Associated Press
Despite its world-famous parks and postcard neighborhoods, San Francisco was the only major U.S. city to add population but lose children during the past decade, as cost-of-living pressures forced out middle- and working-class families.
While San Francisco boomed, it ended the decade with 4,100 fewer youngsters under 18 than it had in 1990, passing Seattle to become the major American city least likely to have households with kids.
Elsewhere around the country, the lure of bigger backyards, more affordable housing and better schools in the suburbs continued to draw families away from otherwise desirable cities.
Ironically, three of the major cities with the fewest children — Seattle; Portland, Ore.; and San Francisco — were rated among the top five "kid-friendly" big cities this year by Zero Population Growth, a Washington, D.C.-based group that factored in education, crime and parks.
In Seattle, where mayors have mounted campaigns to keep kids in town, the under-18 population grew 3 percent during the 1990s, though it didn’t match the city’s overall growth rate of 9 percent.
Children "are the canaries in the mine shaft of livability, whether that’s the safety of our streets or any other criteria," said deputy mayor Tom Byers. "I don’t think any city can be really healthy without its fair share of kids."
Copyright ©2001 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.