The US Census Bureau thread

[urbanactivist]

With the technological advancements that we've had in the last ten years, a Census count could be far more accurate than doing door-to-door block walks. Computer logs, cell phone signals, even GPS photography could be utilized to do a Census count. We could have done a real and complete "snapshot" of the US on April 2010. Question is, do we want to invest the money that it would take to get there? I suspect that by 2020 we will, b/c the Fed does not want to deal with all of these challenges again.

[Gordo]

Originally Posted by plinko

The issue that I have with challenging the census is that if Miami or New York or Houston or urban center was undercounted, likely they ALL were.

So how do you fix it if every urban area is undercounted (even the ones that grew)? You can't.

The reality is that if the undercount is a national issue (which it is), then the federal funding is still being distributed roughly as it would if all these cities suddenly were at the estimate levels.

But then again I'm not a lawyer or politician crowing about how my city didn't grow as much as I thought it had.

I think the concern is that the census has systematically undercounted the totals for urban areas compared to suburban and rural areas, so a larger percentage of funding is being kept from urban areas and central cities (be it Houston, Miami, NYC, etc) and shifted toward suburban and rural areas than should be the case. It's not so much that Miami is potentially losing money to Houston, but that Miami is potentially losing money to the suburbs of Miami and the rural counties of Florida (as an example).

[SpawnOfVulcan]

Originally Posted by plinko

The issue that I have with challenging the census is that if Miami or New York or Houston or urban center was undercounted, likely they ALL were.

So how do you fix it if every urban area is undercounted (even the ones that grew)? You can't.

The reality is that if the undercount is a national issue (which it is), then the federal funding is still being distributed roughly as it would if all these cities suddenly were at the estimate levels.

But then again I'm not a lawyer or politician crowing about how my city didn't grow as much as I thought it had.

True. Makes me wonder how undercounted Birmingham could have been. But, alas there isn't much we can do. We can't just go and fill out a bunch of census forms.

[M II A II R II K]

American Ghost Towns Of The 21st Century


http://247wallst.com/2011/03/27/amer...-21st-century/

There are several counties in America, each with more than 10,000 homes, which have vacancy rates above 55%. The rate is above 60% in several. Most people who follow unemployment and the housing crisis would expect high vacancy rates in hard-hit states including Nevada, Florida and Arizona. They were among the fastest growing areas from 2000 to 2010. Disaster struck once economic growth ended.

Palm Coast, Florida, Las Vegas, Nevada and Cape Coral, Florida were all among the former high fliers. Many large counties which have 20% or higher occupancy rates are in these same regions. Lee County, Florida, Yuma County, Arizona, Mohave County, Arizona, and Osceola, Florida each had a precipitous drop in home prices and increases in vacancy rates as homebuyers disappeared when the economy went south.

Data from states and large metropolitan areas do not tell the story of how much the real estate disaster has turned certain areas in the country into ghost towns. Some of the affected regions are tourist destinations, but much of that traffic has disappeared as the recession has caused people to sell or desert vacation homes and delay trips for leisure. This makes these areas particularly desolate when tourists are not around.

The future of these areas is grim. Our research showed that many have sharply declining tax bases which have caused budget cuts. Forecasts are calling for the fiscal noose to tighten on them even tighter. These are the American Ghost Towns Of The 21st Century. Each has a population of more than 10,000 along with vacancy rates of more than 55%, according to the 2010 US Census.

......

1. Lake County, Michigan

2. Vilas County, Wisconsin

3. Summit County, Colorado

4. Worcester County, Maryland

5. Mono County, California

6. Dare County North Carolina

7. Dukes County, Massachusetts

8. Sawyer County, Wisconsin

9. Burnett County, Wisconsin

10. Aitkin County, Minnesota

[MNMike]

It seems to me that a lot of these places are where people have summer homes...the one in MN is. I would assume they are counting the summer homes as vacant? They are for a lot of the year, yes, but many of them are very nice, well kept, and are in no way a drag on the local economy. The property value declines aren't that out of line with what most of the country has faced, really. I think its the rural farm areas that we really need to worry about. Tourism will come back.

A lake home in Aitkin county:


Aitkin city and county,MN actually both grew by 6 and 7% respectively this census, and the county is a very popular location for people from the city to have 2nd homes, as is Burnett county Wisconsin. Both are less than 2 hours from MSP. I am not really familiar with the other counties listed, but it looks to me that they may be the same way? Some are declining, and dealing with lots of foreclosures on lake homes, sure...but the vacancy rates are pretty misleading, as not many of the lake homes are primary residences. The article covers that factor some I guess...still seems a little off though. There are plenty of places in MN and all of those states that are much more likely to become "ghost towns" than the tourist/vacation areas listed. Swift county MN(western part of the state) saw and 18% decrease this census and has a very grim outlook...that county is dying. I feel like they shouldn't have counted on the vacancy rates that are so skewed by vacation homes so much, and they would have come up with better examples of dying communities.

[M II A II R II K]

Maps Of U.S. Population Change, 2000-2010


Maps: http://www.datapointed.net/2011/04/m...0-2010-census/

Color-coded by the change in population density from 2000 to 2010. In urban areas, deep blue indicates that the population doubled (or more), pure red means that everyone left, grey denotes no change, and the intermediate tones represent the spectrum of increases and decreases in-between.

Below 5000 residents per square mile, these colors fade with the square root of density towards white, where no people lived in either year. We created these maps from the official U.S. Census 2000 and 2010 block-level population data and boundaries using custom-built cartographic software.

.....

Nationwide, one feature stands out: the bumper crop of fresh suburbs that ring almost every metropolitan area. Where did all of these people come from? A zoom into the Midwest suggests the answer. The new tract developments appear to be sucking the life out the older neighborhoods, which bear the scarlet tints of waning population:

[LMich]

This Census was particularly bad, from the announcement of them using the short-form survey, to the malfunctioning of the high(er)-tech devices they were going to use to record data. In general, they just tried to do this on the cheap, in fact, bragging about how far they were able to come in under budget after the completion of it. I'm all for efficient use of public funds, but it seems that the primary focus wasn't so much as accurate an account as they could get, rather, how much under budget they could get.

Locally and anecdotally, unlike in 2000, the current mayor of Detroit didn't put any serious city-lead efforts to help in designated "hard-to-count" areas. And, if I remember correctly, the participation rate kind of revealed that. I think it was even lower this time than it was in 2000.

I've generally been ambivalent to challenges, but the more I see, personally, of the bureau not even really trying, in some cases, the more skeptical I get. I don't think many are expecting huge undercounts; they just want believable canvassing for one, which leads to a more accurate counts. On the personal responsibility front as far as counting is concerned, I personally had to beg two relatives to send back their form. One of them didn't (he was between housing and didn't see the point in the count), and one of them did (she didn't want to, originally, because she'd had a bad experience with a Census worker back in 2000).

[Rail Claimore]

Wow, Atlanta really does have the third or fourth largest urban footprint in the country. It's noticeably larger than DFW and Houston.

[seaskyfan]

Originally Posted by MNMike

It seems to me that a lot of these places are where people have summer homes...the one in MN is. I would assume they are counting the summer homes as vacant? They are for a lot of the year, yes, but many of them are very nice, well kept, and are in no way a drag on the local economy. The property value declines aren't that out of line with what most of the country has faced, really. I think its the rural farm areas that we really need to worry about. Tourism will come back.

A lake home in Aitkin county:


Aitkin city and county,MN actually both grew by 6 and 7% respectively this census, and the county is a very popular location for people from the city to have 2nd homes, as is Burnett county Wisconsin. Both are less than 2 hours from MSP. I am not really familiar with the other counties listed, but it looks to me that they may be the same way? Some are declining, and dealing with lots of foreclosures on lake homes, sure...but the vacancy rates are pretty misleading, as not many of the lake homes are primary residences. The article covers that factor some I guess...still seems a little off though. There are plenty of places in MN and all of those states that are much more likely to become "ghost towns" than the tourist/vacation areas listed. Swift county MN(western part of the state) saw and 18% decrease this census and has a very grim outlook...that county is dying. I feel like they shouldn't have counted on the vacancy rates that are so skewed by vacation homes so much, and they would have come up with better examples of dying communities.

That was my sense as well - Dukes County, MA is Martha's Vineyard.

[Shawn]

^--- Exactly, Martha's Vineyard has a year-round population of a little over 15,000. But from May through September, the island's population swells to around 110,000, with an additional 25,000 or so coming and going daily by ferry. All those people need to sleep somewhere....

