Nice towns finish last?

According to New Jersey Monthly magazine, Teaneck ranks as the state's 311th best town in which to live, 56th out of 70 in Bergen County. Obviously, these mediocre ratings do little to reflect the high regard most of Teaneck's residents have for their hometown. As is always the case when it comes to simplified statistical rankings, one has to look inside the methodology to truly understand how the subjects are being graded. Doing so shows that Teaneck receives low marks precisely in the areas one would expect, and that the keys to improving quality of life in Teaneck (not just for the rankings, but for the residents) are alleviating the tax burden, keeping our streets safe, and improving the educational achievement in our schools. Pretty standard stuff, none of which is new. The real message of the rankings, then, may be that we have fallen further behind our neighbors than we might have otherwise thought.

Here is how New Jersey Monthly figured its rankings:

METHODOLOGY: In compiling New Jersey Monthly’s 2006 Top Towns list, researchers at Monmouth University’s Polling Institute considered eight categories that would best represent the quality of life in New Jersey’s 566 municipalities: property taxes, home values, population growth, land development, employment, crime rate, school performance, and proximity to services. The research team selected a prototypical indicator corresponding, respectively, to each of these eight categories: median property tax (2005), median increase in home values (2000–2005), population growth rate (2000–2004), percentage of land preserved as open space (2004), unemployment rate (2004), total crime rate (2004), student proficiency on state-mandated standardized tests for students in grades 4, 8, and 11 (2005), and number of acute-care hospitals within 10 miles.

To level the playing field, household income levels were not considered, and home values were measured by their rate of increase over five years rather than actual prices. To compare land development, towns with slower growth and more open space were rated more favorably. Towns with lower unemployment and crime rates also scored higher, as did those closer to hospitals.

A statistical standardization technique was used to rank all 566 municipalities according to the eight indicators; an average of the eight numerical values for each municipality determined its final rank.

Among Bergen County municipalities, Teaneck had a median property tax at the high end and the second worst equalized property tax rate (only marginally better than bottom-ranked Bergenfield). Nonetheless, Teaneck finished a solid 26th in home price appreciation, perhaps due in part to Teaneck's top tier ranking in open space. So the other cuplrits for Teaneck's less than impressive showing are a relatively high crime rate (57th in the county for safety) and poor student test scores (63rd place).

In the immediate area, Hackensack, Englewood, and Paramus all scored lower than Teaneck overall, though Englewood is classified in an accompanying article as a 'safe bet.' So while these rankings, like any others, need to be taken with a heaping tablespoon of salt, they do provide a reality check as to how we are faring relative to our neighbors. The message is that there is still plenty of work to be done. While the tax issue is rightfully attracting plenty of attention right now, perhaps more energy needs to be directed seeking ways to reduce the crime rate and to help Teaneck's students reach their full potential.