Posted by: Adam McCann

Running a city is a tall order. The larger the city, the more complex it becomes to manage. In addition to representing the residents, local leaders must balance the public’s diverse interests with the city’s limited resources. That often means not everyone’s needs can or will be met. Leaders must carefully consider which services are most essential, which agencies’ budgets to cut or boost and whether and how much to raise taxes, among other decisions.

But how do we measure the effectiveness of local leadership? One way is by determining a city’s operating efficiency. In other words, we can learn how well city officials manage and spend public funds by comparing the quality of services residents receive against the city’s total budget.

Using that approach, WalletHub compared the operating efficiency of 150 of the largest U.S. cities to reveal which among them are managed best. We constructed a “Quality of Services” score made up of 37 metrics grouped into six service categories, which we then measured against the city’s per-capita budget. Read on for our findings, expert insight and a full description of our methodology.

1. Main Findings
2. Detailed Breakdown by City
3. Ask the Experts
4. Methodology

Main Findings Embed on your website<iframe src="//d2e70e9yced57e.cloudfront.net/wallethub/embed/22869/geochart-bestrun.html" width="556" height="347" frameBorder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe> <div style="width:556px;font-size:12px;color:#888;">Source: <a href="https://ift.tt/2NySGcG>

Best-Run Cities in America

Overall Rank (1=Best)	City	‘Quality of City Services’ Rank	‘Total Budget per Capita’ Rank
1	Nampa, ID	48	1
2	Provo, UT	2	3
3	Boise, ID	4	2
4	Durham, NC	35	10
5	Lexington-Fayette, KY	57	4
6	Las Cruces, NM	61	9
7	Billings, MT	51	11
8	Virginia Beach, VA	3	40
9	Missoula, MT	72	6
10	Fargo, ND	6	34
11	Sioux Falls, SD	17	28
12	Fort Wayne, IN	66	12
13	Nashua, NH	18	30
14	Huntington Beach, CA	1	59
15	Cedar Rapids, IA	23	26
16	Raleigh, NC	21	32
17	Greensboro, NC	60	16
18	Albuquerque, NM	104	5
19	Mesa, AZ	55	22
20	Oklahoma City, OK	78	14
21	Lewiston, ME	76	18
22	Madison, WI	12	54
23	Chesapeake, VA	28	36
24	Aurora, IL	26	39
25	Lincoln, NE	14	51
26	Salt Lake City, UT	24	41
27	Arlington, TX	43	33
28	Louisville, KY	91	17
29	Rapid City, SD	102	13
30	Salem, OR	63	27
31	Columbus, GA	120	7
32	Bismarck, ND	7	65
33	El Paso, TX	41	42
34	Phoenix, AZ	56	38
35	Tucson, AZ	97	20
36	Portland, ME	13	64
37	Grand Rapids, MI	31	53
38	Warren, MI	92	29
39	Manchester, NH	50	48
40	Charleston, SC	22	67
41	Topeka, KS	103	23
