Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: State budget coverage roundup
Next Post: Two workers’ comp arbitrators put on paid leave
Posted in:
* Chicago’s population grew by 4 percent in the 2000 Census. This time, there was a huge drop…
Chicago’s population plunged by 200,418 people — a 6.9 percent decline from 2000, according to the official census count released Tuesday.
The drop was significantly more than indicated by previously released census estimates, and over the next decade it could cost the city hundreds of millions in federal funds, which are partly distributed on the basis of population counts. […]
Chicago’s black population fell the most, nearly 17 percent. Today, blacks make up only 33 percent of the city’s population, down from 36 percent 10 years ago. […]
Hispanic population grew 3.3 percent in the city. But since this is less than the birthrate it is likely that Hispanics also are leaving the city for the suburbs.
Non-Hispanic whites are now 32 percent of the population, while Hispanics of all races make up 29 percent
200,000 people is almost four wards. Suburban Cook’s population grew by about 18,000.
* The population continued its migration to the exurbs…
People continued to spread out far from the region’s urban hub, as thousands flocked to Will, Kane and McHenry counties, all of which experienced a second decade of vigorous double-digit growth, the numbers showed.
“I think these data from here and elsewhere in the country reflect that the United States has become a suburban nation,” said Scott W. Allard, a University of Chicago associate professor of social service administration. “It is a continuing migration from the city out to the suburbs while there are also immigration waves directly to the suburbs as well.” […]
For the second decade, Aurora and Joliet experienced dramatic growth. Aurora (197,899) passed Rockford (152,871) to become the state’s second-biggest town, while Joliet moved up three places to No. 4, with 147,433 residents, nearly 40 percent more than in 2000.
In those cities and others, Latinos found homes far from the city’s traditional ethnic enclaves.
* But there was some surprisingly strong Downstate growth as well…
Much of the state’s population growth was in downstate counties such as Champaign and Mclean with heavily white-collar economies, and in counties that surround Chicago, such as Kendall County where the population more than doubled. […]
The strongest growth was in counties around Cook County, such as Lake (whose population grew by 9.2 percent), Will (up 34.9 percent) and Kane (up 27.5 percent), according to the census. Other strong growth counties included DeKalb, where population grew 18 percent, Champaign, where population increased by 11.9 percent, and McLean, where the population grew 12.7 percent.
* And Latino population grew just about everywhere…
“There’s 102 counties in Illinois — 101 of them registered growth in the Latino population,” said Matthew Hall, a demographer at the University of Illinois-Chicago.
More on that trend…
State Rep. Keith Farnham’s predominately Kane County district, which encompasses Elgin, Carpentersville and East Dundee and portions of South Elgin and Barrington Hills, has seen a tremendous amount of growth in the last decade, due to a large influx of Hispanics.
There are now nearly 160,000 Hispanics living in the county, 65 percent more than 10 years ago.
“Someone told me my district may be smaller, but then again … I’ll work whatever it is,” Farnham said.
Rep. Kay Hatcher, a Yorkville Republican, also has a district that has grown significantly, due not least to Aurora’s population growth by a whopping 38 percent to 197,899.
* Roundup…
* Suburbs grow as diversity grows
* B-N population up
* Small towns near C-U grew quickly
* Peoria population increases, but drops to Illinois’ 7th largest city
* Bradley professors’ population estimates are right on target
* Census shows Aurora second-largest in state, Naperville fifth
* Black, Asian, Hispanic populations rise in Naperville
* Libertyville’s population decreases slightly, minority population increases significantly, according to U.S. Census
* Grayslake sees minority population boom, population increase overall in 2010 census
* Elgin population jumps 14.5 percent
* Downers Grove population drops, racial diversity increases
* Preliminary Census data shows demographic changes in New Trier
* Tinley Park grows by 17.2 percent
* Elmhurst grew 3.2% last decade
* Census confirms Wheaton’s fear: Population drops nearly 5%
* Arlington Heights population dips
* Barrington population grows
* Oak Park, River Forest population drops
* Census tally gives new status to Vernon Hills
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 9:59 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: State budget coverage roundup
Next Post: Two workers’ comp arbitrators put on paid leave
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Mayor Daley can now give speeches on how he was the second coming of Coleman Young , the late Detroit Mayor. The facts are stubborn. Chicago now has less people than when Mayor Daley took office in 1989. Few large cities can say that. New York has more people than 20 years ago. So, does L.A. , Houston, Dallas , San Antonio, and San Jose. If Chicago’s such a successful role model of urban advancement why did it lose population? Why? Here’s a future slogan for incoming Mayor Rahm Emanuel: he’ll do for Chicago what he did for Freddie Mac.
