Population Growth

[R.B.J]

Indianapolis and both Kansas Cities experienced population growth from 2010-2020.

How are these cities growing?

What are they doing?

Can Detroit replicate the things they are doing?

[EASTSIDER BALDUCK]

Why?

[Gistok]

I'll let someone else talk about Kansas City MO.

But with Indianapolis, a big part of its' grown is that the city incorporated a large chunk of the county they were in, into the city back in 1970... [Wiki copy/paste]

As the result of a 1970 consolidation of city and county governments [[known as "Unigov"), the city of Indianapolis merged most government services with those of the county. For the most part, this resulted in a unification of Indianapolis with its immediate suburbs. Four communities within Marion County [[Beech Grove, Lawrence, Southport and Speedway) are partially outside of the Unigov arrangement. Also, 11 other communities [[called "included towns") are legally included in the Consolidated City of Indianapolis under Unigov, per Indiana Code 36-3-1-4 sec. 4[[a)[[2), which states that the Consolidated City of Indianapolis includes the entire area of Marion County, except the four previously mentioned "excluded" communities. The 11 "included towns" [[there were originally 14, but 3 later dissolved) elected to retain their "town status" under Unigov as defined according to the Indiana Constitution, but the Indiana Constitution does not define "town status". Additionally, Cumberland straddles Hancock and Marion Counties.

So if Detroit merged most of Wayne County into the city limits [that will never happen] it too would have had growth spurts... getting close to 1.8 million people, and making Detroit once again the 5th largest city in the USA.

Detroit grew so fast in the 1920s due to annexation, that the state pretty much put a stop to annexations.

[Danny]

I'll let someone else talk about Kansas City MO.

But with Indianapolis, a big part of its' grown is that the city incorporated a large chunk of the county they were in, into the city back in 1970... [Wiki copy/paste]

As the result of a 1970 consolidation of city and county governments [[known as "Unigov"), the city of Indianapolis merged most government services with those of the county. For the most part, this resulted in a unification of Indianapolis with its immediate suburbs. Four communities within Marion County [[Beech Grove, Lawrence, Southport and Speedway) are partially outside of the Unigov arrangement. Also, 11 other communities [[called "included towns") are legally included in the Consolidated City of Indianapolis under Unigov, per Indiana Code 36-3-1-4 sec. 4[[a)[[2), which states that the Consolidated City of Indianapolis includes the entire area of Marion County, except the four previously mentioned "excluded" communities. The 11 "included towns" [[there were originally 14, but 3 later dissolved) elected to retain their "town status" under Unigov as defined according to the Indiana Constitution, but the Indiana Constitution does not define "town status". Additionally, Cumberland straddles Hancock and Marion Counties.

So if Detroit merged most of Wayne County into the city limits [that will never happen] it too would have had growth spurts... getting close to 1.8 million people, and making Detroit once again the 5th largest city in the USA.

Detroit grew so fast in the 1920s due to annexation, that the state pretty much put a stop to annexations.

Detroit can be Unigov, too.

[K-slice]

Some info on KC population growth:
https://flatlandkc.org/news-issues/g...ensus-results/

No secret formula, it all starts with having a great Downtown and going from there. Looks like they are seeing massive residential projects in the CBD which is driving further investment.

I'm sure it helps that KC has a diverse population that more closely mirrors the breakdown of the US in general. I've said it before and I'll say it again, the top job for anyone in Detroit city leadership needs to be growing and diversifying the population of Detroit.

[SFDS]

I remember when Duggan took office, he mentioned the one metric he could be measured by was population growth. His rationale was it would reflect a set of service and livability metrics underlying it.

[Danny]

Face it folks. Detroit's population is still slowing declining. Right now its over 620,000. White flight was slow down. But Black flight is still increasing to the suburbs or any successful cities. White folks are moving to Detroit, but in areas that are getting gentrified from Gilberttown Detroit, Brush Park to Midtown. Hispanics are slowing increasing, but heavenly concentrating in Southwest Detroit. Some are moving farther to other downriver suburbs. Fewer ethnic Arabs are slowly growing in some parts of Detroit West Side near the Dearborn Border And fast grown development of East Indian Town called Banglatown formed at the Detroit Hamtramck Border.


