Moving to Maplewood...help please?

Log Out | Lost Password? | Topics | Search | Who's Online Contact | Register | My Profile | SO home | MOL home

Thread Originator Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post Archive through January 25, 2006 Ali Eddy mjh 40  1  1-25-06  8:59 am   Closed: New threads not accepted on this page

Author Message   Lester Jacobs Citizen Username: Lester Post Number: 80 Registered: 10-2005 Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 1:18 pm:        Ali asked is "Maplewood to good to be true?" My answer is the old saying there is no such thing as a free lunch. I have read that typically the most important things to homebuyers are commute time to work, schools, public safety, and taxes. Comparing Maplewood to say Summit shows how these factors play out. A typical 3 bedroom home in Maplewood sells for about $500K while a typical 3 bedroom home in Summit sells for about $700K. So far Maplewood seems like the better deal, right? First take into account commute time. Maplewood is closer to NYC. Let's say that Summit being 2 towns further away depresses real estate values by about $100,000. That would mean that everything else being equal the Summit house would be worth $400K and the Maplewood house $500K. Next let's consider the schools. Summit schools rank in the top 10, while Maplewood schools are ranked middle of the pack by NJ Monthly Magazine. To get the same quality education as Summit, you would have to send your children to private school. Assuming 2 children per household this would be about $48,000 per year. Assuming that only about 40% of households have school aged children this can be factored down to $19.2K/year or about $1600/month. This would equate to about an extra $200K that could be spent on a house. So the Summit house is now work $600K and the Maplewood house worth $500K. Next consider perceived public safety. Maplewood is next to Irvington and Newark which are high crime areas even though Maplewood is not. The perception is what counts though and this is reflected in higher insurance costs, security costs, etc. Both the tangible and intangible costs add about $50K to the Summit house. The Summit house is now worth $650K and the Maplewood house is worth $500K. Finally property taxes. Summit property taxes are about 60% of Maplewood. If the Maplewood taxes are $10K per year then this would be an extra $350 per month compared to Summit. That $350 would equate to about $50K on the price of a house. These reasons explain why a similar house in Maplewood is worth so much less than in Summit. What this means is that if you work in NYC and do not have school aged children, then Maplewood is an excellent value. If you don't work in NYC, but don't have kids it is probably a toss-up, otherwise you should probably consider looking elsewhere. This explains why we have so many young families that move in, and when the kids turn school age (or by middle school) most move out.   mjh Supporter Username: Mjh Post Number: 353 Registered: 5-2001 Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 1:32 pm:        Is it worth the time and energy it takes to debunk false information in the above post? I think not, I've got work to do. This one, however, is laughable: "This explains why we have so many young families that move in, and when the kids turn school age (or by middle school) most move out."   Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 12059 Registered: 1-2003 Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 1:35 pm:        I agree with your method, Lester, but with a little tweaking of your assumptions, Maplewood can come out on top. This is not to say everyone should want to live here. It means people place different priorities on other factors. For instance, many of us came here because of the ethnic mix. For others, that's a minus, not a plus. For another instance, you put a $100K price on the extra 10 minutes of commuting, but that's clearly a judgement call. You're not wrong, if that is what it's worth to you, but it's not a hard and fast figure for all of us. Also, to me, the greatest value in living in Maplewood and South Orange is the schools. I haven't noticed families moving out when kids reach school age. I notice them arriving as kids reach school age and leaving after they graduate high school. My sample may not be accurate, but if it is, it means we value the schools more than the location. I pay about $6,600 annually in school taxes. The district spends about $9,000 per student, and I have two kids in the system, so I'm getting more than my money's worth. You could argue that $9,000 is too much. And you could argue that I get more for my school money in other towns, but people's behavior shows that people, in the aggregate, don't agree. And if property values are an indicator, I think we should look at the SLOPES of value change over recent years. What is the rate of change in value in Maplewood, and what is it in Summit? I don't know either. If Maplewood's values are rising higher, it's because recent buyers perceive the value. We could be considered clever or stupid to pay the recent prices, of course. I realize you're disappointed, and I can't tell you to feel otherwise, but there are enough of us happy newcomers to let the original poster know that while things are not perfect here (and where are they?), they're not hell, either. Friends of my sisters just moved here from Manhattan. They are die-hard Manhattanites. They still can't find what's wrong with this picture. And they have a boy in Tuscan school.   