Comment by Steve Bartin Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 10:10 am
So will they now call it the Chicago, Aurora, Joliet statistical area?
Going to be an interesting redistricting in Aurora for the wards. With the growth on the edges of the city where fewer people grew up attending the same HS, churches, etc.
Comment by OneMan Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 10:18 am
–Chicago’s black population fell the most, nearly 17 percent. Today, blacks make up only 33 percent of the city’s population, down from 36 percent 10 years ago.–
The last 10 years saw the massive demolition of CHA high rises — Robert Taylor Homes, Henry Horner Homes, Cabrini-Green. Those folks moved somewhere and Chicago ain’t a cheap place to live.
–Other strong growth counties included DeKalb, where population grew 18 percent, Champaign, where population increased by 11.9 percent, and McLean, where the population grew 12.7 percent.–
I know in DeKalb County, at least, a lot of former student housing complexes around NIU converted to Section 8 Housing when they couldn’t compete with newer student apartment buildings.
Rather than students, those old student complexes now house a lot of families, many formerly CHA residents.
Does anyone know whether there’s been a similar experience around U of I and ISU?
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 10:22 am
Senator McCarter is still buying shares in the moving truck companies. Mr. Positive is “winning the future” for Illinois with his budget pep talks.
Comment by Highland, IL Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 10:22 am
Bloomington/Normal is a huge draw for “displaced” CHA folks. Also have seen an increase of close to 12% in Mclean County poplulation. Coincidence?
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 10:29 am
I haven’t noticed a major housing shift around the U of I
Comment by thechampaignlife Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 10:53 am
Looks like Kendall County will get the title of “Fastest growing county of the decade” in the US. Chances are, your neighbor was not there in 2000, and you probably weren’t, either.
Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 10:55 am
I managed the City of Chicago’s Census outreach in 2000 and have a few observations/questions.
I don’t think the drop is due to CHA’s plan for transformation. My sense is most of drop in population showed up in the last census.
I think one factor is the average African American household size became smaller. When you are talking about roughly 350,000 households, a small drop in family size can have a big impact. I suspect that the African-American population is aging, resulting in a smaller household size. I also suspect African-Americans with families are moving to the suburbs. (The decrease in household size is one reason “mature” suburbs decline in population.)
The recession hit hard in 2009 and 2010. I suspect a large number of people moved in with family and friends (doubling up). It is very difficult to accurately count people doubled up because people don’t think or don’t want to report people staying with them on a temporarily basis. This would increase the undercount. Likewise some may end up staying with friends and family in suburbs and other areas, which also would contribute to the decrease in population.
There was a small increase in the number of people reporting two or more races. I presume a large percentage of these people would have been counted as African American in past censuses.
I think the Latino population may have increased more than indicated during most of the decade, but declined by 2010 due to the recession. I think there were a large number of workers drawn here for the construction jobs and other entry level jobs. When these ended due to the recession, they moved elsewhere.
Conducting a complete count in an urban city is very difficult. In 2000, the City budgeted funds for outreach and had a number of very talented employees working on a complete count. My sense is in 2010 due to budget restrictions and tighter staffing, the City’s outreach efforts were more limited. This would logically result in a higher undercount. (However, it should be noted that the mail back return rate of forms was higher in 2010 than 2000.)
Comment by Don Davis Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 10:55 am
*Rather than students, those old student complexes now house a lot of families, many formerly CHA residents.*
*Bloomington/Normal is a huge draw for “displaced” CHA folks. Also have seen an increase of close to 12% in Mclean County poplulation. Coincidence?*
Let’s be careful with taking anecdotal evidence of families that have lived in CHA moving to other communities and extrapolating that into a mass influx of Chicago’s poor into far flung Illinois communities due to the demolition of CHA buildings. I have been in too many communities around the state where they try to claim this massive influx has occurred and point to it as the cause of all their problems. Such scapegoating is not good for anyone.
If folks have data that shows a true correlation between CHA buildings coming down and a statistically significant increase in more blacks in outlying communities, bring it forth. If not, lets hold back on drawing that connection.
Comment by Montrose Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 10:58 am
Actually the census said there was black migration from all the northern states to the south. If it was not for the the Hispanic growth Western illinois would have had devatationg losses of population
Macomb has an oversupply of hosuing on and off campus due to declining enrollment.
Say goodbye to a bunch of republican districts.
The Washington Post said Illinois was the biggest redistrcting prize.