42	St. Petersburg, FL	64	47
43	Warwick, RI	67	46
44	Corpus Christi, TX	82	37
45	Tulsa, OK	117	19
46	Las Vegas, NV	47	58
47	Wichita, KS	113	24
48	Reno, NV	77	48
49	Dover, DE	88	45
50	Des Moines, IA	39	68
51	Fort Worth, TX	73	57
52	Worcester, MA	54	61
53	Eugene, OR	30	73
54	Aurora, CO	45	69
55	Mobile, AL	114	35
56	Spokane, WA	69	63
57	Fort Smith, AR	121	31
58	Colorado Springs, CO	68	66
59	Huntington, WV	136	15
60	Hialeah, FL	29	80
61	Fairbanks, AK	99	55
62	Santa Ana, CA	38	79
63	Springfield, MA	110	50
64	Montgomery, AL	119	44
65	Portland, OR	20	96
66	Baton Rouge, LA	140	21
67	Boston, MA	9	104
68	Little Rock, AR	122	43
69	San Diego, CA	8	107
70	St. Paul, MN	37	84
71	Dayton, OH	101	62
72	Austin, TX	10	110
73	Houston, TX	86	71
74	Fremont, CA	5	117
75	Jackson, MS	148	8
76	Tallahassee, FL	74	83
77	Anchorage, AK	94	75
78	Omaha, NE	59	87
79	Gary, IN	144	25
80	Miami, FL	32	100
81	Rutland, VT	93	78
82	San Jose, CA	11	123
83	Akron, OH	111	70
84	Charleston, WV	131	52
85	Columbia, SC	107	72
86	Tampa, FL	33	109
87	Casper, WY	84	85
88	Columbus, OH	80	92
89	San Antonio, TX	53	103
90	Frederick, MD	25	119
91	Minneapolis, MN	40	111
92	Orlando, FL	70	102
93	Dallas, TX	90	93
94	Burlington, VT	42	113
95	Jacksonville, FL	124	74
96	Anaheim, CA	27	124
97	Garland, TX	79	105
98	Fort Lauderdale, FL	58	116
99	Indianapolis, IN	105	90
100	Nashville, TN	108	94
101	Norfolk, VA	115	89
102	Kansas City, MO	109	98
103	Charlotte, NC	36	126
104	Bridgeport, CT	118	91
105	Bakersfield, CA	112	97
106	Providence, RI	130	77
107	Toledo, OH	143	60
108	Cincinnati, OH	83	113
109	Lubbock, TX	106	101
110	Richmond, VA	100	108
111	Seattle, WA	15	139
112	Shreveport, LA	147	56
113	Milwaukee, WI	127	86
114	Buffalo, NY	87	121
115	Pittsburgh, PA	62	127
116	New Orleans, LA	137	81
117	Denver, CO	44	132
118	Knoxville, TN	71	128
119	Fresno, CA	134	88
120	Long Beach, CA	34	141
121	Stockton, CA	145	76
122	Sacramento, CA	75	133
123	Syracuse, NY	98	125
124	Modesto, CA	116	122
125	Birmingham, AL	139	95
126	Wilmington, DE	123	118
127	Cheyenne, WY	65	140
128	Kansas City, KS	138	106
129	Baltimore, MD	132	111
130	Riverside, CA	96	134
131	Rochester, NY	85	136
132	Yonkers, NY	49	142
133	Atlanta, GA	95	135
134	New Haven, CT	133	120
135	Los Angeles, CA	52	144
136	Memphis, TN	142	115
137	Philadelphia, PA	129	130
138	Tacoma, WA	89	143
139	St. Louis, MO	149	82
140	Chicago, IL	126	137
141	Cleveland, OH	141	131
142	Hartford, CT	135	138
143	Flint, MI	146	129
144	Oakland, CA	81	147
145	Detroit, MI	150	99
146	New York, NY	16	148
147	Chattanooga, TN	125	145
148	San Francisco, CA	19	149
149	Gulfport, MS	128	146
150	Washington, DC	46	150

