That's the official number, according to Channel 7.
Printable View
That's the official number, according to Channel 7.
Nasty, so now we're the 17th largest city in the country and the 4th largest city in the midwest.
Pitiful. Absolutely pitiful. Down from just under 2m in fifty years.
That's astounding.
I was pretty close, only off by 9000 or so. On the other thread, that is.
I await the other numbers for the metro, as they'll have much more important information. We knew this number was going to be psychologically important. Let's get down to the real nitty-gritty and soon.
Why wait? Oakland county 2000 census 1,194,156 in 2010 1,202,362. Macomb County 2000 census 788,149 in 2010 840,978. Wayne County 2000 census 2,061,161 in 2010, 1,820,584
County numbers:
http://www.freep.com/article/2011032...s-numbers-2010
So, it appears that roughly 80% of Wayne County's loss between 2000-2010 was Detroit population loss. Not sure how that will be taken, but it may be good for inner-ring burbs and the prospects of redeveloping the core.
I believe the official Metro Detroit includes St. Clair, Lapeer and Livingston Counties. Totalled up, 4,296,250 by 2010 census figures.
The kicker here is the increase in Macomb and Oakland Coutny is directly correlated with the decline in Wayne County [[Detroit). The region didn't actually grow, in fact the tri-country decreased by 140k. So yeah, and the beat goes on...
So, despite modest gains for Oakland and Macomb counties, the region as a whole has shrunk. Yes?
This is preposterous. I hope they challenge that figure. I feel that is extremely low.
And if this is all true about the Metro's numbers, that means we're going to fall from the 11th largest metro area in the country to the 14th largest [[behind Phoenix and San Francisco).
So even despite the sharp decline, in hindsight this is a good thing for Detroit for the fact that the suburbs can't claim they're doing just fine without the city when they're declining as a whole also.
Way lower than I expected
I don't know, there are a lot of areas that were much fuller in 2000 than they are today. And look at how many former Detroiters now reside in Harper Woods, Eastpointe, Warren, Hazel Park, Madison heights, Ferndale, Oak Park, Southfield, Farmington Hills, West Bloomfield, Canton, etc. There has been a massive outflow that's been confirmed by property managers I've spoken to.
Well, if it's any consolation, this has pretty much been my position all along. I just happen to think that Detroit is more essential to righting the regional trajectory than any individual suburb [[or suburban county). That's why my positions tend to be Detroit-centric...
The inner and middle ring suburban numbers will be interesting. In 2000 all suburbs touching Detroit and the entire Woodward corridor of towns running to Pontiac lost population with the exception of Southfield [a small gain due to middle-class Afro-Am emigration] and Dearborn which grew 10% due to Arab-Am immigration. The inurb of Hamtramck also grew.
The middle rings were flat in 2000 and IMO there numbers will be most telling for our whole community.
Even more important for all will be the economic data. We already know about Sterling Heights having the steepest decline in per capita income, over $20K per year. These trends need to be examined. Decline in population combined with increase in income [This happened in downtown] is different from decline in both or increase in population and decline in income.
Here's the bottom line:
"The losses that we have are completely – or primarily – linked to the decline in the auto industry and in manufacturing in general,” said Professor Lyke Thompson, director of The Center for Urban Studies at Wayne State."
What did anyone expect?
WHAT YOU DRIVE, DRIVES AMERICA.
OUT OF A JOB YET? KEEP BUYING FOREIGN.
Ohh Brooksie, you dumb motherflukker.Quote:
“This speaks volumes and is very disappointing,” said Oakland County Executive L. Brooks Patterson, who was born and grew up in Detroit. “We’re seeing what happens when there’s a total collapse of city services. Detroit is in desperate straits.”
Oakland County gained a little less than 15,000 in population and stands at 1,202,362, according to the Census figures.
“We probably would have had a higher population number, but we have an unemployment rate of 15%. We took a huge drubbing with the automotiveindustry collapse,” Patterson said. “A lot of those guys and gals left the state, so the fact that we only gained 15,000 … I think we did alright, given what we’re up against.”
What do you expect him to say? "We're next!"?
Mine too, essentially. I am Region-centric, but with the belief that Detroit is the center and heartbeat of this region.