My prediction 7 GOP seats go away
Comment by western illinois Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 11:47 am
There will be an interesting fight over the remap in the Chicago City Council.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 11:54 am
@Montrose:
Thank you. Until the block-level data has been crosstabbed and reviewed, most stabs at causality are purely speculative.
It’s equally plausible that middle class blacks are leaving the city for cheaper real estate and better schools in the suburbs.
But most likely a combination of economic factors.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 11:57 am
MOTOWN Madness hits Chicago! Visit inner city Detroit for visions of what Chicago will be like under the auspices of Pat Quinn and the Democrat majority party in Chicago.
Comment by Statesman Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 12:20 pm
the question that matters is who are the winners and losers and the follow up is what does this mean for various interests.
Comment by shore Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 1:49 pm
You can bet Chicago will challenge the #s, for financial aid as well as redistricting purposes - but I anticipate they will not recoup anywhere close to 200k bodies even if they are successful.
Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 2:19 pm
Redistricting will be fun to watch this year. I’m ordering a case of popcorn now.
Comment by Ghost of John Brown Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 2:20 pm
Some cities, like Peoria and DeKalb, seem to have come in for a rather rude awakening after having projected significantly larger population increases (and made significant financial committments, e.g. building new schools) based on recent “special” censuses of high-growth and newly annexed areas.
Apparently, most of that growth was NOT from new residents moving in, but merely a shift of existing population from the central city to newer subdivisions or neighborhoods. If I were a municipal official I’d be very leery of ever ordering another “special census”.
Comment by Secret Square Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 3:12 pm
The Detroit comparisons are inevitable from some, but as absurd as always.
Detroit geared up for the auto age — Mesabi ore to Chicago and NW Indiana steel to River Rouge — and WWII, and God Bless the good folks there for it.
I’m sure Detroit would not have lost population if we had left Western Europe and Japan a smoking wreck, let Kim Jong’s old man overrun South Korea, and not financed the internal improvements, insisted on the Civil Rights and demanded the domestic content requirements that allowed our backward Southern cousins to be integrated into a modern economy and get all those Japanese car factories.
Chicago metro is the fourth largest economy in the world. That skyline was privately financed, as were the the suburban areas that draw off the dynamism of the central city.
No one trick pony there.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 3:17 pm
Wow! This Illinois Census news is intriguing, a real eye-opener about population shifts, and particularly the significant jump in Hispanic/Latino growth into the suburbs and exurbs, let alone hoards of folks surely re-discovering the old come-and-visit Illinois jingle from several years back that “Just Outside ChiCAgo, There’s a Place Called IlliNOIS!” I personally think it’s great–why not “spread the wealth,” as the old saying goes–after all, so many of the Exurbs DO have that “out in the country/backwoods” feel to them, and yet they’re plenty close enough to the “Big City” if ya want to come on down for some reason–work and/or play. Ours is a big and beautiful State–why not venture out some and enjoy some of the new “Illinois Frontier” more than ever!
Comment by Just The Way It Is One Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 3:37 pm
Word,
Yours is a broken record, altho accurate. However, signs are still troubling, this census drop notwithstanding. Don Davis’ comments are worthy of note.
Chicago is the engine of the economy for much of the midwest. Illinois is blessed to have such an anchor. It is the reason I returned to Illinois - where else to find decent jobs and towns to raise a family. I think Chicago would do well to solve the education issue, as well. Imagine how attractive Chicago would become if the public schools could really shine.
Now, if we could just figure out how to resolve the state budget fiasco.
Comment by dupage dan Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 3:45 pm
I find most of the Census buzz rather a yawn except for its implications on redistricting. And, really, redistricting needs to be done by formula based on weighted inputs of desirable characteristics such as being coterminous with other political or geographic subdivisions (county lines, city limits, river, etc). And, finally, we should be using sortition for at least one chamber to limit gerrymandering.
Comment by thechampaignlife Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 4:09 pm
–Yours is a broken record, altho accurate. –
Well, as long as it’s accurate.
I’m not terribly troubled by the Chicago drop in population. Lord knows there were worse problems when the population was a lot higher.
The short history of Chicago, and Chicago Metro, since the old tavern was established at Wolf Point, has been nothing but feverish population growth.
There’s a settling and adjustment going on, influenced greatly by what’s going on elsewhere in the world. They’re hustlers, too.
But the idea that the population of the city goes down 200,000 is a sign that the metro is sick is just plain stupid.
There’s a lot of money being invested and made.
Despite what some would say, the eye tells you that loads of CHA high rises have been torn down, and many high-rise condo buildings have gone up in the South and West Loop.
Chicago ain’t Detroit. There’s a lot of private money flying around. But you have to hustle to be a part of it.