Hank Zona Supporter Username: Hankzona Post Number: 5181 Registered: 3-2002 Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 1:36 pm:        Most move out when kids reach school age?!? please...show me the numbers, Lester. And I would give less weight to commentary from those who move out without having any firsthand experience in the schools. Finally, there are certainly tangible, measurable things regarding value in home purchase, but there are also many valid intangible factors as well. I wouldnt rely solely on either. There is a bottomline in this debate, and that is, it's ultimately a personal decision -- what is right and best for you.   juju's petals Citizen Username: Jujus_petals Post Number: 226 Registered: 5-2003 Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 1:52 pm:        And let's not place too much emphasis on what is written in real estate ads when evaluating a town (or even a house!) "Sought after [insert anything here] neighborhood" is about as meaningful as "charming."   Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 12063 Registered: 1-2003 Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 2:26 pm:        How about the word "cozy"? You know what that's a euphemism for!   Meandtheboys Citizen Username: Meandtheboys Post Number: 2762 Registered: 12-2004 Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 2:36 pm:        What about "handy-man's special?" More like "you better knock it down and start all over again!"   Bob K Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 10412 Registered: 5-2001 Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 6:49 pm:        Ready for your finishing touches = rat droppings in the kitchen Bring your contractor = watch out for the holes in the floor Freshly painted = purple walls and fuscia ceilings over ten layers of wall paper. Mrs. Clean liver here = the owner was bald Walk to station = If you have a half hour to spare and are into race walking Quiet street = Except on weekends when the neighbors have parties every Friday and Saturday Charming = ugly Possible fourth bedroom = folding stairs to attic. Move in condition = for the domesticated farm animals   Jersey Boy Citizen Username: Jersey_boy Post Number: 68 Registered: 1-2006 Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 10:29 pm:        Some important NEW information about the towns. You cannot hear 1190 WLIB in Millburn and Summit. But, it comes in LOUD and CLEAR in South Orange and Maplewood. Coincidence?   Rivka Nelson Citizen Username: Rivka_nelson Post Number: 18 Registered: 11-2004 Posted on Friday, January 27, 2006 - 9:39 am:        Lester, Have you ever toured or been involved with Clinton School? Have you read the posts by people who have? It is a wonderful school, and someone who I assume to be ignorant about a subject, should stay mum on the subject. You can say, the Clinton School area has perhaps some smaller housing stock, or some other observations about the neighborhood, but to make a statement, or an insinuation, about a school that you have no first hand knowledge about, that is libel. Please refrain.   Lester Jacobs Citizen Username: Lester Post Number: 85 Registered: 10-2005 Posted on Friday, January 27, 2006 - 3:59 pm:        Rivka, I am making my assumptions based on data not any personal bias against a particular school. The fact of the matter is that real estate agents promote being in Tuscan district as a positive and the Clinton district as a negative. This shows up in housing prices.   Rivka Nelson Citizen Username: Rivka_nelson Post Number: 19 Registered: 11-2004 Posted on Saturday, January 28, 2006 - 3:21 pm:        Lester, I have worked with real estate agents regardng Clinton School, and as far as I know that old canard about Clinton School is long gone. I think you are getting or regurgitating some old information. All of our schools are fine schools. All have some difficulties and all have many fine pluses. I sit on the Presidents' Council Board (HSA and PTAs) and I know the schools pretty well. What kind of involvement do you have?   