Twin Cities place 5 suburbs in top 22 of 2012 Best Cities List

[pete6032]

Originally Posted by stolafs69

Too many rentals destroy a community....look at North Mpls. Most the houses there are rentals.

Yes it was the rental housing that destroyed the community, not segregation or institutially racist policies of the past like redlining or restrictive housing covenants. And certainly not the policies of today which base school funding on property values.

[golfgal]

Originally Posted by pete6032

Yes it was the rental housing that destroyed the community, not segregation or institutially racist policies of the past like redlining or restrictive housing covenants. And certainly not the policies of today which base school funding on property values.

You do realize that Minneapolis has the highest per pupil funding in the state right? School funding isn't "based" on property values, the funds come from property taxes, which go up or down as costs for the schools increase/decrease.

[ManBearPig1]

Originally Posted by HiFi

Too many rentals doesn't destroy a community, too many poor people destroys a community.


Where should poor people live? In a town with jobs naturally, thus losing the poor status.

Ah, dispatches from the bubble of the world of haves and soon-to-haves!

[MN-Born-n-Raised]

Originally Posted by stolafs69

Comparing Cottage Grove and Woodbury is very interesting example because they are part of the same school district. However if you look at the junior high and HS rankings for both cities, you will see that the schools located in the city of woodbury have much higher test scores then the schools located in cottage grove. All the schools have similar facilities and funding, yet have a drastic difference in th[u]e school rankings because o[b]f test scores. Whould you rather send you kid to a top 5% ranking school or a top 50% school. Simple as that.

I wouldn't care if my kid went to Woodbury OR Cottage Grove. As you say, it is the same district. No matter what the "averages" are, it is a tie. Because we are involved parents and because of our family culture, our kids are motivated to do their very best. Hence, both of my kids are going to stand out academically at either school. I just don't want my kids to be the ones that drag down the averages. I want them to be the ones that raise the averages. It is as simple as that.

I'm trying to help. If you spent an extra hundred Grand and a bunch of effort to move to Woodbury just because you want the best for your kids, I proposed you wasted your time and money. In fact moving to Woodbury might have been a terrible move for the well being of your kids. Allow me to explain. I am allergic to debt. I'd pick the district that allows one of us to stay home and raise our own kids (not daycare). So if Cottage Grove allowed (in our case) my wife to stay home, I'd pick that town HANDS DOWN over the school with the highest test score average in the state.

When we were in our 20's, I picked a building lot in Champlin over Plymouth and I chose a smaller home over a bigger home. That Plymouth lot and home meant my wife would have to work (she was about ready for a 6 figure sales job with 1992 cost of living). So if we both worked we could easily "afford" it. We punted on the promotion and the larger home and a "better" district. As I said, our kids are where they are because our family commitment. So the "inferior schools" of Anoka District made a lot more sense because we understand that "averages" are meaningless for most MN districts. That's because the kids who mandate they are on top don't care about the public school district averages. As a side note, because my wife wanting to manage the home, I could focus on starting our family business. The net result is we are much better off financially AND our kids were nurtured by their mother versus daycare. I didn't fall for the school rating "averages". We made the right decisions for our family and it isn't cut and dry for everyone.

[HiFi]

Originally Posted by ManBearPig1

Ah, dispatches from the bubble of the world of haves and soon-to-haves!

Also known as, the good half. The door is always open and the light is kept on.

[knke0204]

All these little polls and articles are cute and fun, but they can't be taken out of context. Stats, demographics and methodologies vary throughout these lists. Shame on most of you though, complaining and puting down fellow suburbs. We should be proud that as a metropolitan area, Minneapolis-St. Paul, The Twin Cities, is getting such recognition. Yeah, we know they aren't that great, and other suburbs probably should be on that list (Plymouth/Apple Valley) not because of opinion, but because they've been on such lists before.

We have a great metropolitan area. Our Twin Cities are often 12-16th in rankings in size, TV market, airport size, congestion... but break the top 10 and even the top 5 in health, cleanliness, jobs, bikes, education and all that fun stuff...

Embrace it, enjoy it. Be proud of our 'little engine that could' metro area, that is packing a punch nationally.

[golfgal]

It's rare for towns to repeat on that Money list. In past years towns named at the top of that list saw significant growth causing housing prices to shoot up taking them off the list. Also, keep in mind, this is only for towns 50,000 and larger so many of the suburbs don't qualify because of size.