Marlborough on Lower Half of 'Best Communities' List
GoLocal Worcester has compiled rankings for Central Massachusetts' best communities. See where Marlborough falls, and tell us if you agree.
Out of 72 cities and towns in Central Massachusetts, Marlborough is the 42nd best, according to GoLocal.
The Worcester-based online news source has been releasing "Central MA Best Communities" rankings throughout the week, starting with the lowest-ranked and ending with the highest.
Marlborough's biggest draw, according to GoLocal, is its restaurants. It ranked second out of 72 in that category.
Economic condition, affordability, and education, however, earned low marks. In these categories, GoLocal ranked Marlborough 67th, 66th and 53rd, respectively.
The top 20 cities and towns will be released today.
For more on GoLocal's ranking criteria, see this explanation.
Danillo
9:07 am on Friday, June 29, 2012
I had some seafood at anthony's the other day with my wife, if I only new how good they were I would've gone to burger king!
Paul Bishop
3:03 pm on Friday, June 29, 2012
Unfortunately, Marlborough's economic condition has a lot to do with trusting companies like Evergreen Solar and Fidelity-- both companies shafted the city, along with costing nearly two thousand local jobs. They saw the city as easy prey, and they were right.
Those losses translate into losses in local taxes, which translates into less money being available for public services and works, right when the economy needs it most. Education, Infrastructure-- everything suffers due to the dishonesty of these companies.
It's time we hold those who sell out America to move jobs offshore accountable, if only for the promises they make and don't honor.
Peg
6:15 pm on Friday, June 29, 2012
Marlboro has turned into a dump.
Catherine
5:42 pm on Saturday, June 30, 2012
I agree.
Neil Licht
1:24 pm on Saturday, June 30, 2012
Cities and their government structure are not as agile as towns. They are two different political systems in decision making as well and can not be graded side by side as equals as this study has done.
Then there's the sociological and economic differences, also a very heavy factor in the issues each city or town must face and deal with. Those heavily impact the areas compared in the study.The numbers alone then do not work as a method of ranking or comparison.
Conclusion, Its not reliable as a comparative study based on stats alone because problems that differing social, city v town government structures, local economic realities, taxable base for budget plus how decisions are made in these entities make this report a "Stats only" with results that do not make any useful sense.
How a bout a study that is based on these realities with cities compared to cities and towns compared only to towns. Thats a genuine reality check, not what this report has shown.
Neil Licht