Detroit has missed out of tech industry and our automobile industry needs to invest more in EV cars rather than making cars that operates dead Dino gas. It's going to take another 100 years to see that Detroit have to come up with new gimmick to lure people here for regional jobs. This city comes a long way from making cast iron stoves to making cars.

[Danny]

I'll let someone else talk about Kansas City MO.

But with Indianapolis, a big part of its' grown is that the city incorporated a large chunk of the county they were in, into the city back in 1970... [Wiki copy/paste]

As the result of a 1970 consolidation of city and county governments [[known as "Unigov"), the city of Indianapolis merged most government services with those of the county. For the most part, this resulted in a unification of Indianapolis with its immediate suburbs. Four communities within Marion County [[Beech Grove, Lawrence, Southport and Speedway) are partially outside of the Unigov arrangement. Also, 11 other communities [[called "included towns") are legally included in the Consolidated City of Indianapolis under Unigov, per Indiana Code 36-3-1-4 sec. 4[[a)[[2), which states that the Consolidated City of Indianapolis includes the entire area of Marion County, except the four previously mentioned "excluded" communities. The 11 "included towns" [[there were originally 14, but 3 later dissolved) elected to retain their "town status" under Unigov as defined according to the Indiana Constitution, but the Indiana Constitution does not define "town status". Additionally, Cumberland straddles Hancock and Marion Counties.

So if Detroit merged most of Wayne County into the city limits [that will never happen] it too would have had growth spurts... getting close to 1.8 million people, and making Detroit once again the 5th largest city in the USA.

Detroit grew so fast in the 1920s due to annexation, that the state pretty much put a stop to annexations.

The SBC don't want Detroit to be like New York. Folks are scared of more property taxations. So much for UNIGOV.

[preserve]

Just wait till all the new condos and apts in this area get occupied, then Detroit won't have to annex some of the lesser suburbs.

[401don]

It's too bad gov't doesn't function. There are hundreds of thousands of migrants crossing the border. They may not have the skill set desired, but they certainly are willing to work and could be trained for occupations where there are shortages. Since the federal gov't, regardless of party, has no solution to stop the influx, why not direct them to Detroit and other parts of Michigan requiring population growth. You would need to have all 3 levels of gov't cooperate on housing, training, temporary income, work visas, etc. but the short term cost would pay off way more than dumping them in Texas, NY, Chicago, etc. Will never happen of course.

[gratiotfaced]

Take Census estimates with a heap of salt, but Detroit actually reversed its population decline in 2023.

[Atticus]

The biggest challenge is that the people moving out, tend to be those households with kids. The people moving in are young professionals, DINKs, Empty Nesters, LBGT+, etc. which are all groups that are not as likely to have kids. I know there are exceptions, but speaking generally.

Point being, if for example a household of a single parent and 2 kids move out, and are replaced by a household of two young professionals, the number of households remains constant but population decreases. Despite all the progress that has been made in Detroit, it is still not an appealing place for most families with kids to live. Until that changes, population growth will be slow-going.

Indianapolis, KC, and many other cities that are experiencing growth still have desirable suburban neighborhoods that comprise part of their city limits, that attract families. Detroit struggles in that regard. And because those Suburban neighborhoods are not in-vogue with urban planners these days, it’s hard to get the political excitement involved with recreating a suburban neighborhood in the city limits that will attract familles.

[royce]

The biggest challenge is that the people moving out, tend to be those households with kids. The people moving in are young professionals, DINKs, Empty Nesters, LBGT+, etc. which are all groups that are not as likely to have kids. I know there are exceptions, but speaking generally.

Point being, if for example a household of a single parent and 2 kids move out, and are replaced by a household of two young professionals, the number of households remains constant but population decreases. Despite all the progress that has been made in Detroit, it is still not an appealing place for most families with kids to live. Until that changes, population growth will be slow-going.

Indianapolis, KC, and many other cities that are experiencing growth still have desirable suburban neighborhoods that comprise part of their city limits, that attract families. Detroit struggles in that regard. And because those Suburban neighborhoods are not in-vogue with urban planners these days, it’s hard to get the political excitement involved with recreating a suburban neighborhood in the city limits that will attract familles.