And it’s not like Pat Quinn or the Illinois GA even come up in the conversation when folks are putting their money on the line.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 4:13 pm
I saw that Downers Grove lost about 1.8% of their population and Arlington Heights lost about 1.2% of their population. This is a natural progression due to people aging in their homes. Mature suburbs that once housed young families now house a larger number of empty nesters and widows. So if you assume that Chicago experienced a similar decline of approximately 1.5% due to smaller household size, Chicago’s population would decrease by about 43,000 people. While this does not account for the drop of 200,000 it is a significant factor.
Comment by Don Davis Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 4:51 pm
I want to revisit the issue of the undercount. Ensuring a everyone gets counted is difficult and requires a lot of target marketing to very hard to reach groups. In 2000, the City spent over $1 million into outreach efforts and dedicated staff time from some really outstanding people. As a result we were able to significantly reduce the undercount. The exact number is hard to determine but I believe the undercount was reduced from 1990 to 2000 by about 45,000 people and likely more.
I don’t know of any data on the 2010 undercount. But it was a more difficult environment in 2010 due to the recession causing people to double up. Plus the outreach efforts did not have the same level of resources. So it is very possible that a significant portion of the drop Chicago’s population in 2010 was the result of an increase in the undercount.
I believe the Census conducts a Post Enumeration Survey which will provide an estimate of the 2010 undercount.
I’m not arguing that there was not a real drop in the City’s population. Just that there are reasonable explanations for a large part of the decrease and the drop definitely does not signal Chicago’s transformation into another Detroit.
Comment by Don Davis Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 5:37 pm
One other quick point is there are a number of reasons for the undercount. The vast majority has nothing to do with people avoiding being counted. For instance children under 5 have the highest undercount rate and there is not reason to avoid counting them.
The flip side is there is an overcount. Typically this is people with second homes and kids in college. Which as you might guess tend to be wealthier people.
I think the US needs to revisit the idea of using sampling in the Census. It will save vast amounts of tax dollars and result in a more accurate count.
Comment by Don Davis Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 5:41 pm
wordslinger:
What are going to say when the Detroit numbers show a smaller loss than Chicago? How great Chicago is?
Comment by ed mel Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 7:09 pm
Daley’s been working on moving out the welfare folks for like, ever. How did Carbrini-Green get torn down, in the face of all the ‘its for the yuppies’ opposition? How did Maywood, Bellwood, etc. get the way they are now? Hopefully, the people who moved got better schools for their kids. My guess, most of them did.
Comment by Park Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 7:39 pm
Mel, I just don’t understand the purpose of the constant effort to somehow dehumanize our fellow citizens.
I like the folks in Chicago. And in Illinois, all 102 counties. I like Detroit. I Michigan and the Midwest. I like the United States. They all have issues, but I get my back up when they’re constantly ripped in drive by ignorant comments.
What’s your problem and what’s your solution? I’ll work with you from there, brother.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 7:44 pm
Mr. Wordslinger:
There are a lot of solutions. Lower taxes, right to work laws, better public schools,and elimination of zoning laws. Chicago may very well file for Chapter 9.
Comment by Helen Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 7:47 pm
“The short history of Chicago, and Chicago Metro, since the old tavern was established at Wolf Point, has been nothing but feverish population growth.”
What is this - 1946? Chicago hasn’t had feverish population growth in 60 years.
Comment by Some Guy Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 8:00 pm
Helen, in your malignant dreams, the Chapter 9.
Some guy, what are you saying, Chicago has been in decline since 1946? Other than the fact that folks there make more and live better than they did back then?
Chicago metro is still an economic powerhouse, by any measure. It’s bizarre to me the idea that the area is some unique economic decline.
What’s really hurting are rural towns nationwide, and should be the focus of our concern.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 8:12 pm
I with wordslinger. Chicago is both a great city and metro area.
I don’t understand why so many people are rejoicing in Chicago’s declining population.
Comment by Don Davis Wednesday, Feb 16, 11 @ 8:59 pm
@Helen -
Right to work laws?
What, declining population isn’t enough, you’re going for declining wages?
Honestly, other than Chicago’s representation in the General Assembly and Congress, is a 7% drop in population such a terrible thing?
If you’re trying to flip your house or were a developer planning on building a bunch of condos, I suppose so.
But Sweden’s population growth rate has been less than 1% for the past 50 years.
What’s a little hard to fathom is how we can have a school overcrowding problem in Chicago if the population has dropped so much.
Please, someone explain.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Thursday, Feb 17, 11 @ 12:35 am