^

I wonder what they are going to do when the actual count rolls around in 2010, and Hamilton County shows a drop?  Will there be a collective countywide challenge again?

 

This is starting to seem like another example of the politicization of science.  Usually this comes from the right, via creationism and the global warming controversy.  In this case, these periodic challenges to the Census statistical models from declining urban areas, it is coming from the "left". 

I think they are just trying to emphasize that the city is passed the point "Of Down And Out".    There is alot more happening within the past 3-5 years than happened during the entire 1990's.   Mallory is just doing his part to keep the positive momentum going.  He was on Bob and Tom yesterday morning and was talking the city up big time!  He used the phrase " This city is HOT right now".  I was quite impressed with his humor.  He had everyone LTArssesO.       Another great positive showing for the city!! :clap:

This is starting to seem like another example of the politicization of science.

 

If you were mayor and you believed that there were more people living within city limits than what the census is stating ... how would you handle it?

 

Would you let it go, or challenge the count?

I think they are just trying to emphasize that the city is passed the point "Of Down And Out".    There is alot more happening within the past 3-5 years than happened during the entire 1990's.   Mallory is just doing his part to keep the positive momentum going.  He was on Bob and Tom yesterday morning and was talking the city up big time!  He used the phrase " This city is HOT right now".  I was quite impressed with his humor.  He had everyone LTArssesO.       Another great positive showing for the city!! :clap:

 

Glad to see some Indy talk jocks could help Cincy out. :wink:

Marty B, was on this morning.  He was giving Christie pointers on her debut of throwing the first pitch out tonight at GAB.

you can listen to the archives, but only if you are a bob and tom member.

Mallory also plans to try to rally mayors in cities losing population across the country to challenge their estimates.

 

I really like how Mallory has been reaching outside of Cincinnati with this issue and others.  People of the great city-state of Cincinnati have often been criticized for staying within the city-state too much and not reaching out.  I think it is great leadership for Mallory to reach out and really stretch the point that he is trying to make.  That not only is Cincinnati's count off, but many communities suffer from the same loopholes in the Census methodology.

 

I am especially glad he is reaching out into the rest of the county!  For a long time it has been the city against EVERYONE...that includes inner-ring suburbs and the like.  Now that they are starting to feel the pinch a bit, he is reaching out to create a united front.  Now instead of it being the city v. everyone, it may now start being HamCo v. everyone.  I like the force of 800,000+ residents over 300,000+ residents any day.  Well done Mayor Mallory!

Rando, you raise an interesting point about the city and inner ring suburbs making common cause.  I've observed the same point in Louisville, where there is also a patchwork quilt of municipalities.  Just recently the city and county finally voted to merge.  My view is that the county residents finally woke up to the fact that they are soon to be "inner city" residents themselves as growth shifts to the collar counties.  Hamilton County troubles is actually good news in a sense for local cooperation.

 

I must say many doubted with Mallory's experience in state government would benefit in the rough and tumble world of local politics, but it seems to have given him the drive to break out of the localist mentality and claim a spot on the national stage for Cincinnati. Probably the first mayor to do so since Luken in the 80s or perhaps Springer in the late 70s.

An accurate count

 

About a year ago the U.S. Census Bureau reported Cincinnati had 308,728 people, down sharply from 331,285 in 2000. When city officials challenged that number, it was adjusted to 331,310.

 

Recently the Census did its annual update, which resulted in a third number, 332,252 people. The city is going to challenge that number too.

 

It's inspired for two reasons.

 

http://news.cincypost.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070707/NEWS02/707070306/1003/EDIT

Suburbs rallied to challenge census

BY JESSICA BROWN | CINCINNATI ENQUIRER

July 24, 2007

 

Leaders of all of Hamilton County's suburbs are invited to a dinner tonight to learn more about challenging the latest U.S. Census population figures.

 

The meeting was organized by Cincinnati Mayor Mark Mallory and Hamilton County Commission President Todd Portune. They believe the census estimates are inaccurate and take issue with the census methodology.

 

Cincinnati is filing a formal challenge to the 2006 numbers and Mallory and Portune are encouraging other Hamilton County communities to follow suit. If enough do, it would be the first time an area of the country has mounted a regional challenge, Mallory said.

'Burbs ready to challenge census

BY JESSICA BROWN | CINCINNATI ENQUIRER

July 24, 2007

 

BOND HILL – Cheviot is joining Cincinnati in challenging its 2006 census population estimates.

