Living: All Riled Up About Ratings

Whether the subject is the beefiest burger or the biggest corporation, Americans have a penchant for making lists of the best and the worst, then arguing about the results. Since 1939, when Psychologist E.L. Thorndike devised a “goodness index” to rate U.S. cities, no rankings have inspired more disagreement than those about home sweet home. The latest edition of Rand McNally’s Places Rated Almanac can only add to the controversy. According to the 449-page paperback released last week, the best all-round metropolitan area in which to live in the U.S. is Pittsburgh. The worst: Yuba City, Calif.

Pittsburgh boosters celebrated as if the Steelers had won the Super Bowl. “We’ve been the best-kept secret in the world,” said Mayor Richard Caliguiri, “and now the secret is out.” But in the Yuba City area (pop. 109,000), a farming center 40 miles north of Sacramento, residents were mystified. Said Realtor Bill Meagher: “Our quality of living is excellent. Somebody’s got their wires crossed.”

The choices are far from the only revelations in the $14.95 Almanac, which ) ranks all of the nation’s 329 metropolitan areas, where more than 75% of all Americans reside. Since 1981, when the first edition appeared, the fortunes of a number of cities have changed. One reason: this time around Authors Richard Boyer and David Savageau have refined their nine “livability” criteria. Data about climate, housing, health care, crime, transportation, education, culture, recreation and economics are now weighted by such qualities as “fortunate circumstances of geography” and “outdoor recreational assets.” Third-ranked Raleigh-Durham, N.C., moved up from ninth place, for instance, partly because it is “a genteel place to live.” Atlanta, 1981’s top city, fell to eleventh place, hurt by conditions at its zoo. Washington, second in 1981, slipped in rank to 15th, while the metropolitan Greensboro, N.C., area dived from third to 41st.

Boston residents have their own theories on why Bean Town jumped from 18th to second place. Harvard Social Scientist David Riesman (The Lonely Crowd) thinks that media exposure helped. Doug Flutie, the former Boston College quarterback, he notes, “is quick, brainy and made it on countless telecasts.” John Updike, who lives in the exclusive suburb of Beverly Farms, cites the economic factor. “When I came to Harvard in the ’50s, Boston was fairly grubby,” says the novelist. “Now if you have the money, it’s a nice place to live.”

The almanac’s most unexpected result: of the top 20 areas, only four are in the western part of the country. In the 1981 study, cities stood or fell on their own merits. Now the authors give smaller areas credit for the amenities of nearby major cities. Suburban Norwalk, Conn., for example, gained points for New York City’s top standing in the arts and health care, but was not penalized for New York’s last-place rating in crime. Thus Norwalk went from 148th place to ninth. New York’s rank is 25th.

Boyer, a mystery novelist, and Savageau, a relocation consultant, worked for 16 months to track down and verify new statistics. “Every call to a government agency,” says Savageau, “uncovered ten other statistics we could use.” The authors also devised their own formulas. To gauge climate, for example, they developed a complex scheme relating relative humidity to seasonal variations in temperature. To update the 1980 census, they turned to such sources as IRS change-of-address lists. One discovery: the Sunbelt may have oversold its desirability. Address changes for the past two years show % the Northeast has been gaining population while the West has been losing it. Conclude the authors: “Not only did our (older) cities not die, they are undergoing a rejuvenation unparalleled in our history.”

A rating of American metropolises, they write, “is like a snapshot of a moving target.” No picture is fuzzier than that of No. 1 Pittsburgh. It received no outstanding marks in eight categories–its best was seventh in education–and it accumulated no low ones. “Pittsburgh is like the Steelers’ front line,” observes Boyer. “Not incredibly strong in any one area, but consistently good overall.”

Cities in the basement are already contesting the criteria. By last weekend, Rand McNally was overwhelmed with outraged calls. One caller, Pat Lile, a Pine Bluff, Ark., development promoter, complained of Pine Bluff’s 328th-place rating: “They don’t contact one person or make one phone call. Other people use their data, and the damage proliferates.” Said Mayor Edward Bartholomew of Glens Falls, N.Y., which ranked 290th: “We’re going to have a public burning of (Rand McNally’s) almanac and all their maps.” Responded Rand McNally Public Relations Director Conroy Erickson: “All we’ve done is supply the raw material. Readers need to make their own judgments.”

Residents of Yuba City quickly did so. Apples and oranges, they said. “I don’t see how they can compare cities like Pittsburgh and Yuba City,” commented Fireman Ron Ruzich. “It’s just a way for someone to sell books somewhere.” Part-time Mayor Chuck Pappageorge, a grain merchant, looked for a way to capitalize on the city’s bottom-rung prominence. Said he: “If we’d been second to last, no one would have noticed. This is a great opportunity. We’ll get some yardage out of this.” Better hold that line, Pittsburgh.

CHART: Text not available.