Scrotis Lo Knows Citizen Username: Scrotisloknows Post Number: 639 Registered: 10-2005 Posted on Saturday, February 4, 2006 - 3:12 pm:        Lester said: "The other side of Springfield Ave is a war-zone - there is no differentiation from Irvington." Lester, can you please elaborate on this comment? What areas are you exactly talking about? Are you talking the whole Hilton section? If you are then it is probably the most ignorant statement I 've ever heard on this board. Everyone is beating up Lester about the Clinton SD but no one comments on this? My family and I lived "over Springfield" for close to 10 months and not one shell landed on our house or one bullet came through the window. We bought our house for just under 300kin this more blue collar racially diverse QUIET middle class hood. Most houses are SELLING over here between 380-400K by retirees to Yuppies leaving the city. I live 10 minutes from Tuscan where my children plan to go. I pay 5k in taxes. My realtor (and friend) who sold us our house claims that the Hilton section is the best value anywhere in the area right now (he is in fact selling two more houses on our block). Hilton has the the strongest neighborhood association in town as per the Mayor himself... I really am trying to figure out if Lester is kidding or not... Hey Les, if you ever need a tour of the hood let me know....   Nohero Supporter Username: Nohero Post Number: 5022 Registered: 10-1999 Posted on Saturday, February 4, 2006 - 7:39 pm:        Mr. Jacobs tends to say the same thing over and over. A lot of us have responded to him in the same way over and over. After reading through this thread, instead of writing a long response to Mr. Jacobs, I think I'll just endorse - "What S.L.K. said."   catmanjac Citizen Username: Catmanjac Post Number: 23 Registered: 2-2004 Posted on Saturday, February 18, 2006 - 4:26 pm:        For those of us who have or had lived hear more than forty years, we see the changes that are not necessarily good. The school system, though still better than many, has gone way down since the end of the 70's due to demographic changes with students entering who are illprepared for the standards we had maintained for so long. The feeling of individuality has been replaced by intimidation and tension. Busing is such a waste of money and resources. Runaway municipal spending has sent taxes soaring, especially in the pristine areas on the better side of the tracks. The other side of town, especially those bordering Irvington and Newark and the other side of Springfield Ave have declined considerably, and it shows. The relative newcombers see Maplewood as a panacea, compared to where they have been previously. But I worry for the future.   anon Supporter Username: Anon Post Number: 2607 Registered: 6-2002 Posted on Saturday, February 18, 2006 - 5:12 pm:        The feeling of individuality has been replaced by intimidation and tension. In the schools? In the community? I don't feel intimidated or tense. Please explain. Busing is such a waste of money and resources. The only busing is between Marshall and Jefferson and that has been going on for twenty-five years. Runaway municipal spending has sent taxes soaring, especially in the pristine areas on the better side of the tracks. Please tell me which items in the Town's budget you consider to be "runaway spending". Is it higher salaries for policemen? Is it more hours at the Library?   catmanjac Citizen Username: Catmanjac Post Number: 24 Registered: 2-2004 Posted on Saturday, February 18, 2006 - 5:26 pm:        Racial problems in the schools, expecially the high school have caused problems. The first week of school requires half the police department present during dismissal to keep the peace. Busing for racial balance, or any other reason is a waste of money, regardless of how long it has gone on. I do not wish Police Officers to be paid less than they are worth. Nor do I wish real educational advancement, such as a good library to be curtailed. But other areas of spending can be better controled. (I knew I would get slammed with my posting, but ask the old timers, those who can afford to remain as well as those who were forced to move how they feel).   Barbara Citizen Username: Blh Post Number: 616 Registered: 5-2001 Posted on Saturday, February 18, 2006 - 5:46 pm:        Actually, the busing was for socio-economic balance -- and resulted in better racial balance. As an old-timer, you must know that "separate but equal" was outlawed over 50 years ago. Studies in Raleigh NC, where schools were intentionally integrated socio-economically show dramatic reductions in the minority academic achievement gap. Since the kids of today will be the doctors when I'm an old-timer, I'd like them to get good, quality educations. And, by the way, the "other side of Springfield" is "the hill" for some folks in this town. Why do you assume that everyone that is reading this is on your side of Springfield?   anon Supporter Username: Anon Post Number: 2608 Registered: 6-2002 Posted on Saturday, February 18, 2006 - 6:28 pm:        I wasn't "slamming" you, I was asking questions. I think you are wrong, but you can back up your opinion with facts if you like. "Half the police department" was not present during dismissal the first week of school. There may be racial tensions in the schools as in other parts of our society, but there there are certainly friendships between students of different races, and there are sports activities and extra-curricula activities where the races mix amicably. You were comparing the present to the past and you spoke of "changes" but then you mentioned busing. So I pointed out that busing was not a recent change. You criticize municipal spending but won't say what you want cut. I think you are just being nostalgic for some imagined past. The Town is not perfect and it was not perfect when I moved here twenty years ago and I'm sure it was not perfect 40 or 60 years ago. You came on a thread started by a person considering moving to Town and you chose to bad mouth the Town in vague generalities. As someone who loves Maplewood I have a right to challenge you.   