With the shake up and mix in demographics spread over all three core counties, and it has started already, we may see healthier regionalism and a greater focus on Detroit as the core over the next decade. The ongoing purge of corruption can not be underestimated as a good start.
Jobs are a part of the regional decline. But it's about much more than merely jobs. It's also about a dysfunctional region that has 140-odd governments all fighting for a shrinking piece of the pie by trying to emulate a development model that is going extinct.
Amen to that^. Divide and conquer has worked and we are all conquered. Mr. Patterson has egg all over him with a paltry gain of 15K. This is, in reality, a huge loss considering the average national population gain. His county has stood still while the nation passes him by. Can you image the uproar if that had been -15K?
It is time for the chipmunks frolicking up in the flowers and lush leaves at the top of the tree to recognize that their future is directly tied to the health of the big old hollow trunk at their base.
Maybe I'm expecting too much by wanting him to acknowledge the big picture. Maybe I'm the only one who thinks that the measly 15,000 people Oakland County gained resulted from people simply stepping over an imaginary line called Eight Mile Rd. Maybe I'm wrong for thinking that there's something disingenuous about suggesting that Oakland County's population would have been higher if only the auto industry was doing better. Maybe I'm in thinking that Oakland County is actually losing population, which is merely being replaced by defecting Detroiters.
But for Detroit's loss, Oakland and Macomb County both have negative numbers in this census. Suggesting that they're doing okay or showing true gains is ludicrous. The bottom line is that Oakland and Macomb Counties are second only to Detroit in terms of biggest population losers.
I don't believe that number at all, there is no way that there is only 713,000 people living in the city of Detroit. The estimate two years ago was about 910,000 and I have to believe that it's closer to that number, there is no way that Detroit lost 200,000 people in the last two years. I believe that the census is off as much as 20% for any population figure. I think the population of Detroit is closer to 850,000 people, 713,000 seems very low.
On the other hand this has to add huge momentum to Bing's Detroit Works shrink-the-city planning.
Also Synder's inter-community share-or-lose revenue sharing funds has to benefit.
Not making an evaluation of either, just pointing out some winners and losers.
This number may be off, but they didn't count the people 2 years ago, and the ACS isn't for purposes of counting, but for purposes of getting community demographics. It is more likely that the 2009 number was messed up. However, you are right that it is very unlikely that Detroit lost 200,000 people in two years; they just probably weren't there in the first place.
You are right, but that isn't what I find silly about his statement. If Oakland County is only up 15K for the past 10 years, it is certainly down for the past 5. And of course it is about the auto industry, but unless he has magic auto job pixie dust that he has been waiting to scatter around I don't see why that should be much consolation. Oakland has joined the shrinkage express, and LBP is going to have to think about how he and his county are going to deal with it.Quote:
Maybe I'm wrong for thinking that there's something disingenuous about suggesting that Oakland County's population would have been higher if only the auto industry was doing better. Maybe I'm in thinking that Oakland County is actually losing population, which is merely being replaced by defecting Detroiters.
Start having more babies if you want a higher population. What is the birth rate of Detroit?
Someone should point out to Brooks that the SE corner of Oakland County is continuing to see population losses. You would have hoped to see places like Ferndale or Royal Oak stabilize or add some people. Didn't happen with a couple of exceptions in Huntington Woods and Birmingham. Some of the outlying townships also saw population losses too. Not all small cities did poorly. Sylvan Lake, Walled Lake and Orchard Lake all gained population.
Didn't we recently have a thread saying Chicago's numbers were the lowest they've seen since the 1920s?
Yes, we certainly did: http://www.detroityes.com/mb/showthr...-to-1920-Level
hmm...
Are NYC's numbers out yet?
It's already known that the State of New York is losing two Congressional seats.
Yeah, but that's not because NYS is losing population. It's because states in the West have grown faster. Michigan was the only state to have lost population this decade.
ETA: And those seats are coming from upstate which has been shrinking in population for decades.
What you drive paved over Detroit with parking lots.Quote:
WHAT YOU DRIVE, DRIVES AMERICA.
OUT OF A JOB YET? KEEP BUYING FOREIGN.
