Free Press Editorials on Detroit Census Numbers

[begingri]

Editorial: Census data offer bleak urban picture in Michigan

Overshadowed in last week's disclosure that Detroit hemorrhaged a full quarter of its population between 2000 and 2010 was a statewide flight from Michigan's cities. It is a demographic trend that has dire implications for the state's economic recovery -- and reversing it should be one of Gov. Rick Snyder's long-term priorities.

Among the state's 20 largest cities, only Sterling Heights, Wyoming, Rochester and Dearborn gained population over the last decade. Although no other Michigan city experienced an exodus on the scale of Detroit's, most lost residents at a far greater pace than the state as a whole.

Grand Rapids, the state's second largest city, lost 4.9% of its population, while the third-largest, Warren, shrank 3%. Flint lost more than 22,000 residents, an 18% loss that brought its population to a level last seen in the 1920.
Among Michigan's urban population losers, only Ann Arbor's people drain was proportional to Michigan's 0.6% population loss.

Michigan's experience is even more alarming when compared with that of other states. While some other Great Lakes cities [[notably Chicago and Gary) had steep population drops, most large cities grew, even in regions that lost residents as a whole.

In nearby Indiana, whose population jumped 6% during the last decade, many urban centers grew at an even faster clip. Fort Wayne's population leaped more than 23%, while Bloomington, home of the University of Indiana, grew 16%. Even Indianapolis, the state's largest city, managed a robust 4.9% growth.

City dwellers have been migrating to the suburbs for many generations, but it is simplistic and misleading to dismiss that trend as a simple expression of consumer preference for big yards and less congested neighborhoods. In Michigan, particularly, the exodus has been facilitated by government policies that subsidized sprawl and magnified the social and financial costs of city living.


Continued at: http://www.freep.com/article/20110327/OPINION01/103270466/Editorial-Census-data-offer-bleak-urban-picture-Michigan?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|Opinion



What more of the same means for Detroit's decay

RON DZWONKOWSKI

Detroit would keep shrinking, down to about 530,000 people, spread ever more thinly across the same 139.5 square miles but pockmarked by more than 110,000 empty homes and buildings.

Michigan's per capita income, in the top 10 nationally for decades, would be the lowest of the 50 states.

The population here would stagnate while the nation around it grew, diminishing Michigan's voice in Washington even further and likely reducing its share of federal funding for all manner of needs.

The state would keep aging, too -- so health care would account for an ever-larger slice of the economy. And employers seeking workers for jobs in the growing information, technology and knowledge-based sectors would keep looking elsewhere, in places where the populace is better educated.

If nothing changes, that's what changes.

If 2010 is just a point on a trend line, then the problems reflected in the census data released last week just get worse by 2020. The telltale numbers -- population loss, vacancies -- keep getting bigger. And the things that could be beacons for employers and investors -- growth and immigration -- remain weak, erratic and foreboding signals.

Albert Einstein classically defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Maybe that should be our interim state motto if all Michigan does between now and 2020 is stay the course.


Continued at: http://www.freep.com/article/20110327/OPINION01/103270477/Editorial-What-more-same-means-Detroit-s-decay?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|Opinion



City can't afford to bet on bigger census numbers

BRIAN DICKERSON
DETROIT FREE PRESS COLUMNIST

For too many Detroit leaders, that was the reflexive response to this last week's revelation that the city's population has plummeted to pre-World War I levels.

Mayor Dave Bing demanded a recount. Detroit-area legislators compulsively catalogued the myriad nooks and crannies in which census enumerators had likely overlooked card-carrying [[or at least service-consuming ) Detroiters. And City Council President Charles Pugh, in a moment of well-meaning candor that may haunt the rest of his political career, suggested that tens of thousands of missing residents might be sought out [[and reclaimed) in the state's teeming prison cells.

There was some merit in many of these claims [[although inmates have already been counted, in accordance with federal law, as residents of the counties in which they are incarcerated -- and one shudders to think what would actually happen if tens of thousands of ex-felons were abruptly repatriated to a city so utterly bereft of jobs, reliable public transportation, educational opportunity and mental health services.)

The high cost of low numbers

But the certitude that Detroiters had been undercounted sprang less from the demonstrated flaws in the census-takers' methods than from political leaders' fears about what would happen if the count stood.


Continued at: http://www.freep.com/article/2011032...census-numbers



Census data is cold reality for Detroit

ROCHELLE RILEY FREE PRESS COLUMNIST
DETROIT FREE PRESS COLUMNIST


Last week, Detroit got the wake-up call that might finally force its leaders to govern the city that exists instead of the city they remember.U.S. census results revealed that Detroit has lost a quarter of its population -- 237,500 people -- since 2000.
It was the largest percentage loss ever for any American city with more than 100,000 residents, except New Orleans, which lost 29% or 140,000 people after Hurricane Katrina.
Detroit's crisis didn't result from hurricanes, but from slow-rising waters that threaten to drown the city:
• Higher insurance rates.
• Higher taxes.
• Poorer schools.
• Fewer amenities.
• Violent crime.
Rather than excoriate those who leave, Detroit leaders should work faster to fix what's wrong.

Call off the search

Mayor Dave Bing's immediate reaction was to declare that he'd search for nearly 40,000 residents the census must have missed. He needs at least 37,000 to continue operating under special laws written for cities of more than 750,000 people, including the ability to charge higher taxes.


Continued at: http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...=2011103270511



Focus on making Detroit better

TOM WALSH
DETROIT FREE PRESS COLUMNIST

A hundred years ago, four northern industrial cities -- Buffalo, Detroit, Pittsburgh and Cleveland -- were roughly the same size, ranging in population from 430,000 to 580,000.

