Michigan 2011 City Pop. Estimates (over 100,000)

[LMich]

Hadn't updated this in awhile. The July 1, 2011 population estimates were released, yesterday, and with some pretty good news. Most of Michigan's major cities either declined far less since the Census than is usual, and many that had been falling for years have actually posted growths.

Michigan City Pop. 2010 (estimate base) / 2011

Detroit: 713,777 / 706,585 (-7,192 / -1.0%)
Flint: 102,434 / 101,558 (-876 / -0.8%)
Warren: 134,056 / 134,243 (+187 / +0.14%)
Sterling Heights: 129,699 / 129,880 (+181 / +0.14%)
Lansing: 114,297 / 114,605 (+308 / +0.27%)
Ann Arbor: 113,934 / 114,925 (+991 / +0.86%)
Grand Rapids: 188,041 / 189,815 (+1,774 / +0.93)

A few notes:

- At least one year out from the Census, Detroit's decline has slowed down significantly. While it still is estimated to have lost more as a percentage of its population of than any other major city -- and of the 715 cities over 50,000, Michigan cities completely fill the bottom 7 entries in growth -- the percent loss has is way below the average annual loss of 2.5% in the previous decade. Of Michigan cities over 100,000, only Detroit and Flint are estimated to have posted losses.

- Ann Arbor is finally predicted to have passed Lansing, but both showed growth after both having shown a lost population over the last decade. Even more, Lansing has shown it's first estimate growth in years. The last time the city was estimated to have grown was sometime in the mid/late-90's, and the 2000 Census actually showed that not to have been the case, anyway.

- Some surprises in cities below 100,000 included Livonia, Westland, Taylor, Dearborn Heights, and Dearborn all posting larger percentage losses of their population than Detroit, though not by much. Dearborn, strangely, is estimated to have lost a bigger percentage of its population than any city in the nation over the time period. Saginaw and Battle Creek are the only other Michigan cities over 50,000 to post any losses, each declining approximately half a percentage point.

- Of the cities over 50,000 to have grown, some surprises include Pontiac posting a gain (+0.62%), Southfield (+0.64%), Kalamazoo (+0.65%), and Royal Oak (+0.65%), all cities that posted population losses at the 2010 Census.

I'll try to do some work on the townships.

[Dralcoffin]

Originally Posted by LMich

- Some surprises in cities below 100,000 included Livonia, Westland, Taylor, Dearborn Heights, and Dearborn all posting larger percentage losses of their population than Detroit, though not by much. Dearborn, strangely, is estimated to have lost a bigger percentage of its population than any city in the nation over the time period.

One reason for this is the (shady in my opinion) way that the Census estimates population for sub-county estimates. The Census' methodology boils down to taking housing changes and deriving an estimate for the county's population, then applying that population change evenly to all municipalities in a county. The estimates have Wayne County down by 1%, so every city and township in Wayne County is simply docked 1%, the numbers adjusted very slightly for housing changes, and that's it. If you look up the numbers, Canton and Northville Townships declined at a similar percentage to Detroit and Highland Park, the same percentage as Wayne County overall.

[hudkina]

Yeah. I've learned to not trust Census estimates.

[LMich]

Originally Posted by Dralcoffin

One reason for this is the (shady in my opinion) way that the Census estimates population for sub-county estimates. The Census' methodology boils down to taking housing changes and deriving an estimate for the county's population, then applying that population change evenly to all municipalities in a county. The estimates have Wayne County down by 1%, so every city and township in Wayne County is simply docked 1%, the numbers adjusted very slightly for housing changes, and that's it. If you look up the numbers, Canton and Northville Townships declined at a similar percentage to Detroit and Highland Park, the same percentage as Wayne County overall.

Interesting. I knew that the estimates already favored cities with lots of new housing construction (in most parts of the country, that would mean the middle and outer sprawlburbs) and basically penalizes built-out cities where a lot of people may be filling existing housing stock (cities and inner-ring). I didn't know, however, that if a county posts a loss or a gain that every city in the county is automatically robbed or given that percentage growth or decline of that county. That seems like a very abitrary and dumb thing to do.

It certainly explains the Dearborn -- in particular -- number to me. That city grows in spite of not having a lot of new housing construction because of immigration with large household sizes. That said, the numbers for the outerrings don't surprise me given how long housing construction has been for quite a few years now. Most of the growth in the metro area, at the moment, would be internal migration with a few exceptions. For my city, the Census shows it growing ever-so-slightly more than the county gain, last year, and the 2010 Census also showed the city to be declining slower than the estimates up to the Census, so I can believe that the decline has finally slowed to a near stop, at least.

[Hayward]

Glad to see Ann Arbor's numbers creeping back up. I know a lot of out of state students that called Ann Arbor their permanent home after graduation.