[brickell]

Just for comparison sakes

Ten most populous counties
Los Angeles County, California 9,818,605
Cook County, Illinois 5,194,675
Harris County, Texas 4,092,459
Maricopa County, Arizona 3,817,117
San Diego County, California 3,095,313
Orange County, California 3,010,232
Kings County, New York 2,504,700
Miami-Dade County, Florida 2,496,435
Dallas County, Texas 2,368,139
Queens County, New York 2,230,722

Ten most built counties (total # of units) - red lower in rank than above, blue higher
Los Angeles County, California 3,445,076
Cook County, Illinois 2,180,359
Maricopa County, Arizona 1,639,279
Harris County, Texas 1,598,698
San Diego County, California 1,164,786
Orange County, California 1,048,907
Kings County, New York 1,000,293
Miami-Dade County, Florida 989,435
Dallas County, Texas 943,257
King County, Washington 851,261

The 11 counties with more than 100k vacant units

Maricopa County, Arizona 227,696
Cook County, Illinois 214,003
Los Angeles County, California 203,872
Harris County, Texas 163,543
Clark County, Nevada 124,978
Broward County, Florida 124,341
Miami-Dade County, Florida 122,083
Palm Beach County, Florida 120,367
Wayne County, Michigan 118,944
Riverside County, California 114,447
Lee County, Florida 111,281

Ten highest vacancy rates (out of the 100 most built counties)

Lee County, Florida 29.99%
Ocean County, New Jersey 20.48%
Polk County, Florida 19.11%
Palm Beach County, Florida 18.11%
Pinellas County, Florida 17.42%
Baltimore city, Maryland 15.77%
Broward County, Florida 15.34%
Brevard County, Florida 14.89%
Clark County, Nevada 14.87%
Wayne County, Michigan 14.48%

Ten lowest vacancy rates (out of the 100 most built counties)
Fairfax County, Virginia 4.01%
Nassau County, New York 4.23%
Santa Clara County, California 4.39%
Norfolk County, Massachusetts 4.60%
Middlesex County, New Jersey 4.62%
Bergen County, New Jersey 4.73%
San Mateo County, California 4.87%
Montgomery County, Maryland 5.01%
El Paso County, Texas 5.09%
Middlesex County, Massachusetts 5.12%

[tdawg]

Re: vacancy rates. Do they count seasonal dwellings (like a lot in Lee County, FL—Ft. Myers, probably are) as vacant?

[dktshb]

Wow, I can't believe Cook County (Chicago area) at 5.2 million people has a higher vacancy rate than the Los Angeles County at 9.8 million.

[ChiMIchael]

Those Vacancy rates don't tell the whole story.

1. There the type of vacancy that occur because the place was just overbuilt (FL, AZ, CA, NV) . If the area just pause on the building, the vacancy rate will eventually shrink.

2. There is the type of vacancy that result was exodus (MI,IL, OH). Those areas cannot count on their rate shrinking anytime soon.

[sofresh808]

Originally Posted by tdawg

Re: vacancy rates. Do they count seasonal dwellings (like a lot in Lee County, FL—Ft. Myers, probably are) as vacant?

If no one was present April 1st, 2010, and considered it their primary residence, it would be. Otherwise people would be doubly counted.

[Trae]

Originally Posted by sofresh808

If no one was present April 1st, 2010, and considered it their primary residence, it would be. Otherwise people would be doubly counted.

I was counted twice. Once at my college dorm and once at home in Houston.

[hudkina]

Originally Posted by ChiMIchael

2. There is the type of vacancy that result was exodus (MI,IL, OH). Those areas cannot count on their rate shrinking anytime soon.

Even while the central cities lose population, the metropolitan areas in those three states have expanded outward with the construction of thousands of new housing units in farflung suburbs.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by Trae

I was counted twice. Once at my college dorm and once at home in Houston.

That is illegal.

[Trae]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

That is illegal.

Oh well. My parents counted me at home (still have my room there), and my college dorms made us all fill out an application.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by Trae

Oh well. My parents counted me at home (still have my room there), and my college dorms made us all fill out an application.

As someone who worked for the census, I cannot tell you what a relief it is to hear that your university made you fill out the application. Most did not.

You should have told you parents not to include you on their form.