WSPC01488 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

O~J~94 that city. By the same token, Boston, with 14 percent of Massachusetts' pop- ulation, accounts for 40 percent of that State's AFDC expenditure. 3. A clear disparity in tax burden is evident between central city and out- side central city. Local taxes in the central cities are 7.5 percent of in- come; outside the central cities only 5.6 percent of income. Higher central city taxes are reinforcing the other factors that are pushing upper income families and business firms out of the central city into suburbia. 4. On the educational or 'developmental' front, the central cities are falling farther behind their suburban neighbors with each passing year. In 1957 the per pupil expenditures in the 37 metro- politan areas favored the central city slightly -- $312 to $303 for the subur- ban jurisdictions. By 1965, the subur- ban jurisdictions had forged far ahead -- $574 to $449 for the central cities. This growing disparity between the cen- tral city and suburban school districts takes on a more ominous character in light of the fact that the central city school districts must carry a dispro- portionately heavy share of the educa- tional burden -- the task of educating an increasing number of 'high cost' un- derprivileged children. Children who need education the most are receiving it the least I 5. On the municipal service or 'custodial' front, the presence of 'high cost' cit- izens, greater population density, and the need to service the needs of com- muters force central cities to spend far more than most of their suburban neighbors for police and fire protec- tion and sanitation services. The 37 largest central cities had a non-educa- tional (municipal) outlay of $232 per -11-