 

Detailed Breakdown by City

‘Quality of City Services’ Rank* (Score)	City	‘Financial Stability’ Rank	‘Education’ Rank	‘Health’ Rank	‘Safety’ Rank	‘Economy’ Rank	‘Infrastructure & Pollution’ Rank
1 (71.07)	Huntington Beach, CA	36	1	5	7	16	132
2 (69.23)	Provo, UT	20	145	44	2	2	7
3 (68.60)	Virginia Beach, VA	8	3	43	6	46	74
4 (65.34)	Boise, ID	17	43	24	12	8	52
5 (65.27)	Fremont, CA	108	2	11	14	1	127
6 (65.10)	Fargo, ND	47	9	26	21	10	21
7 (64.27)	Bismarck, ND	29	42	25	15	26	59
8 (64.25)	San Diego, CA	90	8	13	17	45	16
9 (64.21)	Boston, MA	3	149	19	10	60	3
10 (64.10)	Austin, TX	23	6	17	42	19	57
11 (64.03)	San Jose, CA	59	11	2	25	9	120
12 (63.66)	Madison, WI	7	92	10	16	61	81
13 (62.46)	Portland, ME	39	21	30	26	75	29
14 (62.41)	Lincoln, NE	12	47	42	18	49	76
15 (62.14)	Seattle, WA	31	30	7	74	29	36
16 (62.07)	New York, NY	80	60	15	5	114	26
17 (61.95)	Sioux Falls, SD	26	54	53	30	4	69
18 (61.85)	Nashua, NH	51	113	69	1	28	39
19 (61.50)	San Francisco, CA	45	63	1	84	15	38
20 (61.22)	Portland, OR	18	37	36	80	70	5
21 (61.15)	Raleigh, NC	13	61	33	20	68	66
22 (60.63)	Charleston, SC	16	58	32	64	56	28
23 (59.88)	Cedar Rapids, IA	30	100	34	34	12	82
24 (59.41)	Salt Lake City, UT	10	147	73	96	3	6
25 (59.22)	Frederick, MD	41	7	75	37	72	97
26 (59.19)	Aurora, IL	57	34	23	4	110	91
27 (58.69)	Anaheim, CA	97	32	3	23	64	138
28 (58.65)	Chesapeake, VA	21	22	117	19	33	116
29 (58.59)	Hialeah, FL	128	4	21	24	78	89
30 (58.34)	Eugene, OR	28	89	91	52	76	2
31 (58.11)	Grand Rapids, MI	73	50	50	39	39	34
32 (58.01)	Miami, FL	93	13	16	87	102	10
33 (57.98)	Tampa, FL	38	77	77	45	31	47
34 (57.96)	Long Beach, CA	83	12	12	38	80	124
35 (57.91)	Durham, NC	5	86	27	70	82	118
36 (57.53)	Charlotte, NC	15	41	41	83	41	119
37 (57.36)	St. Paul, MN	27	142	71	29	88	31
38 (57.16)	Santa Ana, CA	112	35	4	22	52	140
39 (57.10)	Des Moines, IA	67	82	51	58	34	37
40 (56.97)	Minneapolis, MN	52	144	18	82	42	9
41 (56.73)	El Paso, TX	86	19	38	11	77	123
42 (56.00)	Burlington, VT	132	20	39	9	106	11
43 (55.96)	Arlington, TX	56	16	85	44	27	130
44 (55.95)	Denver, CO	40	143	29	51	32	86
45 (55.81)	Aurora, CO	44	117	28	50	23	125
46 (55.67)	Washington, DC	45	83	118	66	93	4
47 (55.64)	Las Vegas, NV	96	68	80	65	44	14
48 (55.59)	Nampa, ID	82	123	68	32	20	51
49 (55.55)	Yonkers, NY	135	87	6	3	120	111
50 (55.40)	Manchester, NH	101	126	62	27	69	17
51 (55.34)	Billings, MT	53	71	109	85	7	53
52 (54.95)	Los Angeles, CA	99	102	14	41	92	94
53 (54.94)	San Antonio, TX	33	49	87	94	50	77
54 (54.90)	Worcester, MA	98	94	48	28	119	42
55 (54.88)	Mesa, AZ	72	59	57	35	51	136
56 (54.76)	Phoenix, AZ	43	91	55	90	36	83
57 (54.72)	Lexington-Fayette, KY	60	33	40	55	89	141
58 (54.56)	Fort Lauderdale, FL	42	98	22	108	103	20
59 (54.44)	Omaha, NE	85	62	93	54	43	70
60 (54.41)	Greensboro, NC	4	22	134	78	108	106
61 (54.30)	Las Cruces, NM	50	46	49	88	117	75
62 (54.09)	Pittsburgh, PA	126	10	70	31	100	49
63 (54.04)	Salem, OR	103	101	63	81	35	8
64 (54.03)	St. Petersburg, FL	61	95	66	97	37	45
65 (53.99)	Cheyenne, WY	9	88	83	49	5	80
66 (53.96)	Fort Wayne, IN	25	39	125	56	54	129
67 (53.96)	Warwick, RI	114	73	95	13	21	143
68 (53.93)	Colorado Springs, CO	88	56	81	61	17	115
69 (53.79)	Spokane, WA	69	65	46	98	84	55
70 (53.63)	Orlando, FL	49	55	52	130	66	48
71 (53.24)	Knoxville, TN	32	29	103	125	71	43
72 (53.11)	Missoula, MT	115	5	90	112	40	30
73 (52.92)	Fort Worth, TX	113	51	60	47	18	126
74 (52.90)	Tallahassee, FL	84	24	86	103	111	13
75 (52.82)	Sacramento, CA	100	116	37	75	25	96
76 (52.72)	Lewiston, ME	65	146	107	59	24	41