The motor city is dead. Long live Detroit.
OK... this is strange... Oakland County gained only 15,000 people.
But the county that a lot of folks on this forum love to hate... Macomb County... gained 52,000??
In fact Macomb County was the state's FASTEST GROWING COUNTY. Even Grand Rapid's Kent County paled by comparison... with a gain of 28,000 [[574,000 to 602,000)... the Macomb growth was nearly double that of Kent County [[which was even below its' 2009 estimate of 608,000).
So yes... to paraphrase a famous commercial... Macomb County is "no one's Emerald City"... but it has a few things going for it that are missing elsewhere.... 1) home affordability [[better than Oakland), 2) safety [[better than Detroit).
Just something to think about when folks spout off that no one would want to live in that flat, treeless, uneducated blue collar, strip mall infested no-mans land....
I'm in the city almost every day, I don't see any densly populated areas. Show me an area where people are packed in. Almost every street has vacant houses, there's hardly any apartment buildings left. 713,000 sounds just about right to me.
My late mother's street in the 48224 area code [[one of the most densly populated in the city) has 19 empty houses on it....
Not many McMansions have been built in the sprawl zone over the last 10 years. There are many subdivisions started during this time period that are much less than half-built and full of abandoned spec homes.
Charles Pugh says a re-count is warrantted because 'there are thousands of Detroiter incarcerated in other municipalities that should be counted as Detroiters"!!!
My biggest problem with Macomb is the corrupt power structure and rigged court system. Macomb is also the home of the Detroit mob, which may have something to do with the taint. If you can live with that, fine... but I can't, due to some personal experiences with the corruption there.
But really, outside of St. Clair Shores, downtown Utica, and maybe Fraser, which parts of Macomb are walkable... which parts have charm and character? Eastpointe had a chance to step up many years ago and be the Macomb version of Ferndale, but blew it. The jury's still out on Mt. Clemens; the downtown there has experienced some rebirth, but it still doesn't have many good neighborhoods.
Macomb's population gain doesn't testify to its quality of life; rather, it speaks of affordability, relative safety, exurban development, and convenience [[to shopping areas and jobs). With the exception of maybe St. Clair Shores, there's not much of a "creative class" there.
For Detroit's CSA
Livingston County = 180,967 [[decline from 183,118)
Monroe County = 152, 021 [[decline from 152, 949)
Washtenaw County = 344,791 [[decline from 347,563)
Genessee County = 425,790 [[increase from 424, 043)
Lapeer County = 88,319 [[decline from 89,974)
St. Clair County = 163,040 [[decline from 167,562)
Sanilac County = 43,114 [[increase from 42,064)
Lenawee County = 99,892 [[decline from 100,801)
Yeah, so only 3,000-odd people out of the MSA's 140k loss remained in Detroit's CSA at all. Statisically those 3,000 people don't make much of a difference at all. And actually, when you add it all up, we loss another 7k people in addition to the 140k.
" I'm just curious about Macomb's inner ring suburbs population stats... to see if they've grown at all."
Nope. Southern Macomb County is moving to northern Macomb County. Warren, Eastpointe, Fraser, Centerline, Roseville and SCS all lost population. Almost all of the new growth was in Shelby, Macomb and Washington townships with Sterling Heights still growing with around 5000 new residents. The one growth sector outside of the Van Dyke corridor was New Baltimore. It added almost 5000 new residents, a 64% growth rate.
No, it's simply more obvious than ever that we need to diversify our industrial base [[and therefore our economy) to survive. You can't go back to the economic structure of the '50s and '60s. It's time to stop relying on the auto industry as a crutch.
I would think that folks would be sick and tired of living and dying with the car companies by now. I know I am.
Well, I can tell you that the Yemeni-Bangladeshi immigrant stream is pouring into Hamtramck, and then it's moving up to Warren and Sterling Heights. These are modest, hard-working people trying for a stab at the American dream, but not as prosperous as yesterday's factory worker. So, as Warrenites and Sterlingites move up to Shelby and Macomb, they're actually quite likely to sell their homes to immigrants passing though Hamtramck.
The numbers will out, but that's the perspective from down here anyway.
