Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Michigan
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-23-2017, 09:32 PM
 
Location: Louisville
5,247 posts, read 5,953,452 times
Reputation: 9505

Advertisements

The last couple of years I have posted a breakdown of the states population by region. Last years thread is here:

//www.city-data.com/forum/michi...on-2015-a.html

Today the latest estimates were released so I updated my spreadsheet for it. Last year there were a few errors in the sheet. This year I went through line by line and fixed them so the numbers should be exact. Below is the county map showing how I break up the populations. Below that are the totals after the 2016 estimates.


First row of numbers 2010 census, 2nd row 2015 estimate, 3rd row 2016 estimate.

I can post the more detailed county breakdowns if anyone requests them. The story of this year is a reversal of trends. Or more likely a correction from previous years. While the state was only estimated to have gained 10,585 people in the last estimates. Several rural counties that have traditionally shown small losses every year instead posted gains.

The NE lower penninsula region had its lowest declines since i've been monitoring estimates like this. Several counties that have traditionally lost a few dozen people showed a surprising rise in population.

The NW lower peninsula posted a stronger than normal gain. This region is anchored by the Greater Grand Traverse region, which is typically the growth driver for the entire northern half of the state. That was not the case in the years estimates. The Grand Traverse region posted about half the normal gain numbers. Lead by a drop in Grand Traverse County which had been one of the top 5 state percentage gainers since 2010. This year it was the rural counties postings gains. Of the 15 counties in the region only 4 posted losses, in each case it was the smallest loss they had posted since i've been tracking these numbers.

The exception to this was the Southwest region anchored by Kalamazoo. While overall numbers are up for the region, it is ONLY because of the growth in Kalamazoo County. Two other counties showed positive increases for the year, but only Kalamazoo County has had gains since 2010, and they have been strong enough to offset the losses in the other counties. This was the only region where the population declines accelerated in the rural counties. The biggest decline is in Berrien County which technically is a seperate metropolitan area.

The West Central region more or less continued it's same trend of growth. It has lead the state in growth percentages since the 1960's so that's not a surprise. Numbers came in showing slightly slower growth than in the past few years. This is mostly due to a drop in Ottawa Counties growth. This I find surprising because over the last 50 years Ottawa County has been the fastest growing county in the state on an exponential basis. The last few years by more than a percentage point per year. This years estimates are over 1000 lower than what I would have expected for Ottawa County. There are not economic indicators that would suggest a slowdown as job growth and GDP are still increasing at the same rate. The flip side of that is Muskegon County posting a gain of more than 700 people which is more than triple the gains it normally see's.

Another positive note was the Lansing area, which I have in the Capitol Region. Lansing showed stronger than expected growth in all 3 of its metro counties. I wouldn't be surprised if the effort to shift Lansing from a manufacturing base to a knowledge and services base is paying off. If the next few years show continued momentum, Lansing should be on solid footing to emerge as a Midwestern bright spot.

That brings me to the I-75 Corridor. The Northern I-75 corridor alone(Flint/Saginaw/The thumb) has lost over 36,000 people since 2010. It is by far the biggest factor in the state as a whole not posting healthier population numbers. True to the trends in the other regions the losses here have softened. Genesee Counties(Flint) losses are less than half of what they have been in previous years. This during the peak of the water crisis in Flint. This is also the case in Saginaw County where the losses have also slowed quite a bit. It could just be a matter of a correction from previous years. These two counties really are the key to the fortunes in that area. If the slowing stays consistent, it could be a sign of bettering conditions. However the numbers for these counties are inconsistent and vary year from year.

The Southern I-75 corridor has a bit more of a rosey picture than the northern. Despite the fact that the Detroit MSA only showed a population gain of 79 people, the overall region had several counties that had a softening of declines, or a strengthening of gains. It was only Wayne County that showed an acceleration of losses. I find that surprising with all of the positive news and investment happening in Detroit. There are several factors that can contribute to this. The estimate as in every case can be off. They are largely based on income tax returns. Areas with higher proportions of residents who file late or don't file can skew the numbers. There is also a chance that all of the good news coming out of Detroit hasn't yet pushed it over that threshold yet. Another point to note is that Washtenaw Counties growth estimate more than doubled from the previous year. I have a theory the spill over from Wayne County has started heading in to Ann Arbors MSA more than it historically has. If that is the case there could be enough commuting patterns from Washtenaw into Wayne County to push it fully into the Detroit MSA. Adding this county into the Detroit MSA takes it from +1300 residents from 2010-2016, to +21000 residents. The economic pull of the University of Michigan has been enough to keep Washtenaw County statistically separate from Wayne County. As development patterns shift, I do not expect this to continue. Right now Detroit is the only major metropolitan area where an immediately adjacent county is not part of the core metro. Washtenaw County is only separate on paper. In practice Ann Arbor is closer to Detroit than several points within the current metro alignment.


As I was collecting the numbers from todays estimates I came accross this map showing domestic migration among counties. What surprised me was the number of counties in Michigan that were showing a positive net domestic migration.

https://www.census.gov/library/visua...migration.html

This does not happen. Rural Midwestern counties, especially in a Rust-belt poster child like Michigan do NOT post positive gains in this metric. They are the poster children for aging populations and fleeing millennials. This map indicates to me that counties in the state showing are tepid gains here. This means one of two things.

1. The census bureau can't figure Michigan out and keeps having to make corrections.
2. There's something quietly positive happening in the state that could be reversing decades of trends.

I don't want to be overly optimistic so the statistician in me is focusing on option 1. Which is still a positive sign. The state of Michigan has given the census bureau fits as in decades of good economies it grows faster than anticipated.

Last edited by mjlo; 03-23-2017 at 09:59 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-25-2017, 05:02 PM
 
447 posts, read 491,460 times
Reputation: 478
Thank you mjlo.
Nice lay out that is packed with information while being easy to read!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2017, 07:30 AM
 
Location: Grand Rapids Metro
8,882 posts, read 19,762,447 times
Reputation: 3920
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjlo View Post
The last couple of years I have posted a breakdown of the states population by region. Last years thread is here:

//www.city-data.com/forum/michi...on-2015-a.html

Today the latest estimates were released so I updated my spreadsheet for it. Last year there were a few errors in the sheet. This year I went through line by line and fixed them so the numbers should be exact. Below is the county map showing how I break up the populations. Below that are the totals after the 2016 estimates.


First row of numbers 2010 census, 2nd row 2015 estimate, 3rd row 2016 estimate.

I can post the more detailed county breakdowns if anyone requests them. The story of this year is a reversal of trends. Or more likely a correction from previous years. While the state was only estimated to have gained 10,585 people in the last estimates. Several rural counties that have traditionally shown small losses every year instead posted gains.

The NE lower penninsula region had its lowest declines since i've been monitoring estimates like this. Several counties that have traditionally lost a few dozen people showed a surprising rise in population.

The NW lower peninsula posted a stronger than normal gain. This region is anchored by the Greater Grand Traverse region, which is typically the growth driver for the entire northern half of the state. That was not the case in the years estimates. The Grand Traverse region posted about half the normal gain numbers. Lead by a drop in Grand Traverse County which had been one of the top 5 state percentage gainers since 2010. This year it was the rural counties postings gains. Of the 15 counties in the region only 4 posted losses, in each case it was the smallest loss they had posted since i've been tracking these numbers.

The exception to this was the Southwest region anchored by Kalamazoo. While overall numbers are up for the region, it is ONLY because of the growth in Kalamazoo County. Two other counties showed positive increases for the year, but only Kalamazoo County has had gains since 2010, and they have been strong enough to offset the losses in the other counties. This was the only region where the population declines accelerated in the rural counties. The biggest decline is in Berrien County which technically is a seperate metropolitan area.

The West Central region more or less continued it's same trend of growth. It has lead the state in growth percentages since the 1960's so that's not a surprise. Numbers came in showing slightly slower growth than in the past few years. This is mostly due to a drop in Ottawa Counties growth. This I find surprising because over the last 50 years Ottawa County has been the fastest growing county in the state on an exponential basis. The last few years by more than a percentage point per year. This years estimates are over 1000 lower than what I would have expected for Ottawa County. There are not economic indicators that would suggest a slowdown as job growth and GDP are still increasing at the same rate. The flip side of that is Muskegon County posting a gain of more than 700 people which is more than triple the gains it normally see's.

Another positive note was the Lansing area, which I have in the Capitol Region. Lansing showed stronger than expected growth in all 3 of its metro counties. I wouldn't be surprised if the effort to shift Lansing from a manufacturing base to a knowledge and services base is paying off. If the next few years show continued momentum, Lansing should be on solid footing to emerge as a Midwestern bright spot.

That brings me to the I-75 Corridor. The Northern I-75 corridor alone(Flint/Saginaw/The thumb) has lost over 36,000 people since 2010. It is by far the biggest factor in the state as a whole not posting healthier population numbers. True to the trends in the other regions the losses here have softened. Genesee Counties(Flint) losses are less than half of what they have been in previous years. This during the peak of the water crisis in Flint. This is also the case in Saginaw County where the losses have also slowed quite a bit. It could just be a matter of a correction from previous years. These two counties really are the key to the fortunes in that area. If the slowing stays consistent, it could be a sign of bettering conditions. However the numbers for these counties are inconsistent and vary year from year.

The Southern I-75 corridor has a bit more of a rosey picture than the northern. Despite the fact that the Detroit MSA only showed a population gain of 79 people, the overall region had several counties that had a softening of declines, or a strengthening of gains. It was only Wayne County that showed an acceleration of losses. I find that surprising with all of the positive news and investment happening in Detroit. There are several factors that can contribute to this. The estimate as in every case can be off. They are largely based on income tax returns. Areas with higher proportions of residents who file late or don't file can skew the numbers. There is also a chance that all of the good news coming out of Detroit hasn't yet pushed it over that threshold yet. Another point to note is that Washtenaw Counties growth estimate more than doubled from the previous year. I have a theory the spill over from Wayne County has started heading in to Ann Arbors MSA more than it historically has. If that is the case there could be enough commuting patterns from Washtenaw into Wayne County to push it fully into the Detroit MSA. Adding this county into the Detroit MSA takes it from +1300 residents from 2010-2016, to +21000 residents. The economic pull of the University of Michigan has been enough to keep Washtenaw County statistically separate from Wayne County. As development patterns shift, I do not expect this to continue. Right now Detroit is the only major metropolitan area where an immediately adjacent county is not part of the core metro. Washtenaw County is only separate on paper. In practice Ann Arbor is closer to Detroit than several points within the current metro alignment.


As I was collecting the numbers from todays estimates I came accross this map showing domestic migration among counties. What surprised me was the number of counties in Michigan that were showing a positive net domestic migration.

https://www.census.gov/library/visua...migration.html

This does not happen. Rural Midwestern counties, especially in a Rust-belt poster child like Michigan do NOT post positive gains in this metric. They are the poster children for aging populations and fleeing millennials. This map indicates to me that counties in the state showing are tepid gains here. This means one of two things.

1. The census bureau can't figure Michigan out and keeps having to make corrections.
2. There's something quietly positive happening in the state that could be reversing decades of trends.

I don't want to be overly optimistic so the statistician in me is focusing on option 1. Which is still a positive sign. The state of Michigan has given the census bureau fits as in decades of good economies it grows faster than anticipated.
You have to take into a account though that for every new urban loft, which usually has one maybe two people in it, a family of four moves out of one of the neighborhoods in the city of Detroit. Maybe even two families. You can resurrect downtowns all you want but if you let your neighborhoods go, it's hard to right that ship. Look at the mess Chicago is in right now and their downtown is obviously booming. If the city of Chicago and Cook County can lose population, Detroit has a long way to go.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-27-2017, 10:50 AM
 
Location: Metro Detroit
1,786 posts, read 2,641,009 times
Reputation: 3603
The problem is how do you fund your services to the neighborhoods in Outer Detroit if the property values and ability for homeowners to pay taxes are poor? You have to tax high earners in high rent neighborhoods. This is why you have a push to establish an economic anchor in Downtown Detroit. Without it the city would fall apart as we saw for much of the last 20 years. With it, it simply maintains its rough shape. It's unfortunate as I'm sure city leaders would love to spend money on revitalizing Brightmoor, but the economics of the situation require spending money to attract to Downtown, so they can maintain Bagley and it won't become the next Blightmoor.

You're right. It's hard to right that ship. If you ask me, the pensions will continue to weigh down the City of Detroit until its legacy retirees begin dying off (sorry, that's super cold sounding and I understand people aren't numbers, but I don't know how to better describe this). If you look at economically distressed units of government, nationwide, on any level, you find a commonality among all of them is under-fudned pensions. These pensions redirect funds from road maintenance, active teacher pay, recreation center development.. to fund the retirements of former employees who weren't expected to contribute to a 401k.

Now you could of course argue that taxing corporations appropriately and requiring land developers to develop on their own without tax subsidies would solve the issue by allowing adequate pension funding, and you'd be correct, but the problem is that if this is done here what's to stop these corporations from moving somewhere that won't? If you tax too much, someone else will lure business away. This puts governments in a Catch 22. There's no perfect solution, but in my opinion what the City of Detroit is doing currently is the best they can with the situation that is available to them.

The hope is of course that over time as established professionals in City Center begin having families and upgrading to homes, some of them stay in the city. Of course most will move to suburbs, but if even a few stable families with upper middle class incomes stay in the city, over the course of 10-20 years you're looking at a much different city. One with upscale outer-neighborhoods mixed in with the bad ones. it's not ideal, but it's the consequences of generations of flight to the suburbs, and it's a lot more stable than what was there 5 years ago when professionals avoided the city, and few even worked there.

I guess what I'm saying is that you're right, but Detroit appears to be trying to fix "tomorrow", which given the bleak state of "today" is probably the right move, and some of the fixing of tomorrow is allowing for funds to help stabilize parts of the city as well. As with any geographically widespread city, there will remain poor areas. The goal should be to be able to subsidize these poor areas with nice, high-income areas, something Detroit is just barely starting to put back on the map. As these areas continue to attract, it will eventually stabilize the ongoing bleed of population from Wayne County to Oakland/Macomb/Washtenaw. I don't believe Wayne County is in quite the same peril as Cook County, due to greater metro and state stability, even if the county population numbers would certainly make a valid counter-point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-27-2017, 10:58 AM
 
Location: Louisville
5,247 posts, read 5,953,452 times
Reputation: 9505
I think the answer to turning around any city starts from the core out. Re-investment in the forgotten neighborhoods doesn't happen until the city as a whole starts looking more attractive. From what I can tell this is happening in Detroit. Or are all of the stories about all of these houses being renovated down to studs just smoke and mirrors?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-27-2017, 11:00 AM
 
Location: Metro Detroit
1,786 posts, read 2,641,009 times
Reputation: 3603
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjlo View Post
I think the answer to turning around any city starts from the core out. Re-investment in the forgotten neighborhoods doesn't happen until the city as a whole starts looking more attractive. From what I can tell this is happening in Detroit. Or are all of the stories about all of these houses being renovated down to studs just smoke and mirrors?
Someday i'll get good at writing summaries to my long-winded ideas
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-27-2017, 04:28 PM
 
Location: Grand Rapids Metro
8,882 posts, read 19,762,447 times
Reputation: 3920
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjlo View Post
I think the answer to turning around any city starts from the core out. Re-investment in the forgotten neighborhoods doesn't happen until the city as a whole starts looking more attractive. From what I can tell this is happening in Detroit. Or are all of the stories about all of these houses being renovated down to studs just smoke and mirrors?
Well the city apparently went from 910,000 (?) in 2009 to 688,000 today (?). If the average family household is 4 let's say, then that means 55,500 households have left Detroit since 2009. 55,500 more vacant homes then in 2009... It seems unreal.

Even if you had 5000 houses a year being built or remodeled in Detroit, which would be a MASSIVE number (probably the largest housing development in the U.S. if it were really happening all at once), that'd still only be reclaiming 1/10th of the loss. And that's just the loss since 2009.

I do agree that you have to reinvigorate the core in order for people to want to move back into the surrounding neighborhoods.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-27-2017, 04:49 PM
 
1,996 posts, read 3,128,406 times
Reputation: 2302
That 910,000 was a U.S. Census estimate that was an absolutely egregious miscalculation. In the next year, the Official U.S. Census showed Detroit had 713,000. So there is no way that the population of Detroit dropped by 197,000 in one year.

I also believe that number of 688,000 is overly optimistic. As a city resident, I perceive that the city is a lot emptier since 2010. I would put Detroit's population between 550,000 and 600,000 in the next official census.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-27-2017, 06:04 PM
 
Location: Grand Rapids Metro
8,882 posts, read 19,762,447 times
Reputation: 3920
Quote:
Originally Posted by usroute10 View Post
That 910,000 was a U.S. Census estimate that was an absolutely egregious miscalculation. In the next year, the Official U.S. Census showed Detroit had 713,000. So there is no way that the population of Detroit dropped by 197,000 in one year.

I also believe that number of 688,000 is overly optimistic. As a city resident, I perceive that the city is a lot emptier since 2010. I would put Detroit's population between 550,000 and 600,000 in the next official census.
So either way, it has lost about 40,000 - 50,000 households since 2009 or 2010.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-27-2017, 07:59 PM
 
45 posts, read 50,757 times
Reputation: 40
I really hope Detroit finds a way to stop the population hemorrhage. But its not just Detroit. The Midwest and Rust Belt is going through the same problems. Chicago is the next to fall.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Michigan

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top