77 (52.48)	Reno, NV	121	14	102	46	13	95
78 (51.82)	Oklahoma City, OK	6	75	114	92	57	148
79 (51.75)	Garland, TX	140	26	74	36	22	128
80 (51.57)	Columbus, OH	89	81	119	43	83	93
81 (51.48)	Oakland, CA	107	85	8	136	11	113
82 (51.47)	Corpus Christi, TX	79	27	65	111	61	121
83 (51.18)	Cincinnati, OH	87	28	130	93	99	32
84 (50.90)	Casper, WY	1	121	105	68	6	64
85 (50.81)	Rochester, NY	102	109	100	67	138	1
86 (50.74)	Houston, TX	117	44	59	106	67	61
87 (50.74)	Buffalo, NY	120	107	58	60	121	22
88 (50.59)	Dover, DE	94	48	104	104	74	79
89 (50.55)	Tacoma, WA	105	104	45	100	48	90
90 (50.50)	Dallas, TX	134	36	54	71	65	73
91 (50.49)	Louisville, KY	37	74	122	99	81	110
92 (50.41)	Warren, MI	66	132	121	8	104	72
93 (50.18)	Rutland, VT	11	70	79	76	101	12
94 (50.13)	Anchorage, AK	75	15	76	113	58	88
95 (49.94)	Atlanta, GA	80	90	84	120	94	60
96 (49.62)	Riverside, CA	123	67	35	72	14	146
97 (49.36)	Tucson, AZ	109	97	31	115	97	92
98 (49.35)	Syracuse, NY	125	129	47	53	122	19
99 (49.17)	Fairbanks, AK	14	31	89	101	55	137
100 (48.86)	Richmond, VA	76	111	133	62	116	67
101 (48.55)	Dayton, OH	71	72	126	91	141	40
102 (48.43)	Rapid City, SD	95	133	67	109	38	85
103 (47.57)	Topeka, KS	104	79	140	86	73	58
104 (47.44)	Albuquerque, NM	63	106	82	146	96	46
105 (47.39)	Indianapolis, IN	19	140	131	127	90	98
106 (47.27)	Lubbock, TX	77	52	72	139	79	142
107 (47.16)	Columbia, SC	64	130	88	122	134	54
108 (47.12)	Nashville, TN	111	119	115	107	63	65
109 (46.98)	Kansas City, MO	91	38	96	144	59	114
110 (46.88)	Springfield, MA	124	125	99	63	135	15
111 (46.69)	Akron, OH	110	64	127	79	136	103
112 (46.62)	Bakersfield, CA	92	53	108	116	47	149
113 (46.40)	Wichita, KS	55	118	101	128	85	135
114 (46.30)	Mobile, AL	62	66	128	140	113	44
115 (46.29)	Norfolk, VA	74	124	149	48	98	108
116 (46.18)	Modesto, CA	122	93	61	121	30	122
117 (46.12)	Tulsa, OK	34	84	129	132	95	145
118 (45.85)	Bridgeport, CT	144	122	9	33	144	63
119 (45.77)	Montgomery, AL	116	99	120	77	130	78
120 (45.04)	Columbus, GA	54	76	150	105	133	35
121 (45.03)	Fort Smith, AR	131	17	110	114	105	87
122 (44.65)	Little Rock, AR	35	96	113	149	115	101
123 (44.26)	Wilmington, DE	78	57	94	143	143	109
124 (43.72)	Jacksonville, FL	138	69	136	102	53	56
125 (43.27)	Chattanooga, TN	106	78	116	124	109	62
126 (42.90)	Chicago, IL	150	45	64	69	125	24
127 (42.83)	Milwaukee, WI	118	134	112	118	112	102
128 (42.36)	Gulfport, MS	129	18	124	129	124	107
129 (42.31)	Philadelphia, PA	136	137	135	57	140	50
130 (41.80)	Providence, RI	147	138	78	40	107	68
131 (41.72)	Charleston, WV	68	40	144	147	126	99
132 (41.66)	Baltimore, MD	48	148	148	126	127	84
133 (41.48)	New Haven, CT	143	136	56	89	139	23
134 (40.89)	Fresno, CA	139	80	97	119	86	147
135 (40.76)	Hartford, CT	149	103	20	95	145	18
136 (40.38)	Huntington, WV	2	108	143	134	129	27
137 (40.12)	New Orleans, LA	142	128	106	123	137	25
138 (40.12)	Kansas City, KS	133	135	98	137	87	104
139 (39.80)	Birmingham, AL	119	25	132	145	131	100
140 (39.63)	Baton Rouge, LA	58	120	141	142	142	131
141 (39.14)	Cleveland, OH	127	114	111	131	148	105
142 (37.78)	Memphis, TN	70	131	142	148	128	139
143 (37.61)	Toledo, OH	130	115	139	117	132	134
144 (37.24)	Gary, IN	24	105	147	73	149	144
145 (36.51)	Stockton, CA	141	110	92	141	91	150
146 (36.39)	Flint, MI	22	141	138	110	150	71
147 (34.59)	Shreveport, LA	137	112	137	138	146	112
148 (32.20)	Jackson, MS	146	127	123	135	123	133
149 (29.81)	St. Louis, MO	145	150	145	150	118	33
150 (28.77)	Detroit, MI	148	139	146	133	147	117

