Star, Idaho is dealing with what many communities in the United States have experienced at one time or another: the change to the community that comes with a growing population.
Since then, Star, about 30 minutes west of Boise, has become the fastest-growing city in Idaho—one of the fastest-growing states in the nation. Over the past nine years, Star’s population has doubled to more than 10,000. Most of the growth has come from people like the Turnipseeds who uprooted from the West Coast to the greater Boise area—known as the Treasure Valley—drawn by the promise of less stressful and more affordable living. By 2040, Star’s population could surpass 35,000, according to city projections.
Now Star is grappling with some of the same problems the Turnipseeds left California to escape. The town’s main drag, where ranchers once drove their cattle, is clogged with traffic during rush-hour commutes. Sprawling subdivisions have sprouted up around farmland, as have new chain stores. The median home price has more than doubled to nearly $400,000 since 2010…
According to a September 2019 survey by Boise State University, 75% of Treasure Valley residents said that growth was occurring too fast, up from 50% in 2016…
The debate over Star’s transformation mirrors the rest of the region, as disputes in neighboring cities have erupted over whether to approve major housing developments. A public meeting in Star this week on a proposed apartment complex is expected to draw a large crowd, officials said.
Growth is generally good for American communities. To not grow is to stagnate (or even decline).
But, this story presents one of the acceptable situations in which residents and leaders can argue their community should not grow. The typical argument goes like this: our community (or neighborhood) is unique because it is small, tight-knit, not over-developed and more people coming would ruin the character and atmosphere.
It gets more complicated when the community is full of relatively recent arrivals. In cases of suburban sprawl, people might choose a community to move to because of its particular features and then find in ten or twenty years that the community changed because other people had similar ideas. At what point do community members get to discuss and possibly enact drawing up the proverbial moat and saying they want no more growth?
Pretty much all communities change over time. Instead of thinking in binary terms of change versus no change, it would be helpful to think of community change on a continuum from slow change to major quick change. Some people do really want to live in communities that change relatively little and such places can be found. Others might want to be in dynamic places and they can find those. How many people will move when a community changes a lot? Hard to say as this might be dependent on personal circumstances or the direction of change.
Working out these tensions in a community can be difficult. Much public conversation and listening are needed. And some residents might move away seeking something else and others might still come as they see something attractive and exciting.