125857644_web1_gavel

Teacher’s appeal on corruption case given new life

125856453_web1_IMG_0317

Wilkes-Barre to pay more to get rid of recyclables

Hazleton got bragging rights as the best &ldquo;small city&rdquo; in the region, according to a new national ranking system, but being best around here isn&rsquo;t much to brag about.
				WalletHub, the website that bills itself as &ldquo;dedicated to helping people efficiently attain top Wallet Fitness so they may enjoy life instead of worrying about money,&rdquo; ranked 1,268 small cities nationwide. &ldquo;Small&rdquo; was defined as having between 25,000 to 100,000 residents, while &ldquo;best&rdquo; was measured through 43 &ldquo;key indicators of livability&rdquo; ranging from housing costs to school quality to restaurants per capita.
				Cities were ranked overall by the percentile they fell in, with 99 being the best and 1 the worst. And yes, there were cities in the single percentile, twenty of them, most in southern states but a few in New York and New Jersey. They also got rankings in affordability, economic health, education, quality of life and safety, as well as a &ldquo;total score.&rdquo;
				While 19 cities landed in the 99th percentile, the highest total score was given to Sammamish, Washington, practically a suburb of Redmond settled on a plateau with a lake to one side and a valley to the other. It scored 73.05 overall and ranked first in the economic health category.
				The city with the lowest score? Pine Bluff, Arkansas, coming in with a 32.62 total score. Pine Bluffers probably aren&rsquo;t happy about that status, but they have the distinction of not ranking dead last in any of the sub categories.
				Three cities in Lackawanna and Luzerne counties made the list, and of them Hazleton &mdash; the smallest by population &mdash; got the highest total score at 56.54, putting it in the 48th percentile. Its best sub-category score was in economic health, ranking 399th, while its worst was in affordability, ranking 846th.
				Wilkes-Barre had a total score of 52.65 and fell in the 26th percentile. It landed fairly high in the quality of life category at 377, but tanked badly in economic health, ranked at 1,222.
				Scranton got the poorest rating of the three, and the second-poorest rating among 19 Pennsylvania cities that made the list. The Electric City&rsquo;s total score was 49.66, sinking it to the 13th percentile. It did get one thing to boast about regionally, ranking better in quality of life &mdash; 188th &mdash; than Hazleton or Wilkes-Barre.
				The city you want to move to if you plan to stay in the Commonwealth? Lancaster, scoring 67.48 and landing in the 97th percentile. It ranked 15th nationally in quality of life.
				The Keystone city you likely want to avoid, based on these rankings at least, would be Chester, with a score of 45.98 putting it in the fourth percentile.
				Complete ratings and methodology are at <a href="https://wallethub.com/edu/best-worst-small-cities-to-live-in/16581" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">wallethub.com</a>.

In new rankings, Hazleton rates best of the not-so-good regional cities