We always talk about Davis as a great place to live – low crime, relatively speaking, affluent and engaged population, progressive policies, great schools – so it may come as some surprise that when 24/7 Wall St. listed the 50 worst places to live in America, while Miami was first, Davis ranked 45th.
Write the authors, “To determine America’s worst cities to live in, 24/7 Wall St. reviewed data on the 550 U.S. cities with populations of 65,000 or more as measured by the U.S. Census Bureau. Based on a range of variables, including crime rates, employment growth, access to restaurants and attractions, educational attainment, and housing affordability, 24/7 Wall St. identified America’s 50 worst cities to live.”
The good news is that 72.2 percent of Davis adults have at least a bachelor’s degree. That is more than double the national average for college attainment.
They write, “The city is home to UC Davis, one of the largest universities in California’s public school system, which may explain the area’s high college attainment rate.”
So what’s the problem? For starters, “High educational attainment rates typically accompany low poverty rates. In Davis, however, 28.5% of the population lives below the poverty line, nearly double the nationwide poverty rate.”
There is also the cost of living aspect: “For many residents, owning property in the city may be too expensive. The median home value in Davis of $527,000 is more than $100,000 greater than the value of a typical California home and close to 10 times the city’s median household income. This means housing in the area is about three times less affordable than it is across the nation.”
How do we evaluate this ranking? On the one hand, we have noted that the poverty rate is higher than you would expect. For instance, we have pointed out that one quarter of students in Davis schools are Title 1, meaning low income. However, it has also been pointed out that some of that might be a function of the number of college graduate students who have families but make a modest income.
It might be helpful to compare how Davis ranks against other college towns.
There is no doubt that Davis is an expensive place to live – but then again, so are a lot of college towns and Davis is nowhere near as expensive as, say, the Bay Area.
The problem with the metrics here is that looking at median home value, poverty rate, and percentage with a bachelor’s degree is a rather limited measure of good places to live. The metrics ignore the advantages of Davis.
First, you have a relatively low crime rate, particularly violent crimes, although property crime rates are quite high.
Second, you have excellent schools.
Third, you have good amenities – the network of bike paths, parks, greenbelts and city recreational services are top notch. For those reasons, we think that 24/7’s ranking underestimates the good aspects of Davis.
That said, as we have noted for months – some of the funding sources for these amenities are now in jeopardy. We have noted that the schools, even with parcel taxes, are only averagely funded. We have noted that the city is lacking the resources to pay for increases in great amenities, and that is putting them in jeopardy.
Finally, it may well be that the solution to fix city infrastructure and amenities is more taxes and higher costs to live here, which will reinforce the warning signs in this survey.
At the end of the day then, we think ranking Davis as one of the worst places to live is premature, but there are real challenges that need to be resolved or standards and quality of living will decline.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
Every one of us have different variables when we want when we look for a place to live. There are items we have to have, such as ready access to quality medical care if one of our family members has poor health–or we are aged. Then there are the nice things to have. A fanatical softball player will count the number of lighted softball fields per capita. Other variables are not even included on our individual radar. Folks with no school-age children or grandchildren in the community give less weight to the quality of the local school system–unless their profession is real estate.
The variables chosen by these surveys are relatively few in number, and they have to be items that are routinely compiled and measured. The largest number of variables for ranking communities is maybe, twenty, and shown in the form of a matrix. In reality, we have hundreds of measures we use, including some that are intangible and sub-conscious, to evaluate the livability of a particular town.
Many years ago, I was strolling through a residential area of a Pacific Northwest town and was immediately taken by the charm of the place. Why? Thinking it through, it was the abundance tree-lined streets and how residents invariable made eye-contact and smiled when you passed them. Neither of those variables are on any best-town list.
Finally, there are the disparities that question the veracity of any these kinds of rankings. A community that ranks first in one survey is in the middle of the pack in four others. A high-ranking town one year, plummets down the scale the following year and no identifiable statistical reason is found. Being fairly well traveled myself, there is only one town I’d urge that you never move to and that, unfortunately, is where I was born and raised to adulthood. Flint, Michigan.
David wrote:
> 24/7 Wall Street listed the 50 worst places to live in America
I don’t often give advice, but everyone’s live will be better if you never again click a link that says something like “50 worst places to live”, “50 richest celebrities” or “50 cute cute child stars who are now fatter than Oprah Winfrey”…
Don’t forget that “loans” are not “income” so if you are a grad student getting an MBA driving a Lexus and living in a $2,000/month apartment you are “living in poverty” according to the US census if you don’t have any “income”…
P.S. I’m wondering if David meant to write: “Commentary: Is Davis Really One of the Worst Places to Live?”?
Yup, just ignore the silly click bait 🙂
Gee, I’m sure we can think of a demographic reason for this statistical fluke that evidently escaped the astute editors of 24/7 Wall St. Nearly every college student who lives off campus is technically below the poverty level.
They may be “below the poverty line”, but many of them have credit cards that they use and their parents pay the bills.
No, he meant to write, “Commentary: Is Davis Really One of the Want Places to Live?”
But look at the bright side… if Davis is one of the worst places to live, Davis will no longer need to be a “legend in its own mind” (cleaning up a lot of CC agendas), and might take off some of the growth pressures, increase the vacancy rate, and bring the price of housing down to more affordable levels… these could be good things!
With the housing shortage that we currently have, perhaps we should be thanking these list makers. This reminds me of the tongue in cheek strategy of Oregon adopting the mosquito as their state bird in an attempt to discourage “immigrants” from California.
To that point, I’ll add another and remind everyone of the popular bumper sticker displayed in the State north of us: “Don’t Californicate Oregon.”
Damn! David, Highbeam, whoever, “fixed” the caption! That’s just WRONG!
Please bring back the ORIGINAL!
Sorry, hp, I saw it as soon as I started the article
Best to you, and yours Highbeam! Have a great holiday weekend!
[When I first saw the caption, thought it was a “July Fools” joke…]
hpierce wrote:
> Damn! David, Highbeam, whoever, “fixed” the caption!
> That’s just WRONG! Please bring back the ORIGINAL!
Don’t worry it is still there in the URL:
https://davisvanguard.org/2016/07/commentary-davis-really-want-worst-places-live/#comment-324041
Thanks! you made my day!
Davis is such a horrible place to live. That’s why we have some of the highest home values in the region. That’s why everyone is always crying for us to build more housing because nobody wants to live here.
On the plus side Davis scores low on the “people of walmart” index.
Davis, ranked as 10th best place to live in in CA by Niche magazine:
2016 Best places to live in California
Needed a splash of ego to go with the morning coffee?
Davis is a place I chose to live in. I take neither pride nor shame in that choice.
I do take pride in the contributions I have and am making in the community.
But I’d probably do the same wherever I lived… oh, wait, did that!
My point was that these rankings are highly variable and should be taken with a grain of salt, if Davis can be on one outfit’s best list and another outfit’s worst list.
Understand your apparently intended nuance… missed it the first time… my bad…
No worries, I can see how you would take it the other way.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-most-unaffordable-place-to-live-in-america-is-2016-06-23
Why just the other day I asked about what the relationship between median income and median home price is in Davis because Marketwatch had an article about the most unaffordable places to live in the entire country based on this metric and most of them were in places near the coast of California with its fabulous climate and hostility to home construction. At a ratio of ten times the median income to home price Davis would rank fourth on the list, above both San Francisco and Maui, two places constrained not only by a dogged opposition to growth like Davis but also the physical geography provided by the Pacific Ocean.
The median home price/median income ratio is important because of its correlation with high poverty rates. It is likely that the high poverty rate in Davis isn’t only a function of the student population, it may also be a function of our unwillingness to do what is required to rectify the imbalance between supply and demand for housing here. Nevertheless our high unaffordability drives good people out of Davis who would otherwise like to stay here. Many, who work or go to school here, move to nearby communities and actually clog our roads and increase our greenhouse gas footprint more than if housing that was affordable was also available to them in Davis.
The unintended consequences of Davis’ housing constrints are real and tangible. While these consequences may be acceptable to the limited number of people who get to participate in Measure R votes by virtue of where they live, a different perspective of Davis can be found by those locked out of town and our elections by those who live nearby.
I would say the price of housing in general in CA is much higher than the rest of the country. Not only that, the quality of the housing in CA is much poorer than in the rest of the nation. See: http://www.lao.ca.gov/reports/2015/finance/housing-costs/housing-costs.aspx
From the article: “This trend has continued. Today, an average California home costs $440,000, about two–and–a–half times the average national home price ($180,000). Also, California’s average monthly rent is about $1,240, 50 percent higher than the rest of the country ($840 per month).“
MAli wrote:
> Davis would rank fourth on the list, above both San Francisco
> and Maui, two places constrained not only by a dogged opposition
> to growth like Davis but also the physical geography provided
> by the Pacific Ocean.
It is true that the the people that own homes and apartments in San Francisco are just like the home and apartment owners in Davis that want to keep values and rents high by fighting any growth. The Pacific Ocean has nothing to do with the lack of growth in SF and Maui. The island of Maui only has 49 (forty nine) residential units per square mile compared with the city of Davis that has about 2,500 residential units per square mile (more than 50x the density).
SF does not have as much vacant land as Maui, but the housing density in the city is only about 20% of the density in Manhattan (that has about 5x more housing units per square mile). I would love to see SF build high rise apartments along Golden Gate park (similar to the apartments that look at Central Park in NYC) but it will never happen since more apartments mean lower rents and property values for the people already there.
Under NY law, you can “own” an apartment… not true in CA…
“our high unaffordability drives good people out of Davis” This is true but it’s more true to say that home prices drive bad people out of Davis. Higher home prices skew the population to people who are successful criminals and away from unsuccessful criminals who are more likely to disturb the neighbors. Relative affordability is linked to higher crime rates and worse schools.
Davis is not the best city in the world? Who knew! LOL Every city has its own ethos, its own identity, its own plusses and minuses. I just visited Dixon the other day – what a charming little town. Go to Napa, and the lovely architecture abounds. Go to New England and look at the white church steeples and brick buildings with fall colors as a back drop in Sept-Oct, and a no-nonsense practicality effused in abundance by northern East Coasters. Go further south and famous southern charm comes into play. Every city is special in its own way.
Hope you visited Dawson’s and had some of their clam chowder… fandamntastic!
I’ll have to check that one out. Ate at Bud’s – their lamb chops are excellent!
And Davis has its Strang Mid-Century Modern motif.
Nameless: That’s one way to look at this. The other though is more serious and that is the theme we have seen here on the Vanguard – Davis as a declining asset due to lack of investment into what makes it great and that is reflected in this ranking.
Or, it isn’t reflected if you choose another ranking, like the one I linked to above. Why anyone would take anything away from these rankings is beyond me.
Rankings smankings. I agree, but the median home price /median income ratio is a standard calculation of affordability and considered to be one of the root causes of the high poverty rates found in California as described in the LAO report you linked. Of course that people on the prosperous side of this divide in Davis couldn’t care less about the high rates of poverty found in California or at least are more interested in protecting their own wealth and lifestyle than doing anything to alleviate its root cause should come as no surprise to anyone.
I would absolutely agree Davis is a declining asset due to lack of investment!