 

“They dropped our numbers almost 2,000 over the years,” said Mayor Samuel Keller. “We’ll be first in line.”

 

He’ll be joined on that bandwagon by Fairfax Mayor Ted Shannon, whose city lost 15 percent of its population according to the census, he said.

Maybe while all these people are getting together, they should be talking about how they can collaborate and work together more, as opposed how they can just jointly complain about the Census.

 

Perhaps Mallory sees this as an excuse to establish a better relationship with neighboring municipalities. I applaud his effort but if the census methodology is wrong, it's likely going to be EQUALLY wrong everywhere. What if it backfired on some cities, townships etc that actually have less people? Bye bye federal funds.

anyone challenging the census figures has to come up with their own data before submitting it to the feds.  in cincinnati's case, they came up with 331,310 last year and the feds accepted that as the correct number.  how did they get to that number, well a big plus was conversions which are undercounted by the feds, another is that the census assumes x percent of housing stock over y age goes offline each year. 

 

anyways, if addyston was challenging the census and they use their own methods and it turns out their population is actually lower that the estimate, they wouldn't officially challenge.

 

basically you request the challenge worksheet, then you fill it out and if your population is actually lower, you could turn it in but probably you wouldn't

Perhaps Mallory sees this as an excuse to establish a better relationship with neighboring municipalities. I applaud his effort but if the census methodology is wrong, it's likely going to be EQUALLY wrong everywhere. What if it backfired on some cities, townships etc that actually have less people? Bye bye federal funds.

 

Those places that would be in jeopardy of the bye bye funds scenario would most likely be southern cities and/or new growth cities.  Especially the ones that are experiencing rapid building booms.  The Census methodology favors places with new construction over those with rehabs/conversions and what not.

 

Also an important thing that hasn't really been hit on yet, is that the Census numbers also help determine congressional representation.  Ohio has been losing political clout over the past decade or so because of lost share of the overall population.  These numbers are EXTREMELY important, and when you seem to be having more and more people questioning the methodology (nationwide)...the idea of reexamining the current process should at least be entertained.

Maybe while all these people are getting together, they should be talking about how they can collaborate and work together more, as opposed how they can just jointly complain about the Census.

 

 

I think that is mostly right on. Mallory really does seem to be making a claim for the mayor of Cincinnati as a regional leader, but one who is among first among equals rather than lording over the small town and township crowd.

Minority groups on rise

Population shift picking up pace here

BY STEPHEN OHLEMACHER | THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

August 9, 2007

 

WASHINGTON - Whites are now in the minority in nearly one in 10 U.S. counties.

 

And that increased diversity, fueled by immigration and higher birth rates among blacks and Hispanics, is straining race relations and sparking a backlash against immigrants in many communities.

 

• View minority growth data

 

"There's some culture shock," said Mark Mather of the Population Reference Bureau, a Washington-based research agency. "But I think there is a momentum building, and it is going to continue."

I am not sure I agree with this guy's assumption that most of the growth of NKY is people moving across the river.  People on both sides seem to prefer to stay on one side or the other by and large.  I would love to ask him to show me some data to support his statement.

 

County population declines 3 percent

Post staff report

 

Hamilton County's total population dropped 3 percent in the past six years while its Hispanic community climbed 40 percent, according to U.S. Census Bureau statistics released today.

 

But Hispanics remain a miniscule fraction of the county's people - 1.3 percent.

 

The figures showed Hamilton County went from 845,303 people in 2000 to 822,596 in the 2006 estimate, while the Hispanic population increased from 7,555 to 10,510.

 

http://news.cincypost.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070809/NEWS01/708090359

I am not sure I agree with this guy's assumption that most of the growth of NKY is people moving across the river.  People on both sides seem to prefer to stay on one side or the other by and large.  I would love to ask him to show me some data to support his statement.

 

His is a popular sentiment, but you're right.  We won't really know until the more detailed census in 2010.  Then we can track from where people have moved to NKY.

 

I was really surprised by the low Hispanic numbers in Hamilton County.  That's one area where I do think it is difficult to get good estimates because of rapid changes and the desire of many illegal aliens not to be counted.

 

Contrast with Jefferson County, KY (Louisville) which had about 18,000 Hispanics.

Marion County, IN (Indianapolis) had about 56,000 Hispanics.