*No. 1 = Best Run

Ask the Experts

A well-run city isn’t just the product of efficient budgeting or lots of resources. It is the fruit of countless other decisions, too. For more insight into why some cities perform better than others, we turned to a panel of local-government, economic and diversity experts. Click on the panelists’ profiles to read their bios and thoughts on the following key questions:

1. In your opinion, what are the most important issues facing U.S. cities today?
2. Why are some cities better run than others?
3. What can citizens do to increase the transparency and accountability of local government?
4. Are some forms of city government — a strong mayor versus a strong city council, for instance — more effective than others?
5. In evaluating how well a city is run, what are the top five indicators?
6. How can local policymakers reduce racial tensions in the wake of recent movements?

< >

• Denise Scheberle Ph.D., Clinical Teaching Professor, University of Colorado Denver, School of Public Affairs
• Kerry Hunter Ph.D. – Professor, College of Idaho
• David N. Schleicher Professor of Law, Yale Law School

Methodology

In order to determine the best- and worst-run cities in America, WalletHub compared 150 of the most populated cities across six key categories: 1) Financial Stability, 2) Education, 3) Health, 4) Safety, 5) Economy and 6) Infrastructure & Pollution.

We evaluated those dimensions using 37 relevant metrics, which are listed below with their corresponding weights. Each metric was graded on a 100-point scale, with a score of 100 representing the highest quality of service.

Next, we calculated an overall “Quality of City Services” score for each city based on its weighted average across all the metrics. Finally, for each city, we divided the Quality of City Services score by the “Total Budget per Capita” (dollar amount) in order to construct a “Score per Dollar Spent” index — displayed as “Overall Rank” in the Main Findings table above — which we then used to rank-order the cities in our sample.

The metrics used do not create a disadvantage for DC, despite its unusual status as a city/state, with the exception of the Long-Term Debt Outstanding per Capita metric. However, even with that metric removed, DC still ranks last. Thus, the District was included in this report.

Financial Stability – Total Points: 16.67

• Moody’s City Credit Rating: Quadruple Weight (~13.33 Points)
• Outstanding Long-Term Debt per Capita: Full Weight (~3.33 Points)

Education – Total Points: 16.67

• K–12 School-System Quality: Double Weight (~11.11 Points)Note: This metric measures the share of public schools rated by GreatSchools.org with above average score.
• High School Graduation Rate: Full Weight (~5.56 Points)

Health – Total Points: 16.67

• Infant Mortality Rate: Quadruple Weight (~6.67 Points)
• Average Life Expectancy (in Years): Quadruple Weight (~6.67 Points)
• Hospital Beds per Capita: Full Weight (~1.67 Points)
• Quality of Public Hospital System: Full Weight (~1.67 Points)Note: This metric is based on the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ ranking of public hospital systems.