I've seen a change in some Detroit Public Schools Community District schools [[DPSCD) where a decent number of young white parents are sending their children to the public schools in their neighborhoods. Some of these parents are sending their children to the neighborhood charter school as well.

I substitute teach for DPSCD and I was surprised to see the number of white students in some of the schools that I sub for. One school in Woodbridge has a majority of white students in the early grades [[Pre-K to 4th). It is a Montessori school so that might be the attraction. Another school is in Indian Village. Yet another school, a charter school, located in the Pingree Park area [[just north of Indian Village) has a large number of white students. I witnessed white parents taking their students to school one morning this fall. Many of the parents walked them to school.

This is a good trend towards increasing Detroit's population. The questions worth asking are, "How long will this trend continue and will it spread throughout other parts of Detroit?"

Another thing that I think would improve Detroit's population would be to start a marketing campaign, either public or private, that would promote Detroit's low cost of living. This campaign should go after individuals who are tired of paying ridiculous rents and mortgages in other big cities and have jobs where they work remotely. I'm going to assume that some department in city government or the Detroit Chamber of Commerce is working on this right now. If not, then they definitely should be.

[Scottathew]

A lot of the "inner ring" suburbs have been losing population as well.

Warren, 180,000 to 140,000
Roseville, 60,000 to 47,000
Eastpointe, 46,000 to 34,000
St. Clair Shores, 88,000 to 59,000
Dearborn, 112,000 to 109,000 [population dipped and has almost recovered]
Allen Park, 40,000 to 29,000
River Rouge, 21,000 to 7,000

So even if Detroit absorbed some of the nearby suburbs, it would still be declining.

A lot of the inner-ring suburbs have different issues causing the decline. Post-war housing stock [[small ranches and bungalows) doesn't attract families. Also, families are having far less children.

[royce]

A lot of the "inner ring" suburbs have been losing population as well.

Warren, 180,000 to 140,000
Roseville, 60,000 to 47,000
Eastpointe, 46,000 to 34,000
St. Clair Shores, 88,000 to 59,000
Dearborn, 112,000 to 109,000 [population dipped and has almost recovered]
Allen Park, 40,000 to 29,000
River Rouge, 21,000 to 7,000

So even if Detroit absorbed some of the nearby suburbs, it would still be declining.

A lot of the inner-ring suburbs have different issues causing the decline. Post-war housing stock [[small ranches and bungalows) doesn't attract families. Also, families are having far less children.

If Detroit absorbed those suburbs, based on their latest population count, Detroit would end up with 938,000 residents. Would it financially be worth it to Detroit to cover those new areas?

[Danny]

Take Census estimates with a heap of salt, but Detroit actually reversed its population decline in 2023.

From 620,376 to 620,410 only 34 people moved to Detroit in the past year. That's nothing. Let's wait and see by 2030 Census of Detroit's pop. still increasing or decreasing.

[Gistok]

^^ A lot of the inner ring housing decline is greatly due to 1 factor... empty nesters still living there. For folks living in the same place for 30 years, it doesn't pay to move... because your property taxes will increase. I've been in my house since 1990... and the virtually identical house next door recently sold, and the new owners are paying twice the property taxes I am.

[Scottathew]

If Detroit absorbed those suburbs, based on their latest population count, Detroit would end up with 938,000 residents. Would it financially be worth it to Detroit to cover those new areas?

There would be one hell of a fight against it. Functional cities with lower taxes and better services wouldn't want to come under the Detroit umbrella.

Would it be beneficial for Detroit? In the short term, absolutely. However, if those annexed lands started to fall to the same ills, then in the long term, no.

I've thought about whether or not Detroit would do better cut up into three or four cities/school districts to match the new boundaries. Having a government that is much more focused on smaller cities, that would still be some of the largest cities in Michigan [behind Grand Rapids]. When I've pitched that idea here in the past actual Detroit residents [of which I'm not] seemed very against it.

It makes me wonder what is the best size for a city. I grew up in Clawson, which was too small. Cities that are around the standard township size [36 square miles] seem to be the sweet spot. Cities that are about the size of Warren, Rochester Hills, Livonia, Troy, Sterling Heights, Farmington Hills, etc... Of course all those cities I listed received all the spoils from the awful past of racial segregation. Perhaps that's why I have a tainted view of why these bigger, but smaller than Detroit-sized, cities have done well.