Bob K Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 10738 Registered: 5-2001 Posted on Sunday, February 19, 2006 - 6:04 am:        Barbara, while I tend to agree with you that a lot of the current issues at the high school are more socio-economic than racial, the pairing of Jefferson and Marshall was done for racial balance issues, as back in 1982 Marshall and Jefferson were the only schools out of racial balance in the district. Anon, it is interesting, and maybe telling, that you didn't include academic classes as places where kids of different races mix. Both our children graduated from Columbia and are still close friends with African American young people who they not only played sports with, but were in a lot of level 4 classes with. Which brings me to one of my pet peaves; the fact the BOE has never made public the racial breakdown of the levels at CHS.   Barbara Citizen Username: Blh Post Number: 617 Registered: 5-2001 Posted on Sunday, February 19, 2006 - 8:36 am:        Yes, Bob. I was thinking of the more recent redistricting.   anon Supporter Username: Anon Post Number: 2612 Registered: 6-2002 Posted on Sunday, February 19, 2006 - 1:13 pm:        Well, Bob, I haven't been into any classrooms, so I couldn't comment. I've been to sporting events and school plays.   Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 12591 Registered: 1-2003 Posted on Sunday, February 19, 2006 - 10:55 pm:        I'm under the impression that the racial balance in South Orange (not Maplewood) has remained the same. So with lots of blacks always in South Orange, and sharing the schools with South Orange, is it really true that the schools' racial balance has changed much?   Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 12592 Registered: 1-2003 Posted on Monday, February 20, 2006 - 1:00 am:        I see racial tensions as a feature, not a bug, to use geek-talk. Good preparation for adult life. We moved into town in search of that.   Bob K Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 10744 Registered: 5-2001 Posted on Monday, February 20, 2006 - 6:02 am:        Tom, between the 1990 amd 2000 census reports the African American population in both towns basically doubled to around 33 percent. The difference is income level. In SO as of the 2000 census the median household income for blacks was actually higher than the median household income for whites in MW, although lower than white households in that town. As of the 1990 census African American household incomes in both towns were actually slightly higher than for white households, something both communities were quite proud of. As of the 2000 census this was no longer the case. These facts caused the exchange of posts between Barbara and myself yesterday and my feeling that a lot of the current tension at CHS is socio-economic, not racial. I have to say that your last post indicating that racial tension is a feature is quite extraordinary. I don't see how anyone can look at racial tension as a positive.   Scully Citizen Username: Scully Post Number: 171 Registered: 8-2005 Posted on Monday, February 20, 2006 - 1:41 pm:        I think Tom is saying that racial tensions can often be a reality in adult life and it helps the kids who might eventually come across it to learn how to deal with it in a healthy manner. It gives the kids a shot of going out on their own more prepared, not hot house flowers.   Bob K Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 10749 Registered: 5-2001 Posted on Monday, February 20, 2006 - 1:46 pm:        One of the things that attracted us to Maplewood in the first place is that it isn't a typical suburb and our kids would grow up with a diverse (both race and socio-economic) enviornment. However, talking about "tension", or hostility if you prefer, doesn't seem at all positive.   mtierney Citizen Username: Mtierney Post Number: 903 Registered: 3-2001 Posted on Tuesday, February 21, 2006 - 12:23 pm:        As someone who has lived here for 40+ years in the Tuscan School district, I witnessed the closing of First St., Fielding, Montrose and Newstead schools and school busing. Declining enrollment and deteriorating buildings were major issues in the '70s, along with desegregation. Barbara, busing was never for socio-economic balance. So happens that rich white kids lived in the Jefferson district, but that was never the rationale for busing. FWIW: First St.'s site now houses that PT/medical facility; Fielding is where the BOE is; Newstead is now S.Mt. annex; and Montrose is the CHS alternative school. As I have said on other posts, the reval changed forever, I guess, how Maplewood is described. Previously, areas were referred to by the name of the elementary school. I was really surprised to learn that I had been living, not in Tuscan area, but west of Springfield Avenue! Not on the "hill," however, which left us lost in the middle somewhere!   Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 12594 Registered: 1-2003 Posted on Tuesday, February 21, 2006 - 11:55 pm:        bobk, I see racial tension as a feature because it presents challenges. My job as my kids' parent is to help them become stronger, not to make their lives easier. My 11th grader has come up with some pretty good insights about it all. Some of it is mixed with annoyance, and perhaps I am a bit sorry about that, but she would not otherwise have come up with the insights.   SoxHater2090 Citizen Username: Soxhater2090 Post Number: 21 Registered: 4-2005 Posted on Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 10:44 am:        Tom Reingold: Bob K is certainly correct. Take some time, and do some research on the Internet, in the papers, etc. You will see that the racial balance in both towns is identical, and the difference between the two towns is an economic one. As Bob K said, HHLD income is something like this:SO White, SO African American, Maplewood White, Maplewood Afican American. This is also demonstrated in housing values. Even though both Towns have enjoyed large gains over the past 10 years, the housing in SO has continued to be at a higher level. In a recent Real Estate report that we received in the mail, it showed every house that sold in both towns last year, and the asking and sold price. Perhaps you received it as well? Interesting to me was the lowest price properties in Maplewood were about 15-20% lower than the the lowest price ones in SO. In addition, although more total homes sold in Maplewood than in SO, the absolute #, as well as the percentage selling for $900 + was considerable higher in SO. (I didn't choose $1M, becasue there were simply too few in Maplewood). Perhaps, Tom, you should quit bashing the Town that shares (and supports a majority of the bill for) your kids' schools. Probably, you'd be surprised to know that there is very quiet underground group in SO, that unlike everyone else who wants to merge services like Police, Fire, Trash, etc., actually wants to SPLIT the schools. SO has the economic base and the facilities to accomplish this, while Maplewood does not. The members in this "movement" cite test scores, crime in the schools, etc, meaning if the 2 Towns were separated, SO would not be being "brought down" by Maplewood. It's too bad that someone like you seems to wants to really make BOTH Towns look bad, with your very narrow degrading viewpoint. Perhaps you really meant to live on Long Island somewhere?   Jersey Boy Citizen Username: Jersey_boy Post Number: 243 Registered: 1-2006 Posted on Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 12:01 pm:        I knew South Orange was better. I missed the post where Tom was bashing it though. J.B.   Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 12639 Registered: 1-2003 Posted on Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 12:51 pm:        SoxHater2090, you misinterpret my motives. No bashing intended at all. I was trying to get the facts straight. Apparently, I missed that mark, but leave it to me to explain my motives, OK? I'll take your word for it about the income levels and the house prices. I never knew about the underground movement to split the schools, but now I know. And I have no interest whatsoever in making either town look bad. I like them both, and it's best for me if others do, too.   catmanjac Citizen Username: Catmanjac Post Number: 49 Registered: 2-2004 Posted on Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 12:52 pm:        After all this debating going back and forth, as I said, both towns were better 40+ years ago. The schools were more homogenous, as were the towns. The brief drug rumors of the sixties were just that, brief rumors, and no one forced them down anyone's throat. Go back to that era... lower crime, lower taxes, school incidents were practically unheard of...   BGS Citizen Username: Bgs Post Number: 640 Registered: 10-2003 Posted on Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 2:17 pm:        Except, Catmanjac...we cannot go back 40 years, so, what is everyone doing to bring things up to speed??? Comparing economics and racial balance and talking about which town is better (Jersey Boy) does nothing to help either town. If you want to see things better, get involved with your towns and schools and community. It just makes me crazy to hear about how good things were and little discussion about what we as a community can do to make things move forward. BGS CHS '66   Barbara Citizen Username: Blh Post Number: 620 Registered: 5-2001 Posted on Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 2:29 pm:        mtierney -- the Seth Boyden redistricting was to break up the disproportionately high percentage of low income families at SB -- the sending area was cut in half with families in the outer circle sent to contiguous school zones -- Tuscan, Clinton or Marshall (yes, there was a section of the SB zone that reached into the Marshall zone.) The restriction put on volunteer families who were then brought in to SB was that they not be low income (i.e., eligible for free or reduced lunch.) There were no racial restrictions put on volunteer families. Yes, it was socio-economic --- but did result in greater racial balance as well.   