Milwaukee County, WI had over 103,000 Hispanics.

 

A good chunk of the population growth disparity between Indy and Chicago appears to be explainable by higher levels of Hispanic immigration.

 

Obviously both Indy and Milwaukee are bigger draws to Hispanics because of their proximity to Chicago.

 

What was the Hispanic population in Franklin and Cuyahoga counties?

 

I was really surprised by the low Hispanic numbers in Hamilton County.  That's one area where I do think it is difficult to get good estimates because of rapid changes and the desire of many illegal aliens not to be counted.

 

Contrast with Jefferson County, KY (Louisville) which had about 18,000 Hispanics.

Marion County, IN (Indianapolis) had about 56,000 Hispanics.

Milwaukee County, WI had over 103,000 Hispanics.

 

A good chunk of the population growth disparity between Indy and Chicago appears to be explainable by higher levels of Hispanic immigration.

 

Obviously both Indy and Milwaukee are bigger draws to Hispanics because of their proximity to Chicago.

 

What was the Hispanic population in Franklin and Cuyahoga counties?

 

 

As of the 2005 Estimates Cuyahoga had just under 50,000 hispanics.

 

Franklin had about 36,000.

 

Lorain County even had 22,000.

 

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/39/39049.html

 

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/39/39035.html

I'm just loving all of this!

 

On appeal, Wyoming gains residents

BY CLIFF RADEL | CINCINNATI ENQUIRER

November 16, 2007

 

WYOMING - ’Tis the season to appeal last year’s population estimates – and win – increasing Hamilton County’s population by nearly 20,000.

 

Wyoming is the latest community in the county to enter the winner’s circle, which Silverton occupied last week.

 

The U. S. Census Bureau informed Wyoming on Wednesday that its revised 2006 population estimate for the city increased by 797 residents to 8,372.

the entire county can thank mayor mallory for his leadership on census challenging, portune helped as well

anyone want to take an over under on cincinnati's revised population, my guess is 333,500

More make it merrier in Hamilton County

December 6, 2007 | CINCINNATI BUSINESS COURIER

 

CINCINNATI - Nine Hamilton County communities followed the city of Cincinnati's lead and challenged their 2006 Census estimates, boosting the county's population by more than 20,000.

 

Cincinnati Mayor Mark Mallory and Hamilton County Commission President Todd Portune announced the revised population estimates Thursday at a press conference in Silverton, one of the municipalities that mounted the challenge. The others were: Amberley Village, Blue Ash, Colerain Township, Delhi Township, Green Township, Springfield Township, Symmes Township and Wyoming.

Hamilton County Gains Population

BY JOHN HUTH | UPDATE

December 2007

 

CINCINNATI - The US Census Bureau publishes population estimates for every jurisdiction in the United States each year after the decennial census. These estimates are used in federal funding allocations, as survey controls, and in monitoring recent demographic changes. Existing data such as births, deaths, Federal tax returns, Medicare enroll-ment, and immigration are used to update the decennial census base counts. These estimates showed that Hamilton County was on pace to lose nearly 50,000 resi-dents between the years 2000 and 2005.

 

Governmental units, including states, counties and units of local government, may challenge the population estimates pre-pared by the Census Bureau under the provisions of Title 15, The Code of Fed-eral Regulations.

 

The City of Cincinnati successfully challenged its 2005 estimate of 308,728 (a loss of 22,557 people since Census 2000) to 331,310 (a gain of 25 people since Cen-sus 2000). The City’s growth was due to a large amount of conversions of older buildings from various uses to single-family or multi-family residential units.

 

    I must again caution you that the U.S. Census did NOT change the estimate for Hamilton County.

 

  Nine communities challenged the U.S. Census, and the Census accepted the numbers. Saying that the county gained 20,248 residents assumes that there was no change in the other communities.

 

  "Hamilton County gains population" did not come from the U.S. Census.

 

Nine communities challenged the U.S. Census, and the Census accepted the numbers. Saying that the county gained 20,248 residents assumes that there was no change in the other communities.

 

That is the glass half-empty perspective...it could also mean that the other communities gained population as well, or more accurate in Hamilton County community's cases - they didn't lose as much as estimated in previous counts.

 

"Hamilton County gains population" did not come from the U.S. Census.

 

Did someone suggest that this was a report/statement from the U.S. Census?  There is a link to the publication, the author's name/email and even phone number.

