Cleveland Population (Columbus, Cincinnati, Brooklyn: 2014, neighborhoods, schools)

[wills737]

Cleveland's population has been declining at a pretty steady rate for years now. However, the Cleveland MSA saw a change of -14 from 2012 to 2013. Many are saying that the population is finally bottoming out and many expect a possible population increase in 2014. Any thoughts? Many analysts that I found online are still predicting a decline in population, is it common for them to be wrong? Cleveland has gotten much needed press lately with the RNC coming and the Gay Games. What are your thoughts on the Cleveland Population? I'll leave my sources down below so you can check them out yourself!

Special Report: 2013 Metropolitan Area Population Estimates | Newgeography.com

[Clevelander216]

Originally Posted by wills737

Cleveland's population has been declining at a pretty steady rate for years now. However, the Cleveland MSA saw a change of -14 from 2012 to 2013. Many are saying that the population is finally bottoming out and many expect a possible population increase in 2014. Any thoughts? Many analysts that I found online are still predicting a decline in population, is it common for them to be wrong? Cleveland has gotten much needed press lately with the RNC coming and the Gay Games. What are your thoughts on the Cleveland Population? I'll leave my sources down below so you can check them out yourself!

http://www.newgeography.com/content/...wgeography.com

Great news! definitely saw it coming with all the development and press we've been getting lately with much more to come. this is just the beginning.

[Min-Chi-Cbus]

Most analytics are completely guesses based on recent historical trends. For instance, most metrics you'll see will show continued rampant growth in Austin, Dallas, Houston, Atlanta, etc., and the chances are that those cities can't continue their current projectory without some MAJOR intervention (such as mass rail build-out, much higher taxes to pay for new road infrastructure, etc.). Just visit Austin to see what I mean, with the nation's worst traffic and insanely high housing prices in the core for a city not landlocked or on the coast. If you would have looked at population projections in 1940 for Cleveland, St. Louis, Chicago, etc. they would have probably shown continued growth through 1980 and 2000, but clearly that didn't happen. They use a moving average that only looks at historical data and very little current info that they know will impact future growth (such as a growth boundary, like in San Diego or Portland).

That all being said, having lived here for only a few years (4) and also having lived in other Midwestern cities that were losing population and have recently seen growth (e.g. Minneapolis and Chicago), I'll tell you that the key to changing the tide is to stem the loss of the working class/poor population -- not necessarily try to build your way out of population loss. Most of the loss comes from the poorest neighborhoods in many cases (as was true in Minneapolis and Chicago, and still is), so do whatever you/we can to keep those residents in the city and invest in those areas through schools, infrastructure, and neighborhood groups.

That's what I'd suggest to do about it, not that it's an easy thing to do though. As for my estimate for 2014 or 2020, I'd guess that we probably are at/near the bottom, but I don't see a major resurgence from that bottom without the aforementioned bolstering of the lower/middle class neighborhoods. I can see slight increases that may punch the population above 400K or so, but nothing steady or exponential just yet.

[jbcmh81]

Here is what I would honestly expect come the next census:

1. Cleveland's metro area sees a gain. How big, I don't know, but it probably won't lose again.
2. Downtown, UC and perhaps a few adjacent areas will register growth, perhaps fairly significant.
3. The overall city population will likely still decline, just because the growth in those areas won't yet be widespread enough to counter all the other areas. However, the loss is very likely to be much smaller than in previous decades.

So I think more positives than negatives, and trending in the right direction. Cincinnati managed to start growing again, but I think Cleveland is a bit further behind on that as far as the entire city goes. Growth is on the horizon, but maybe not on the near horizon.

[ohioaninsc]

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

Here is what I would honestly expect come the next census:

1. Cleveland's metro area sees a gain. How big, I don't know, but it probably won't lose again.
2. Downtown, UC and perhaps a few adjacent areas will register growth, perhaps fairly significant.
3. The overall city population will likely still decline, just because the growth in those areas won't yet be widespread enough to counter all the other areas. However, the loss is very likely to be much smaller than in previous decades.