Barbara Citizen Username: Blh Post Number: 621 Registered: 5-2001 Posted on Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 2:30 pm:        By the way, we're a SB family and think the redistricting was a great idea.   Nohero Supporter Username: Nohero Post Number: 5095 Registered: 10-1999 Posted on Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 7:18 pm:        Catmanjac wrote above - Quote: After all this debating going back and forth, as I said, both towns were better 40+ years ago. The schools were more homogenous, as were the towns. With all due respect, there can be a difference of opinion as to whether that constitutes "better", or just "different".   wendy Supporter Username: Wendy Post Number: 2012 Registered: 5-2001 Posted on Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 7:37 pm:        I picked up on that line too, nohero. I wouldn't treat it with all due respect, however. The "good ole days" as perceived by Catmanjac et al. are gone and pretty soon whites will actually be in a minority. Catmanjac is either deluding himself or herself and/or needs to start a protected enclave somewhere in Idaho. This is the world in our great country. Love it or lump it but don't keep on about the good ole days.   Mtam Citizen Username: Mtam Post Number: 56 Registered: 11-2005 Posted on Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 10:40 pm:        On the higher prices for SO houses-- I think there's a mixing of apples and oranges here--there's a great deal of larger houses in South Orange, with larger plots, whereas Maplewood has many more modest and mid-sized homes. Indeed many families might buy the cute Maplewood house and trade in for a larger South Orange home later. So I don't think that the comparison makes sense.   Jersey Boy Citizen Username: Jersey_boy Post Number: 248 Registered: 1-2006 Posted on Sunday, February 26, 2006 - 12:00 am:        To all and BGS, When I say, "South Orange is better" It is only better than its awesome sister town of Maplewood. If you live in Maplewood and you think it's "better," speak up. J.B. South Orange is the best. Maplewood is only cool because of it's association with South Orange. Ha!   anon Supporter Username: Anon Post Number: 2622 Registered: 6-2002 Posted on Sunday, February 26, 2006 - 12:31 am:        Wendy and NoHero: I agree. What is positive about the Town being more "homogenous"? I prefer diversity   Nohero Supporter Username: Nohero Post Number: 5098 Registered: 10-1999 Posted on Sunday, February 26, 2006 - 12:35 am:        Jerseyboy - "Oh, we live in South Orange, which is really 'Upper Maplewood', you know ..."   susan1014 Supporter Username: Susan1014 Post Number: 1375 Registered: 3-2002 Posted on Sunday, February 26, 2006 - 2:57 pm:        Catmanjac, if I wanted to live in a more homogeneous town, I would have moved to one. You may have liked the past better, but that doesn't mean that we all crave it. (I hope that you do not mean the racist tone that comes across in your three postings here. I'll assume you don't, since I like to think that those feelings have been left behind in the past that you view through rose-colored glasses)   mtierney Citizen Username: Mtierney Post Number: 905 Registered: 3-2001 Posted on Sunday, February 26, 2006 - 3:58 pm:        Barbara, you may be correct regarding Seth Boyden's busing. My earlier response was to the busing instituted when Marshall and Jefferson were cojoined. That specifically was to address desegregation. Re a reference to homogeneous - not necessarily a racial statement. Some 40 years ago the student body was homogeneous as a matter of fact - kids attended school here from K-12, thereby having the SAME educational experience. My spouse attended Seth Boyden through Columbia at the time when schools were perhaps 90% white. There were poor kids, lots of rich and middle class kids.Today we are teaching a diverse group of kids (not a bad thing) but it is a more difficult situation to expect all the kids to achieve at the same level and at the same rate when they may not have had a good educational experience earlier or perhaps are from non-English speaking homes. Dealing with reality doesn't translate into racism. How in the world will we succeed if we don't?   anon Supporter Username: Anon Post Number: 2625 Registered: 6-2002 Posted on Sunday, February 26, 2006 - 9:02 pm:        I had a conversation once with a man who graduated Clinton School in 1936. He told me that half his classmates had parents who were foreign born. I took "homogenous" to mean "white". I think it is a stretch to think it meant that kids attended the local schools from K-12. Do you really think that people didn't move in and out of Town with kids of various school ages? Was it 40 years ago or longer that the Maplewood Country Club was "restricted"? On the other hand whn a person longs for "the good ole days" maybe what they are really longing for is their own youth.   