713,000 That's rediculous!!! That census Data is ALL WRONG! There are more than 713,000 people. U.S. Census only counted the live in residents in Detroit, not the homeless. Therefore Detroit's population should be over 800,000.
If Detroit's population is 713,000 that means the biggest lost of population group is middle class African Americans It must have went decreased from 690,000 to 580,000 in a year. TOTALLY REDICULOUS!!! Now I see the vacant homes and buildings being piled up.
The Bright side of the picture is The Mexican Hispanic population increase slowly from 47,000 to almost 70,000 by now.
This speaks volumes and is so true. 713 may not be bad for the city in that many of those gone residents may be school-age children [[less schools=less cost). Also, if big money is out and little income is in, that is a very telling bit of information. The Oakland "grand dam" mentioned he thought it was okay but if the higher saleries are gone and replaced with minimal-wage residents, look out Oakland County-that is a decline.
What's really showing is the even greater split between the haves and the have nots. In Washtenaw County Ypsilanti population dropped 12.6%. Crime has risen a lot in Ypsi and a fair amount in Ann Arbor and once rural townships, too - bank robberies, shootings, home invasions, burglaries, you name it.
Gistok, some parts of Shelby and especially Washington townships have retained a degree of country-like scenery, and that's great... but... those two places are the main strongholds of the mob, too! I forgot to mention Romeo and Richmond. Romeo is quaint with many historic homes and is still a small town, but becoming more sophisticated. Richmond, on the other hand, still feels like a farm community with a somewhat drab downtown, and doesn't offer the charm and amenities that Romeo does.
I think that a great strategy for Macomb would be to redevelop and rejuvenate the Gratiot corridor [[a la the Woodward corridor in Oakland) and keep St. Clair Shores vital.
Another Forbes list - tweeted by the Metro Times - 2.9% home vacancy rate for Detroit [[national average is 2.7%) and 15.6% for Detroit apartments - Orlando and Las Vegas [[among others that overbuilt) have higher vacancy rates
http://www.forbes.com/2011/03/02/orl...st-cities.html
Have Detroit and suburbs combined into one mega city. That would the population up to 5 million people.
Fury13... I always thought that "mob country" was the "Moravian & Millar corridor" of Clinton Twp.... so much classical statuary, grape vines and wrought iron.... and subdivision names like "Villa di Fiore".... LOL...
Actually, we're the 19th largest city in the country now [[Charlotte did pass us), pending Memphis' numbers.
If Memphis saw a 6% increase in population then we're the 20th largest city in the country.
Why are you all so hung up on numbers comparing Detroit with other regions? Why give a crap how big Detroit is compared to other cities in the USA?
While LBP loves mentioning that Oakland grew he will reap what he has been sowing for years. That is other suburbs are going to do what his county did to Detroit [[in-fighting, making sure OC has a leg up on Detroit on a myriad of issues, etc).
When those who can get out of Detroit are doing just that, then there is a problem. Sadly I would say the loss would have/should have been larger but many people can't escape Detroit; that is the sad reality. Detroit, in a decade or so, will have only those who can live as kings in the city; while putting up with poor services and higher taxes. And those who are doomed to extreme poverty and just don't give a fuck. [[I will add the criminals as well as they will grow bolder as the city empties out. But no one will do jack shit about that. Nope! Just piss and moan and compare yourselves to Atlanta, Chicago, Memphis etc).
I'm not as pessimistic as Goat but I do agree that there are too many size queens here. Detroit can turn around quickly if the city government gets its act together. Crime won't thrive when there's nothing to steal, no one to buy. Land is cheap and available. The question is what's best going forward - how to mix business and residential compatibly.
It is hard to compare Orlando when counting empty spec built rental condos ,it took 3 months for my son and his family to find an affordable 3 bedroom rental in a decent not high priced area,so one cannot really compare it to the real world city stats.$1100 per month rental
I have a house there in a large suburb [[kissimmee) built in 1992 there has not been a empty house in there for over three years and it is a year wait just to be able to rent there.
Orlando now tops Detroit in crime.
713,000? So now can they reduce the size of the city council?