Safety – Total Points: 16.67

• Violent Crime Rate: Quadruple Weight (~4.76 Points)
• Property Crime Rate: Quadruple Weight (~4.76 Points)
• Motor Vehicle Fatalities per Capita: Quadruple Weight (~4.76 Points)
• Share of Sheltered Homeless Persons: Full Weight (~1.19 Points)
• Perception of Safety (Safety walking alone during daylight/night): Full Weight (~1.19 Points)Note: Composite metric:
  • Safety walking alone during daylight
  • Safety walking alone during night

  These data are based on perceptions of visitors of numbeo.com website in the past 3 years. If the value is 0, it means it is perceived as very low, and if the value is 100, it means it is perceived as very high.

Economy – Total Points: 16.67

• Unemployment Rate: Triple Weight (~2.63 Points)
• Underemployment Rate: Full Weight (~0.88 Points)
• Median Annual Household Income (Adjusted for Cost of Living): Double Weight (~1.75 Points)
• Median Annual Income Growth Rate: Double Weight (~1.75 Points)Note: Growth compares the income level in 2017 versus in 2016.
• Annual Job Growth Rate (Adjusted for Population Growth): Double Weight (~1.75 Points)Note: Growth compares the number of employed civilian population in 2017 versus in 2016.
• Share of Population Living in Poverty: Double Weight (~1.75 Points)
• Economic Mobility: Triple Weight (~2.63 Points)
• Growth in Number of Businesses: Full Weight (~0.88 Points)Note: Growth compares the number of businesses in 2016 versus in 2015.
• Change in Housing Prices: Full Weight (~0.88 Points)Note: Change compares the price in 2018 versus in 2011.
• Zillow Home Value 1-year Forecast: Full Weight (~0.88 Points)Note: The Zillow Home Value Forecast is Zillow's prediction of what the Zillow Home Value Index will be one year from now.
• Building-Permit Growth: Full Weight (~0.88 Points)Note: Growth spans 2015 to 2017.

Infrastructure & Pollution – Total Points: 16.67

• Quality of Roads: Quadruple Weight (~3.03 Points)Note: This metric measures the share of pavements in poor condition.
• Average Commute Time (in Minutes): Full Weight (~0.76 Points)
• Transit Access Shed: Full Weight (~0.76 Points)Note: “Transit Access Shed” is the total area of land that is easily accessible from any point via public transportation.
• Traffic Congestion: Full Weight (~0.76 Points)
• Walk Score: Triple Weight (~2.27 Points)Note: “Walk Score” measures pedestrian friendliness by analyzing population density and road metrics such as block length and intersection density.
• Bike Score: Full Weight (~0.76 Points)Note: “Bike Score” measures whether an area is good for biking. The Bike Score is calculated by measuring bike infrastructure (lanes, trails, etc.), hills, destinations and road connectivity, and the number of bike commuters.
• Transit Score: Half Weight (~0.38 Points)Note: “Transit Score” is a patented measure of how well a location is served by public transit.
• Recreation-Friendliness: Quadruple Weight (~3.03 Points)Note: This metric is based on WalletHub’s “Best & Worst Cities for Recreation” ranking.
• Share of Residents with Access to Internet: Half Weight (~0.38 Points)
• Water Quality: Full Weight (~0.76 Points)
• Air Pollution: Full Weight (~0.76 Points)
• Greenhouse-Gas Emissions per Capita: Full Weight (~0.76 Points)
• Share of Parkland: Triple Weight (~2.27 Points)

Videos for News Use:

• YouTube (for web embedding National)
• Raw files (for editing into clips)

 Sources: Data used to create this ranking were collected from the U.S. Census Bureau, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Council for Community and Economic Research, Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Moody's Investors Service, GreatSchools.org, County Health Rankings, Health Resources and Services Administration, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Federal Bureau of Investigation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Chmura Economics & Analytics, Zillow, The Equality of Opportunity Project, The Road Information Program, Center for Neighborhood Technology, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Walk Score, The Trust for Public Land, INRIX, U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development, Numbeo and WalletHub research.

from Wallet HubWallet Hub


via Finance Xpress