Bob K Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 10810 Registered: 5-2001 Posted on Monday, February 27, 2006 - 7:43 am:        Maplewood has always been ecomically diverse. As far as racial diversity, many areas aren't all that diverse. Here is a link. Just type in an address and the zip code and there is tons of information from the last census and census estimates: http://www.ffiec.gov/geocode/default.htm You can also find out why your neighbors are driving Mercedes Benz products while you are stuck with your old Dodge Omni.   Cynicalgirl Citizen Username: Cynicalgirl Post Number: 2393 Registered: 9-2003 Posted on Monday, February 27, 2006 - 12:21 pm:        Bob K, does every street address in Maplewood come up the same? As in, what's the lowest determining factor? I'm not sure I understand the tract thing....   Bob K Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 10818 Registered: 5-2001 Posted on Monday, February 27, 2006 - 12:33 pm:        These are census tracts. All communities are broken down into tracts for census purposes. You can look at a map by clicking on the button to the right. The reason I posted this was to show just how economically diverse Maplewood is, but how racially it really isn't.   Cynicalgirl Citizen Username: Cynicalgirl Post Number: 2395 Registered: 9-2003 Posted on Monday, February 27, 2006 - 2:15 pm:        0196 is my tract and it is 61% minority. I tried some addresses of friends not on my street, and to be sure, came up differently as to percentage minority and mix, often as low as 22% minority (0195) and probably lower still. Yes, average income seems to rise with % non-minority. As I'm at work, there's only so much playing I can do! Certainly does show the differences within Maplewood, some of which may come into play in our perspectives.   C Bataille Citizen Username: Nakaille Post Number: 2471 Registered: 5-2001 Posted on Monday, February 27, 2006 - 2:18 pm:        CG, we're in the same tract. 61% seems about right to me, or maybe a little low. I'll have to check the numbers for prior years because there've been some changes over the past 15.   Bob K Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 10824 Registered: 5-2001 Posted on Monday, February 27, 2006 - 2:25 pm:        Cyn and Cathy, you have to go back and look at the 1990 census information. The 2005, 2004, etc. figures are estimates and I think the only thing that changes from year to year is income. I posted this to show while Maplewood as a whole is very diverse, some parts are very diverse and other parts hardly at all.   Cynicalgirl Citizen Username: Cynicalgirl Post Number: 2396 Registered: 9-2003 Posted on Monday, February 27, 2006 - 2:27 pm:        I actually think that this is a very cool tool as it shows how our individual streets influence our views. I also think that many people have a ltd sense of Maplewood's geography! I further suspect that this lack of knowlege makes some of us think there are more "illegal" students than there are, or causes us to have inaccurate picture of the community and its needs.   Meandtheboys Citizen Username: Meandtheboys Post Number: 3102 Registered: 12-2004 Posted on Monday, February 27, 2006 - 2:36 pm:        It is very cool. But what's MSA/MD?   Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 12649 Registered: 1-2003 Posted on Monday, February 27, 2006 - 3:03 pm:        I entered a Woodland Rd address in Maplewood and it said the tract is 11% minority. This is a very cool tool. It would be even funner (is that a word) if we could draw the tract lines ourselves, but that would add tremendous complication, and it would enable us to make deceptive data.   shaun Citizen Username: Shaun Post Number: 53 Registered: 6-2001 Posted on Monday, February 27, 2006 - 4:25 pm:        CG, CB we must be neighbors.   Cynicalgirl Citizen Username: Cynicalgirl Post Number: 2398 Registered: 9-2003 Posted on Monday, February 27, 2006 - 4:53 pm:        I'm on Warren near Parker. You? Tom, check your address in it...you were one of the one's I tried as I had it ready to hand. But, I haven't figured out how to see the tract boundaries.   Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 12651 Registered: 1-2003 Posted on Monday, February 27, 2006 - 5:01 pm:        When you enter an address, there are two buttons. "Get Census Demographic" and "Get Street Address Map". The latter will show the tract boundaries.   Cynicalgirl Citizen Username: Cynicalgirl Post Number: 2401 Registered: 9-2003 Posted on Monday, February 27, 2006 - 8:23 pm:        Got it! It could be useful to have a version of that map of all Maplewood, with the mean income and minority % displayed. I think that it does show why some areas may feel under-represented. As always, each of us can have a different reality/perception, and the data offers some reasons why. I see quite incredible variation just among my kid's friends' neighborhoods, looking at their addresses. One lives in our same tract, one near MMS, 2 on different parts of Ridgewood. Quite a lot of variation just in that sample.