to end the confusion surrounding their names.

Going back to this.

(in a vain attempt to quell the PA insanity)

Are there any other US cities that are named after a state that that they are not located in?

Specifically, I'm looking for "_____ City", where the blank is the name of a state that the city ain't in.

[craigs]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Going back to this.

(in a vain attempt to quell the PA insanity)

Are there any other US cities that are named after a state that that they are not located in?

Specifically, I'm looking for "_____ City", where the blank is the name of a state that the city ain't in.

Two that come to mind immediately: Nevada City, CA and Virginia City, NV.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by craigs

Two that come to mind immediately: Nevada City, CA and Virginia City, NV.

Also Colorado City, AZ.

[bilbao58]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Going back to this.

(in a vain attempt to quell the PA insanity)

Are there any other US cities that are named after a state that that they are not located in?

Specifically, I'm looking for "_____ City", where the blank is the name of a state that the city ain't in.

There’s a suburb of Houston called Missouri City.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Going back to this.

(in a vain attempt to quell the PA insanity)

Are there any other US cities that are named after a state that that they are not located in?

Specifically, I'm looking for "_____ City", where the blank is the name of a state that the city ain't in.

West New York, New Jersey
Delaware County, PA
Indiana County, PA
California, PA

[James Bond Agent 007]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Kansas City, MO into Kansas.

...

If for no other reason than to end the confusion surrounding their names.

This. You would not believe how many people I encounter who think Kansas City is in Kansas. And of course, there really is a KCK, but it's not what one usually means when one says "Kansas City."

I was really surprised at this when I moved here. Even when I was a kid I knew Kansas City was in Missouri.

Frankly, rather than move KC into Kansas, I think they should instead rename Kansas City (MO of course). There's a "Missouri City" not far from KC, and maybe they could merge, but I don't think the folks of Missouri City would take kindly to that.

A better idea I thought of would be to change the name of KCMO to "Truman." There's tons of Truman-this and Truman-that around here, so it would be a natural thing to use for a city name.

"Truman, Missouri."

So the Chiefs would become the Truman Chiefs and the Royals would become the Truman Royals.

Or maybe you use "Truman City." Then it would be the Truman City Chiefs and the Truman City Royals.

Since Truman was a democrat republicans might get upset. Too bad. There's all kinds of Lincoln-stuff in Illinois even though Lincoln was a republican and Illinois is dominated by democrats.

[AviationGuy]

Originally Posted by James Bond Agent 007

This. You would not believe how many people I encounter who think Kansas City is in Kansas. And of course, there really is a KCK, but it's not what one usually means when one says "Kansas City."

I was really surprised at this when I moved here. Even when I was a kid I knew Kansas City was in Missouri.

Frankly, rather than move KC into Kansas, I think they should instead rename Kansas City (MO of course). There's a "Missouri City" not far from KC, and maybe they could merge, but I don't think the folks of Missouri City would take kindly to that.

A better idea I thought of would be to change the name of KCMO to "Truman." There's tons of Truman-this and Truman-that around here, so it would be a natural thing to use for a city name.

"Truman, Missouri."

So the Chiefs would become the Truman Chiefs and the Royals would become the Truman Royals.

Or maybe you use "Truman City." Then it would be the Truman City Chiefs and the Truman City Royals.

Since Truman was a democrat republicans might get upset. Too bad. There's all kinds of Lincoln-stuff in Illinois even though Lincoln was a republican and Illinois is dominated by democrats.

I was at a conference in downtown Kansas City (MO) about 20 years ago. One of the prominent speakers started out by thanking the people of Kansas for their hospitality. There was a chuckle among the audience, and she looked perplexed. Later on, someone told her, and she later apologized about her gaffe.

[edale]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Mobile in LA, Memphis in MS, Charleston in GA.

Why would Charleston make sense in Georgia? It's basically the flagship city of South Carolina, and I think pretty integral to the identity of that state. Plus, Georgia already has its Charleston-ish city in Savannah.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by edale

Why would Charleston make sense in Georgia? It's basically the flagship city of South Carolina, and I think pretty integral to the identity of that state. Plus, Georgia already has its Charleston-ish city in Savannah.

To me, lowland SC is extremely different from upland SC. Savannah and Charleston inhabit the same cultural space, and it's very different from most of SC.

[iheartthed]

I think Savannah seems more of the outlier in Georgia and would fit better in the Carolinas. However, the Carolinas and Georgia have the same dynamic where the coastal culture is distinct from the bigger inland cities and feels more "colonial" versus the new big cities inland. Atlanta, Greenville, and Charlotte, are probably more like each other than they are the older coastal cities in their states.

[edale]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

I think Savannah seems more of the Georgia outlier in Georgia and would fit better in the Carolinas. However, the Carolinas and Georgia have the same dynamic where the coastal culture is distinct from the bigger inland cities and feels more "colonial" versus the new big cities inland. Atlanta, Greenville, and Charlotte, are probably more like each other than they are the older coastal cities in their states.

Yeah, I agree with this. Greenville seems like more of the outlier in SC than Charleston. The state flag of SC has a palmetto tree on it, which is characteristic of coastal SC, and not found in the Greenville area. Greenville and that uplands portion of SC seems more like North Carolina or Georgia to me. Charleston is quintessential South Carolina imo. There are plenty of other coastal, beachy areas of SC like Myrtle Beach, Hilton Head, etc. Georgia has Tybee Island, but I can't think of too many other notable beach/coastal towns. I agree that Savannah would fit better in SC than Georgia.