New city estimates are out (Omaha, Columbus: health, land , rain)

[Go Ne]

Omaha had a healthy growth of around 5,000 to land at 432,921 as the 42nd largest, Virginia Beach, the 41st is only about 2000 ahead of us and Cleveland the 40th is only 4000 ahead of us. Who knows, with the annexation plans that will give us an additional 7000 people to the city and natural growth added on we could be 40th soon, Kansas City is 39th with 450,000 so no hope in taking that away from them soon.

[Go Ne]

I just found out that Virginia Beach shrunk from last year, and Cleveland probably has too. Yay for us!

[ehenningsen]

Originally Posted by Go Ne

Omaha had a healthy growth of around 5,000 to land at 432,921 as the 42nd largest, Virginia Beach, the 41st is only about 2000 ahead of us and Cleveland the 40th is only 4000 ahead of us. Who knows, with the annexation plans that will give us an additional 7000 people to the city and natural growth added on we could be 40th soon, Kansas City is 39th with 450,000 so no hope in taking that away from them soon.

Those estimates DO NOT include the annexation of Elkhorn and the other neighborhoods from that year that totaled about 10,300 people, and then just a few days ago we annexed another 7,600.. So in the next year or so, we may jump to number 39 or 40...

[Go Ne]

Originally Posted by ehenningsen

Those estimates DO NOT include the annexation of Elkhorn and the other neighborhoods from that year that totaled about 10,300 people, and then just a few days ago we annexed another 7,600.. So in the next year or so, we may jump to number 39 or 40...

yeah they do include Elkhorn, it says in the paper.

[ehenningsen]

Originally Posted by Go Ne

yeah they do include Elkhorn, it says in the paper.

okay, but they don't include the 2000+ residents they also annexed, because if you look the 2007 estimate is 424,000 and when you add elkhorn it then becomes 432,000.. What they don't mention are the 2000+ residents that were annexed in addition to Elkhorn that year to be able to annex elkhorn..

plus another 7,600 a few days ago and the average 4,500 growth..

I predict the 2008 estimate to be 446,500

[Go Ne]

Originally Posted by ehenningsen

okay, but they don't include the 2000+ residents they also annexed, because if you look the 2007 estimate is 424,000 and when you add elkhorn it then becomes 432,000.. What they don't mention are the 2000+ residents that were annexed in addition to Elkhorn that year to be able to annex elkhorn..

plus another 7,600 a few days ago and the average 4,500 growth..

I predict the 2008 estimate to be 446,500

Actually, the 2006 estimate also included Elkhorn, because it was officially part of the city in 2005 so the Census bureau had to go back and change it, originally the estimate in 2006 was around 419,000. Then they added Elkhorn after all of the legal trouble and it became 427,872, so the 5,000 growth came naturally and then the estimate is 432,921. But when you add the 9,600 from the other annexations, its 442,521, which makes us the 40th largest city in the country. I also think the estimate of next year will be larger, let just say we grow by 5000 again and we annex 7,600 again, our population would be 455,121. I predict by 2010 we may have annexed Waterloo and Bennington with Valley coming soon after.

[Dave1215]

And if you look at the metro stats its even healthier since Papillion, LaVista, and Gretna all had record growth. Papillion overtook Columbus for the #10 spot in the state. Good news for the overall metro.

[berryman]

I don't really want to rain on anyone's party or anything, but I believe these statistic are a bit deceiving. These population statistic only consider the population of the city proper not the entire metro area. If you take in to account the populations of Metro Areas Omaha ends up 61th in the country in 2005. For an example of how these statistic can mislead is that the city of Miami is listed as the 45th largest city in the County in 2005 as opposed to Omaha's 44th ranking. If you take into account the Miami Metro area its population rises to the 7th largest in the country as opposed to Omaha's Metro Area ranking falling to 61st. I'm not trying to say anything bad about Omaha but it really is hard to say that Omaha is bigger city then Miami is, with in the conventional logic of what someone considers to be "the city".

[DTO Luv]

I don't think you're really enlightening anyone. We're all aware the city population is moot.

[ehenningsen]

Originally Posted by berryman

I don't really want to rain on anyone's party or anything, but I believe these statistic are a bit deceiving. These population statistic only consider the population of the city proper not the entire metro area. If you take in to account the populations of Metro Areas Omaha ends up 61th in the country in 2005. For an example of how these statistic can mislead is that the city of Miami is listed as the 45th largest city in the County in 2005 as opposed to Omaha's 44th ranking. If you take into account the Miami Metro area its population rises to the 7th largest in the country as opposed to Omaha's Metro Area ranking falling to 61st. I'm not trying to say anything bad about Omaha but it really is hard to say that Omaha is bigger city then Miami is, with in the conventional logic of what someone considers to be "the city".

Yes berryman, the metro estimates came out a few months ago and the overall growth for the entire Omaha metro was just under 10,000 while lincoln was about 4,000