Sunday, July 6, 2008

List of top 20 places in U.S. to raise families does not include the state of Tennessee

Don't get angry.

The factors constituting the best environment in which to raise children is quite subjective. New rankings by reputable sources come out all the time. So if you don't like the latest one -- such as the Top 20 ranking by Forbes magazine -- just wait a few more months.

At http://www.forbes.com/, the latest ranking advertised great schools, low crime and a desirable cost of living as the factors determining which U.S. county is the best place to raise a family. Go to that website to review the list and weigh the validity of the reporting.

These counties significantly beat the national average of 28% for locales putting property taxes into their public schools. That was the big standard for Forbes and its corporate readers. And for Tennessee counties with great schools, it is no wonder that the headquarters for North American Nissan has landed in Williamson County. The first workers are expected to show up this week.

The No. 1 best place is Hamilton County, just north of Indianapolis. Homes there sell for an average of $200,000. Nearly all the places on the top 20 list are suburban counties of big cities in the North.

Now swallow hard before reading further. The state of New Jersey has six counties on the top 20 list.

Pennsylvania had several counties outside of Philly on the list.

Wisconsin got two.

The only two Southern counties on the list are in Florida.

The state of Kansas got one, along with California, Texas, Rhode Island, Ohio, Virginia, Maryland, Massachuseets and South Dakota.

I can hear you shouting as you read this, since a lot of the new people we know in Tennessee have come here from the North. Take time to read the comments section under the Forbes story for some great entertainment from outraged former Northerners.

As for the social history molding the Forbes' rankings, you can cite white-flight over school desegregation or fatigue of parents in poor urban schools. Which came first is up to debate. But it certainly appears that corporations and long-time homeowners deserted the cities and their schools first.

So the acclaim these counties are now receiving for livability, low crime and schools is not grounded in as much heroism and visionary planning as they might like us to believe. And the current involvement of corporations in these school districts begs the question "why now?" and "why did you desert the cities and children-at-risk there in the first place?"

Still, the education bar has been set. And people of all races and ethnicites are buying into these suburban counties and the quality of life. The cities will never be able to jump as high because their property values -- particularly on residential properties -- will never reach that of the suburban counties. In addition, they have more education responsibilities with a more diverse student population.

Yes, urban districts do receive additional dollars from the federal government. But funds are no replacement for patrons of the district -- represented by long-time homeowners, local grocers and neighborhood manufacturers. That sense of stability and reliability is irreplaceable. If you don't believe this contention, go rent a copy of the movie, "It's A Wonderful Life."

Conversely, the lending scandal that has gripped the nation and mushroomed foreclosures has reduced property values in the suburbs, too. So their school budgets will be under stress like those in the city. But the suburbs will be forced to meet expectations, no matter if less revenue is coming in.

Yes, we all know that Tennessee is a good place to raise families. But the best? If that comparison must be made, then read who's hot and who's not. And perhaps, just perhaps, consider what more could be done in your county and state along with reforms to rattle the public education bureaucracy that wastes more money than it uses to actually help.

As for all the former Northern folks shouting at the computer screen, they might have to admit that the superior education they received in their highly taxed hometowns perhaps allowed them to pursue their professional careers and be able to move wherever they wanted in their later years. Just because they no longer have children in public schools does not make higher taxation directed toward better schools wrong.

At least that is what one of the bibles of the corporate world is saying.

Please don't kill the messenger ... just wait and think, if you want all the jobs from corporate HQs like Nissan.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

It's all about the education. Have lived in many states and the South has the worst education systems. People in Nashville don't seem to care about education or they don't understand what a quality education is. It's sad.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for an interesting perspective on the rankings, Tim. My wife is from northern New Jersey, essentially a suburb of NYC. While I have to agree that it is a wonderful place to live, the property taxes and real estate prices are really crushing. On the flip side, your kid can get a solid education in their local public schools, and they have great mass transit. There has to be some balance between keeping taxes manageable and adequately funding these services. Both extreme ends of the spectrum are bad.

Bryan Pieper
Tennessee