Seattle Still on Low End for Children for a Major U.S. City
There are several reasons to raise this issue.
One reason is the growing gentrification of this city which is likely to push out groups that traditionally have more children - immigrants (especially Latinos.)
Another reason is the rising costs of housing in this city as well as the seemingly lack of family-sized apartments/condos being built (at least as being pushed by the Mayor's HALA committee.)
Still another concern is our school district and its inability to be operationally sound and provide good academic outcomes for all children. If many poorer families get pushed out of the district and wealthier families continue to go private, Seattle Schools may not continue its growth. Charter schools are likely to influence what happens as well (if the current law doesn't also get overturned.)
The New York Times had a story recently about San Francisco and its lowest-in-the-nation child population.
As an urban renaissance has swept through major American cities in recent decades, San Francisco’s population has risen to historical highs and a forest of skyscraping condominiums has replaced tumbledown warehouses and abandoned wharves. At the same time, the share of children in San Francisco fell to 13 percent, low even compared with another expensive city, New York, with 21 percent.
As San Francisco moves toward a one-industry town with soaring costs, the dearth of children is one more change that raises questions about its character. Are fewer children making San Francisco more one-dimensional and less vibrant? The answer is subjective and part of an impassioned debate over Seattle Schools Community Forum: Seattle Still on Low End for Children for a Major U.S. City:
