🚀 go-pugleaf

Michael Higby wrote the quoted material below:

" [....]  Even with the City of Van Nuys, for example, you could 
" have numerous districts and neighborhoods such as Sherman Oaks, Sherman 
" Village, College Park, etc.  

I don't think anyone in Sherman Oaks is going to want to be identified 
with Van Nuys.  Any new city would need to start with a neutral name, and 
Van Nuys is not neutral by any stretch of the imagination.  

In the Bay Area, 5 towns (Centerville, Niles, Mission San Jose, Warm 
Springs, and Irvington) became Fremont.  Neutral name.  No problem.

Two towns (Alvarado and Decoto) became Union City.  Again, neutral.  

Sharp Park, Vallemar, and numerous other communities became Pacifica.  
Again, the new name was neutral.

However, there are many communities that don't want to become part of an 
existing city.  Castro Valley (an very large unincorporated town) is 
kicking and screaming about someday being dragged into either Hayward or 
San Leandro.  They don't want it.  

By the same token, the community of Clayton did not want to "ruin the 
small-town atmosphere" by becoming part of Concord, a city seen as 
lower-end compared to Clayton.  

--
(c) 1996                         "Conceit, arrogance, and egotism are the
David Kaye                      essentials of patriotism." - Emma Goldman