Move Over DC, Seattle, Boston: MKE's Population Estimate Up 30K (Milwaukee: apartment, condo)

[EnjoyEP]

Well, here is some good news for the city of Milwaukee, the US Census Bureau has revised its 2006 estimated population for the city, and actually is now showing the city to have grown by roughly 30,000 residents.

This revision moves Milwaukee past Washington DC, Seattle, and Boston into the 22nd largest city in the US (they had been slotted as #25).

It also shows growth in the city, which is a reverse trend for Milwaukee (if true...again, this is only the estimate being the 2006 year).

Good news for Milwaukee!:

JS Online: Census boosts count

[Empidonax]

That is good news. I wonder how much of the increase is due to new condo dwellers. It'll be nice to see the demographic details when they're released.

[adam76]

This is very interesting and quite a jump (> 5%) after years of losses. It makes you wonder if this is due to modified counting methods instead of actual gains. Does anyone know how other northern cities fared? Most rust belt cities have been losing population over the past decade.

[Milwaukee Ronnie]

This is a re-evaluation of the 2006 population estimate. The US Census came out with an estimate earlier this year that set the 2006 population at ab out 587,000. The City challenged this estimate and the Census did a recount, using new data the City provided. The Census then said, essentially, "we were wrong, here's the new estimate." This new estimate came in at about 602,000.

So, the US Census is not saying that Milwaukee added 30,000 people over this decade. In fact, the difference is more like 5,000 people, since the 2000 "official" count was about 597,000 (rough figures).

Still, though, this re-estimate is very good news. US Census counts every 10 years, and the estimates in off years, have showed the City losing population steadily since 1970. To have an actual increase over the year 2000 count is actually a really big deal, even if it is only 5,000 people. It means that we're no longer losing people, and, indeed, are growing modestly. This is big for a Rust Belt city like Milwaukee.

In fact, there are many people who put more stock in the US Census estimates than in the actual "official" count (the next count is in 2010). The reason is that the estimates are based mainly on building and occupancy permits for housing. Every time a house or an apartment is bought, renovated boarded up, vacated or torn down, the City keeps a record of that. US Census estimates are based on these records. The official counts every 10 years, however, are based on the census forms mailed to every household, and to people actually hitting the streets with clipboards going to door-to-door to collect those figures for households that didn't return the form.

In 2010 we will have the next official census count taken. I'm pretty certain, given this estimate, that the 2010 count will show a modest increase in population over the year 2000. That would mean that the City of Milwaukee will have
"officially" ended it's nearly 40 year run of losing population. That's good news.

[EnjoyEP]

Originally Posted by adam76

This is very interesting and quite a jump (> 5%) after years of losses. It makes you wonder if this is due to modified counting methods instead of actual gains. Does anyone know how other northern cities fared? Most rust belt cities have been losing population over the past decade.

Here is the listing of cities in order from the 2006 census Adam -

Phoenix climbs to No. 5 in Census ranking of cities - USATODAY.com

***[NOTE: This was PRIOR to the change in Milwaukee's figure, which hurdled it to #22 and past Seattle, DC, and Boston]

It looks like the Rust Belt cities ahead of Milwaukee:

City 2006 estimate 2006 rank 2000 rank Change 2000-06
Chicago 2,833,321 3 3 -2.2%
Detroit 871,121 11 10 -8.4%
Indianapolis 785,597 13 12 0.5%
Milwaukee
Cleveland 444,313 40 34 -6.9%

Of these cities, we have joined Indianapolis as the only Rust Belt city of size to gain population from 2000.