Forbes claims their vacancy rates come from the Census Bureau fourth quarter of 2010 - the Bureau obviously counted differently each time.
On the plus side - all the stupid crime data ranking lists won't be able to list Detroit if they keep their size cutoffs at 750,000.
If the auto industry was as alive and well as it was back in the 50's and 60's, Detroit would be a thriving City with over 1 million residents today. Maybe you're sick and tired of living and dying with the car companies but that is what Detroit was. Many other manufacturing companies, small businesses, ie., restaurants, barber shops, cleaners, corner markets and too many others to mention were doing business as long as the auto industry was thriving...when it began to fail, so did Detroit.
There are many other contributing factors to Detroits' decline in population. Corrupt leaders using the City coffers as their own ATM's; pay to play, no services, high taxes, inadequate schools, parents who don't care where their children are; families without parents, grandparents raising the young....I could go on and on.
I'm not surprised. Maybe there is an undercount, but I don't think there are anywhere near 800,000. Perhaps counting all the suburban addresses and those hiding out from immigration/the law/other situations, the true number is 750K.
In my opinion, we're not done with population loss -- unless something changes radically within the next 5 years, we are going to lose elderly and other holdouts. Without major incentives for other groups to move into the city of Detroit, or other unforeseen developments, the number in 2020 will likely be near 500K.
I don't think the numbers mean much of anything other than it being a sad indictment of the city as a whole over the past few decades. Whether we have 900k or 713k in the city is not important, what is important is the percentage of that population who pays their taxes and invests into their communities. Detroit could have a population north of 1.8 million again but imagine the city with 1.8 million and the same problems it has now.
At some point Detroit will bounce back but a population between 750k and 1 million is probably about right long-term. Problem is who wants to move into Detroit right now? Anyone planning to move to Balduck Park? North Rosedale attractive? How's my old neighborhood of Franklin Park? Make Detroit viable first, worry about the population later.
This is worse than even SEMCOG's estimate, which wasn't generous to the city to begin with, so I don't mind if Bing calls bullshit on the numbers. Losing a quarter of the population in one decade seems a bit much, even for as bad as we all know things have been in the region.
I think this just shows how bad the count was that even Bing is getting involved, now. He'd said very early on that he wouldn't challenge the numbers, but even he knows this is just plain ridiculous. I could see a 20% loss, but there isn't anyway that this is an accurate count.
Every city bitches about being undercounted, but this is just ridiculous. The real number is 750,000 at the lowest.
Honestly I am not surprised. I love Detroit as much as anyone here, but I grew up in the inner city, and all my ties are recent. I didn't live in Detroit in the 40s or 50s or 60s... my Detroit is that of the mid-1970s until now.
Something bad happened during the last decade. 12-15 years ago, except for a handful of people, everyone I knew who'd grown up in the city was still there, and so were their parents and grandparents. Today, those numbers are reversed. My family and friend circles are all part of the population bleeding of the past 10 years -- made up of good, solid working class and lower middle class Black folks. This was the demographic that in 2000 swore they'd NEVER leave -- "my house is paid off!", and looked down on those of any race who had.
Today, everyone I grew up with, and my entire extended family [[there are a good 35-40 of us) are all gone. The old "ghettohoods" are just decimated beyond belief. I was hoping that it was because families were doubling and tripling up in homes to save money, but I believe the numbers. The numbers are low, but as I've said, no way are there 800,000 Detroit residents. We will continue to lose people because there are still so many of those stuck in the 'hood who are trying to leave. Out of Detroit, out of Michigan, anything to have a better life.
I think that is what is referred to as voting with your feet.
Well, I expected 750,000-775,000 not 713,000...in my lifetime almost a 60% population loss...Whoa...
713,777....well it was expected. Drive through areas like Brighmoor and it is a believable number. But this is a sad day not only for Detroit but for Metro Detroit. Detroit loses, everyone loses, period.
I agree. I think that the SUV boom that pumped up all of Michigan started to really cause job losses of all types as it petered out. Also, the rise in housing prices in Detroit [[and remortgagings), along with the better times resulted in a horrible bust where people have had to get out and ended up all over the country, not just in the suburbs.