[Zacha341]

^ The main distinction, seemingly forgotten, is that we now have a welfare state. Albeit weakening under the existing strain.

Yet we now have an unprecedented rush of people coming forth via our breach borders - negating the former immigration process - many for our welfare benefits: subsidized housing, transportation to various states, for varied city, state and NGO services.

They are distinctly being steered to these services. Service and funding not available to traditional immigrants. As noticed.

This is having an impact on existing citizens already in need of services. Services already spread thin and in some cases not available.

All of this occurring during a time of hyper-inflation, deficit spending, mega war funding with no off-ramp, and millions of Americans homeless; without adequate health care, unemployment, drug addicted -- living in extreme poverty, etc ETC. How's unchecked migration sustainable?

One of my recent immigrating family members filed to immigrate [indeed a long process] to the US under Trump's presidency. Per that processing, he could NOT, for example, immediately apply for welfare or any other state benefits. And is now working in skills trade sector.

Other nations have zero motivation to correct their own systems when their people can rush into the US without question. If we'll take care of them why should they?

I doubt seriously most Detroiter's feel we have an abundance of social services to spare. Ask them.

[401don]

^ The main distinction, seemingly forgotten, is that we now have a welfare state. We have an unprecedented rush of people coming - negating the immigration process precisely for our welfare benefits, subsidized housing and other city, state and NGO services. They are being steered to these services.

This is having an impact on existing citizens already in need of services. Services already spread thin and in some cases not available.

All of this occurring during a time of hyper-inflation, deficit spending, war funding with no off-ramp, and millions of Americans homeless; lack of employment, drug addicted, and living extreme proverty. How is uncheck migration sustainable?

One of my recent immigrating family members filed to immigrate [indeed a long process] to the US under Trump's presidency. They could NOT, for example, immediately apply for welfare or any other state benefits. And is now working in skills trade sector.

Other nations have no motivation to correct their own systems when their people can run into the US without question.

Sorry about you family's issues but to say these refugees are coming to collect welfare is nonsense. They come for the same reason all immigrants have come for generations, for a better life. They will work hard and contribute tax revenues to support you in your old age. They will need a helping hand for a year because they can't work immediately but don't blame them because the system is broken.

[Zacha341]

^^^Not all of them are. I never said ALL [in the original or my edited post]. But they are being distinctly steered to our services. Services already strained - inarguably so.

And let's not even discuss the 'got aways' now within the interior of the US. Who's vouching so precisely and with such surety what they are doing or their agenda? Are you? I'm not.

This problem would not be as big if our border was not so breach as it is.

The system of processing this influx is 'broken' [and overwhelmed]!!

What further can go wrong??

Again, how can we sustain this in the context of our own Broken 'system' as you state? We cannot.

And woe to those on the waiting lists seeking traditional immigration.

They're really on the short end! And they KNOW IT.

PS. I have edited my post for clarity. See above.

[EASTSIDER BALDUCK]

Why are we talking annexation when Det cannot run their own town?

'diculous

[ABetterDetroit]

Why are we talking annexation when Det cannot run their own town?

'diculous

What is the point of attacking Detroit in a population thread when the city has had the best Decade it has had in 60 years?

The State of Michigan has been a uncompetitive shit show hemorrhaging population and talent for half a century. It is long past blaming Detroit for Lansing doing the same stupid crap endlessly and expecting different results.

The large majority of the other states are kicking our ass while eating off our plate. The dumb ass suburbs vs. city crap solves nothing obviously because if it did we would be the best metro/city/state in the nation by now.

[Henry Whalley]

The State of Michigan has been a uncompetitive shit show hemorrhaging population and talent for half a century. It is long past blaming Detroit for Lansing doing the same stupid crap endlessly and expecting different results.

Life in rural Michigan will bore one to death.

[Margaret's boy]

Both Metro Detroit and Windsor Essex will witness significant population growth thanks to large waves immigration to both countries. Both Americans and Canadians will react negatively to large-scale immigration as competition for jobs, housing and education negatively impact both countries. Health care will be pushed to the limit on both sides of the border.