That was soon to change, as Detroit blew by its peers with a period of explosive growth.
By 1950, the brawny Motor City had 1.85 million people -- more than double the size of Pittsburgh or Cleveland, more than triple Buffalo.

Detroit was king of the metal-bending belt, the Arsenal of Democracy in World War II and the automotive juggernaut in the boom years to follow.
But that was then.

Last week, a Wall Street Journal headline declared, "Detroit's population crashes," after 2010 census figures showed a 25% drop in the past decade. "Ghost town" was a popular term for the city in other news reports.





Continued at: http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...=2011103270432

[professorscott]

Even more disturbing than the City's decline in population is this trend: across the metro region, from 2000 to 2010 we lost nearly 11% of our under 18 population.

People are fleeing the city, but the future is fleeing the region. Worse yet, nobody is discussing this, much less proposing anything that might have a prayer of reversing it.

We can't cut our way to success. Yes, we have to cut spending, but we have to find a way to win this. As Churchill famously said after Dunkirk, "Wars are not won by evacuations."

[bartock]

Even more disturbing than the City's decline in population is this trend: across the metro region, from 2000 to 2010 we lost nearly 11% of our under 18 population.

People are fleeing the city, but the future is fleeing the region. Worse yet, nobody is discussing this, much less proposing anything that might have a prayer of reversing it.

We can't cut our way to success. Yes, we have to cut spending, but we have to find a way to win this. As Churchill famously said after Dunkirk, "Wars are not won by evacuations."

Yes! Your middle paragraph is so right. The resurgence of discussions on only race is ignoring the larger underpinnings of "flight".

[begingri]

Even more disturbing than the City's decline in population is this trend: across the metro region, from 2000 to 2010 we lost nearly 11% of our under 18 population.

People are fleeing the city, but the future is fleeing the region. Worse yet, nobody is discussing this, much less proposing anything that might have a prayer of reversing it.

We can't cut our way to success. Yes, we have to cut spending, but we have to find a way to win this. As Churchill famously said after Dunkirk, "Wars are not won by evacuations."

Absolutely, especially that last paragraph. Detroit could cut all of its taxes to 0%, but people won't start moving back in if crime is still high, the school performance is still low, EMS response is still slow, etc.

[mwilbert]

Absolutely, especially that last paragraph. Detroit could cut all of its taxes to 0%, but people won't start moving back in if crime is still high, the school performance is still low, EMS response is still slow, etc.

Depends what you mean. All the things you mention are important [[at least to some people) so whether cutting all Detroit taxes to 0 [[not feasible anyway) would stop net outmigration is extremely doubtful. However, no doubt some additional people would move in--after all, some people move in now, and that would be a considerable savings. For instance, someone who would like to buy one of the many houses with unreasonable tax bills might well do so if the tax bill were 0.

[begingri]

Depends what you mean. All the things you mention are important [[at least to some people) so whether cutting all Detroit taxes to 0 [[not feasible anyway) would stop net outmigration is extremely doubtful. However, no doubt some additional people would move in--after all, some people move in now, and that would be a considerable savings. For instance, someone who would like to buy one of the many houses with unreasonable tax bills might well do so if the tax bill were 0.

You're right, I was exaggerating a bit. But you won't attract families, the bread-and-butter of most cities, back until you fix the services. I'm just saying in a choice cutting taxes vs. improving services, Detroit is much better off focusing on the latter.

[Novine]

Comparing Michigan's urban cities to those in Indiana is apples and oranges. Indianapolis is a consolidated city-county government and much of the growth there is happening in the outer ring of townships within the consolidated city boundaries. Even more growth is happening outside of Indianapolis in the surrounding suburban counties.

http://www.indianaeconomicdigest.net...rticleID=58419

Fort Wayne has grown through annexation.

http://www.cityoffortwayne.org/annex...-overview.html

I believe the same is true of Bloomington. The only large Michigan cities growing in that manner are Ann Arbor and Lansing. Ann Arbor has defined urban boundaries with its surrounding townships so the annexations taking place today are small and mostly infill as township islands are absorbed. Lansing has done some Act 425 agreements with surrounding townships but those have been largely focused on commercial and industrial developments seeking tax breaks that the city could offer and the townships could not. Even much of Rochester's growth goes back to the annexation of the portion of Avon Township east of the city before the township incorporated as Rochester Hills. Much of that land has only developed in the past 10 years so Rochester is seeing that growth. But that area has largely developed so it's unlikely that that Rochester will post those kinds of numbers in the future.

Annexation isn't necessarily the answer to the decline of Michigan's cities. As the Professor noted, the decline is happening regionwide, not in the cities alone. Growth by annexation that relies on capturing suburban growth but leaves an empty and rotten core isn't much better than what we do today. But the Free Press should compare the differences between these urban areas before using them to make any kinds of comparisons.

[mwilbert]

Families are the last group who will move into Detroit. Better to focus on the 50%+ of households with no children, plus home schoolers, private schoolers, and virtual schoolers.

This shouldn't be taken to mean that we should not be concerned about public school kids, but realistically Detroit isn't going to attract many of those families that intend to use the public schools until there are better options than there are now.

The other thing is that services are harder to measure than taxes. It is hard to say to someone, "Detroit's services are 20% better than they used to be." but easy to say, "Detroit's taxes are 20% lower than they used to be."

[iheartthed]

The population trajectory of Pittsburgh and Buffalo may match Detroit's, but it doesn't make much sense to compare them with Detroit because of the underlying differences. Buffalo and Pittsburgh have been losing population metropolitan wide since the 1960s, whereas Detroit has only lost population twice in history [[metropolitan wide). The Cleveland comparison makes sense, and of course the Chicago comparison too.