So I think more positives than negatives, and trending in the right direction. Cincinnati managed to start growing again, but I think Cleveland is a bit further behind on that as far as the entire city goes. Growth is on the horizon, but maybe not on the near horizon.

My bet is that 2020 census will show a metro that has slightly grown...w/ the city only being down a small amount...perhaps 10-15K...of which, most of it occurred the 1st half of this decade. I think by the 2030 census, you will see Cleveland back over 400,000 and a little more growth in the metro area as a whole.

Anything that comes out now or in any other year is a just a guess...only the census numbers are usually accurate.

[Aggiechem]

I just came across this article (The Rustbelt Roars Back From the Dead | Newgeography.com) talking about the resurgence of the 'rust belt', most of it talking about Cleveland. It's longish, but I found it a really good read. One of the facts it mentions is "more educated workers now leave Manhattan and Brooklyn for places like Cuyahoga County and Erie County, where Cleveland and Buffalo are located, than the other way around". Whether growth is really on the horizon or not, it's definitely a narrative that's getting started in the press. Sorry for not linking the article - I'm new and on mobile and not sure how.

[andrew61]

Originally Posted by Aggiechem

One of the facts it mentions is "more educated workers now leave Manhattan and Brooklyn for places like Cuyahoga County and Erie County, where Cleveland and Buffalo are located, than the other way around".

That's probably only because Manhattan and Brooklyn have become completely unaffordable for ordinary working people. The "one percenters" can afford the sky-high housing costs, and the poor have their housing subsidized, but the middle class is being pushed out. They're so fed up with what NYC has become that places like Cleveland are looking pretty good right now.

[ohioaninsc]

Originally Posted by andrew61

That's probably only because Manhattan and Brooklyn have become completely unaffordable for ordinary working people. The "one percenters" can afford the sky-high housing costs, and the poor have their housing subsidized, but the middle class is being pushed out. They're so fed up with what NYC has become that places like Cleveland are looking pretty good right now.

I have never understood who any middle class person could afford NYC, Bos, DC, SF, Sea or LA.

My salary is decent for living in Columbus...but no way could I live on it in any of those cities.

[Urban Peasant]

Originally Posted by ohioaninsc

I have never understood who any middle class person could afford NYC, Bos, DC, SF, Sea or LA.

My salary is decent for living in Columbus...but no way could I live on it in any of those cities.

Some of the middle class who were rooted in those cities long before they became super expensive do somehow make it through but it is always a struggle. It is definitely not a good idea for a middle class newcomer to move to any of those cities without landing a well paying job on top of saving a lot of money first before making the move. I know, sometimes the demographic changes happening on the East and West Coasts makes me sick too. The thing that perplexes me is how Boston, NY, DC, and San Francisco still attracts people and businesses even when it is very clear there is little space left and both cost of living and cost of doing business will be high. There must be some marketing gimmick these cities use that keeps attracting wealth and talent over and over again.

[Cleverfield]

Originally Posted by Urban Peasant

Some of the middle class who were rooted in those cities long before they became super expensive do somehow make it through but it is always a struggle. It is definitely not a good idea for a middle class newcomer to move to any of those cities without landing a well paying job on top of saving a lot of money first before making the move. I know, sometimes the demographic changes happening on the East and West Coasts makes me sick too. The thing that perplexes me is how Boston, NY, DC, and San Francisco still attracts people and businesses even when it is very clear there is little space left and both cost of living and cost of doing business will be high. There must be some marketing gimmick these cities use that keeps attracting wealth and talent over and over again.

Economy is an idea hatched out of the concept of an eco-system. These places have eco-systems that are highly functioning. The talent creates the businesses, which draws more talent, and the competition for these talent resources creates economic diversity. If Cleveland or other cities want that type of dynamic, they need to get an education-work place synergy going, which I think they're trying to do.