Lowell Sun
Article published April 30, 2004
Granite Gold
N.H. tops list of 'most livable' states while Mass. tumbles way down to (gulp!) No. 16
New Hampshire's state bird may be the purple finch, but these days, the "Live Free or Die" folks are crowing.
And Bay Staters are eating a little crow.
According to State Rankings 2004 issued by Kansas-based Morgan Quitno Press, New Hampshire is the nation's "most livable state." It narrowly edged Minnesota, which had held the title for the past seven years. New Hampshire already knows the sweet taste of the top ranking, having been number one in the 1991, 1993 and 1994 surveys.
Massachusetts rated 16, down from No. 9 in 2003. Its highest ranking was No. 5, in 2002.
This is the survey's 14th year. According to the folks at Morgan Quitno, it factors a broad array of economic, health, educational, public safety and environmental data.
Of course, some take such awards seriously New Hampshire public officials will use the ranking to lure prospective businesses and residents while others (those in Massachusetts) balk a bit.
"We topped Minnesota?" wonders Bill McDevitt, chairman of the Board of Selectmen in Pelham. "I wonder if it has anything to do with Jesse Ventura leaving office."
Or perhaps, it is suggested, the now-collapsed Old Man in the Mountain was holding them back for seven years.
"It had nothing to do with that," the selectman says flatly.
"Yeah, sure it's a compliment," says McDevitt, who settled in New Hampshire in 1971 and commuted until retirement to work in Boston. "It's nice to have a compliment. It's like somebody saying, my, you have the cutest little girl."
He says the award reflects the spirit of "hard work" the state's people exhibit, and "we're blessed a lot with volunteers here, one of the things that makes it work so well. It's really a reflection of the people who choose to live here."
Any advice for Massachusetts?
"You've really got to shake that full-time Legislature. Too much entrenched political machinery."
Dave Juvet, vice president of the Business and Industry Association of New Hampshire, says the award brings to light "a quality of life issue."
New Hampshire offers plenty of land up north, "natural variety, including forests, mountains, lakes" and "a general political/philosophical tone of the state, that less is more." Good public education and state university systems, good health care, and a low infant-mortality rate.
"From a business perspective, it's worth a lot. We can't rely solely on New Hampshire kids growing up here and going to work here."
Such an award can be a valuable tool in recruiting prospective employers, and appeal to their workforces.
Alas, the reaction was more muted in Massachusetts.
"We're No. 16, and New Hampshire's No. 1?" asks a befuddled Jeanne Osborn, president of Greater Lowell Chamber of Commerce. "We have the best hospitals in the world, the best universities in the world, one of the largest cities in the world. And New Hampshire has what ... cows?"
Jeanne, we hope you're sitting down. Even North Dakota topped us, at No. 15.
"Oh, yeah, all six people in North Dakota."
Why such a low rating?
"It could be the economy and unemployment," says Osborn. "I mean, we have industry and high-tech."
So she won't be using the rankings anytime soon?
"Not if we're No. 16."
You'd think Sean Sullivan would be a little torn. He is Hudson, N.H.'s director of community development. He is also a 1981 Lowell High School grad. And a Tewksbury resident who commutes to New Hampshire.
"There's a lot to draw people to the southern part of the state," says Sullivan. He says the housing market is strong, home lots are larger and more plentiful, it's convenient to major highways and Nashua offers services and industry aplenty.
"I'd definitely use this," he says. "If a business or potential resident calls from out of state, this is something to add to the other draws. It's another lure."
Oh, well. In Massachusetts, there's a familiar saying: Maybe next year.
David Perry's e-mail address is
.