This article, IMO was the best reporting on how the rise in property values became a two edged sword in the neighborhoods of Detroit [[and Metro Detroit).......
http://atdetroit.net/forum/messages/...tml?1180989442
I'm not inclined to discount the numbers so quickly. Want a good yardstick of population loss? Look at DPS's enrollment numbers. They've dropped by 50% in 10 years. That's somewhere around 100,000 kids. Many kids went to charters. But you can bet a good percentage of those were families that left the city. Families with school age kids don't even account for a significant percentage of the overall population. If there was an exodus in equal percentages in other age groups, the numbers announced today don't seem so far-fetched.
Wow, that's powerful stuff.
Also some very good points by English in here. My Detroit is also more recent [[72-86 living) and what we considered ghetto then, is now gone or so abandoned that it really should be. There was a lot of crime when I grew up but it was unthinkable to see an abandoned house anywhere near my neighborhood near W. Chicago and Evergreen. Now that neighborhood has boarded up houses and the fire but has even hit it somewhat [[more towards Tireman than towards Joy).
All the people that lived in my neighborhood are gone except for some elderly who long ago finished paying for their house. For those people they barely hang on to a sense of the past that actually forced my family out. To those people those were the good ole days. Yeah the crack epidemic and runaway crime was better than bad mortgages and total flight from the city.
Those who could leave have left. Many who are left behind wished they had, because now they are stuck. This has happened over and over again since the 1960s, rich flight, white flight, African American flight and just flight these days. At some point this will stop, it has to but whoever is still in that city for the most part is as desperate of a population as you'll find. I always go back to the neighborhood when I'm in town to visit the lady across the street from the house I grew up in. She said her daughter lives in Madison Heights now and that the daughter wants her to move there because our neighborhood is no longer stable enough to be trusted. This includes visits by her grandchildren and great grandchildren, they no longer want to even visit the city anymore. And this is Franklin Park, there are dozens of neighborhoods worse off in every single way.
I am an optimistic person and I really bash those people not from Detroit that hold the city in contempt. But between Detroiters I sometimes have trouble being optimistic, I am terrified I will not only never get to see the Detroit my Dad enjoyed in the 50s...but even the Detroit I enjoyed in the mid to late 70s and early 80s. I mean seriously I know five or six people that live in the city now, 30 years ago almost everyone I knew and most of my family lived within the borders.
Detroit just can't catch a break, hasn't been able to catch one in 30 or 40 years it seems. Not sure what else to say, I love the city like it was my family but it's getting pretty tough for even me to swallow all this bad news year after year, decade after decade.
When you combine all public schools [[regular and charter), the drop of students from the district is 30,000 to 40,000 [[there are over 50,000 in public charters), which is what makes me skeptical of the population numbers. DPS had 160,000 or so in the 2000-2001 school year; it had about 130,000 in 2010 when you include both DPS charters and regular schools. I don't think the Census was that far off, but off far enough for it to be statistically and financially significant.
BTW, while most of my family had moved out by the 80's, there are still a lot of them left in the city. In fact, I can think of only one aunt who moved out of the city in the 00's. All of my cousins [[20, 30, and 40-somethings) still live in the city and with their children. I guess that's kind of the opposite of the trend.
I'm happy that Mayor Dave Bing is challenging this number. I believe that it is an undercount and we need to count as many people as possible so the city can get the appropriate funding. I'm convinced that there wasn't enough of a push last year to get people counted as there was in 2000.
On another note, while Detroit has lost a lot of it's population over the years, it is still posed for a comeback. We just need to focus on improving our infrastructure [[especially mass transit), investing in education for ALL residents, and improving city services. We need to work on improving the quality of life for our residents. Detroit is located on an international border right between Chicago and Toronto. It is not like we are an unattractive location geographically. We have quality educational institutions and businesses. We just need to be positive and work with what we have. The population can increase overnight if we make the right decisions.
WHAT YOU DRIVE, DRIVES AMERICA.
OUT OF A JOB YET? KEEP BUYING FOREIGN.
Know this is off topic but, arn't we buying foreign when GM shuts down plants because they can't get parts out of Japan due to the earthquake? How many Detroiter's could have jobs if these parts were made in Detroit?