
                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: SATURDAY, August 20, 1994                   TAG: 9408220065
SECTION:  EDITORIAL                    PAGE: A9   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: 
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium

WE'RE (NOT) IN THE MONEY

THE EXPERTS have been sounding the alarm: Something's rotten in Roanoke - and Norfolk, and Richmond, and Lynchburg, and Danville. Somebody had better do something fast about Virginia cities' fiscal stress and social maladies, they warn, lest those cities get flushed down the toilet of urban decline while their North Carolina competitors luxuriate in the Jacuzzi.

But who expected Virginia cities to sink this far this fast? According, anyway, to Money magazine.

In the magazine's 1993 listing of "best places to live in America," every major city in Virginia was in the top 100. This year, only Charlottesville is among the 100 best - and even there, by the magazine's estimation, the quality of life has plummeted from 37th to 77th in the country.

For other Virginia cities, the free fall is even farther. Roanoke, 81st last year and 201st this; Danville, 60th last year and 214th this; Lynchburg, from 67th to 219th; Norfolk-Virginia Beach, 63rd to 224th; Richmond, 64th to 253rd.

Meanwhile, Raleigh-Durham, just 183 miles south of Roanoke, was designated by Money as the most idyllic address in America. And this after Fortune magazine rated it this year as the nation's best metro area in which to do business.

Oh, the humiliation. We Roanokers were so pleased last year to be 81st - not super, maybe, but more than respectable. We could hold our heads high - especially after the magazine in 1991 had ranked us a pitiful 294th out of 300 - that's right: seventh-worst place to live in the United States!

Or just maybe Money - that yo-yo - is jerking us around. It admits to changing the criteria each year by which it judges U.S. metropolises. This year, the magazine said, its readers valued low crime rates, clean air and water, good health care, strong government, and low taxes more than last year, when readers were more interested in good schools, housing prices, ski areas and proximity to major-league sports.

Even so, you'd think, the new criteria hardly seem the sorts of things to drop Roanoke from the top 100. Did nobody tell Money that the crime rate here has been falling for two years in a row, and that, as of noon Friday, the city this year had yet to record its first reported murder? Or that The Wall Street Journal is said to be doing a story about environmental initiatives in the Roanoke Valley? Or that Roanoke is the medical center for much of Western Virginia?

Why, did Money not even pick up on the rumors that Hillary Clinton just might have been spotted last month in Roanoke, having dinner at a local Italian restaurant?

Not that anyone should take seriously those silly lists (except when you're near the top, of course). Nor that anyone should be ungracious to Raleigh-Durham (the scum) for its double recognition (unfair).

Should Roanoke ever win similar recognition, you can bet (hey, how about skywriting from here to California?) we would not launch a huge promotional campaign. No (quick, call an international press conference; demand an audience with the pope!) sirree bob. Of course (White House dinner; national day of recognition!) not. We would be humble.

by CNB