 

    All I'm saying is that the Hamilton County Planning Commision, Enquirer, etc., are using the headline "Hamilton County Gains Population," when, in fact, they cannot prove it. It is misleading at best.

 

    I don't know whether Hamilton County is losing or gaining. I am also disturbed that some think that the decennial census is low by about 30%, and thus the U.S. Census is losing credibility.

 

    Nevertheless, it is my feeling that Hamilton County is losing population, based on long term trends and on other evidence. For example, some school districts are experiencing declining enrollment. Population loss is generally considered a bad thing, and planners are under political pressure to show an increase. This they do by counting housing units, without mentioning that the number of people per house is declining.

 

    Please take the "Hamilton County gains population" headline with some caution.

 

   

Yes, but considering the years of "Hamilton County Shrinking" and "Residents fleeing Hamilton County" type headlines - I don't think it is unfair that local officials are looking to stem the PR nightmare that so many media entities have been quick to jump on.  While it is hard to prove whether or not HamCo and Cincinnati are losing or gaining population it seams to be alright to write articles/columns about them losing the population...while it is NOT okay to do the opposite?!?!

 

While it isn't yet appropriate to throw in the towel on the Census Bureau, I also don't think it is fair to blindly support their methodology which has been thrown into question on more than one occasion.

New Census county numbers are out. Hamilton County only lost 0.3% since 2000.

 

2006

822,596

 

2007

842,369

 

I'm sure the count was from the correction of the City of Cincinnati  when they challenged it last year.

 

Anyway the CSA is just short of 2.2 million at 2,176,749.

The MSA is at 2,133,678.

Growth mirrors recent trends

Hamilton Co. falls; the outskirts gain

BY JESSICA BROWN | [email protected]

 

Hamilton County lost nearly 5,000 people between 2006 and 2007 - the equivalent of the city of Silverton - according to census estimates released today.

 

While the populations of surrounding counties swelled, Hamilton County lost more population than any other county in Ohio, except Cuyahoga, dropping to 842,369 people. The drop of 4,999 was the largest single-year dip since 1998, when the county lost 6,059 people.

 

According to the estimates, Ohio's Butler, Warren and Clermont counties and Kentucky's Boone, Campbell and Kenton counties all gained population between 2006 and 2007.

 

"Hamilton County Commission President Todd Portune describes the impact this way: "An Ikea isn't going to locate in an area they believe is hemorrhaging population," he said, referring to the home furnishings superstore that opened last week in Butler County's booming West Chester Township."

 

I suggest you be a little more proactive in your thoughts Mr. Portune.   Perhaps you can do us all a favor and go be a part of something great in BUTLER Cty. then!!!!!!

 

 

We have had this discussion before.  The methods to obtain the data is a joke!!!

Wait, wasn't the census done in 2000? When the population of the county was 845,303? So they are saying Hamilton County actually gained residence up until last year to 847,368 and now dropped 5k in a single year?

Keep in mind that I'm trying to have an open mind as possible and yes -accept a decline if there is one, but I was a little confused by a couple of things:

 

First Besl states:

"It's a long-term trend of suburbanization that has been going on for a few decades" & "Mallory and everyone wants you to believe there's a big urban renaissance, and there may be, but it hasn't shown up in the numbers yet."

 

 

... as if the numbers were solid. A concrete conclusion.

 

 

Later he states:

"My general impression is that the exact numbers are open to question," & "The census estimates should be taken with a grain of salt, said Besl"  :? ... what are you really trying to say?

 

 

Example:

"Many communities have challenged census estimates and won. For example, the Census Bureau originally estimated Hamilton County's 2006 population at 822,596 but later revised it to 847,368 - an increase of nearly 25,000."  :?

 

 

Also, I'm not denying their method: The estimates are calculated using birth records, death records and tax returns, among other things. ... but what if I'm 15 years old? I didn't die, I wasn't just born, and I don't have a tax return and I can't figure out how the "other things" would be able to track my residence? I'm curious, does anyone know?

Lots of questions. What about stay home mom's that never file? What about Residences that use Florida as there home base but live here?

does anyone have the link to where these numbers came from?

http://www.azcentral.com/news/datacenter/counties.html

does anyone have the link to where these numbers came from?

 

http://dunes.cincinnati.com/data/census/county.aspx

Here is a link that shows the crazy ups and downs the county has done this decade.

 

http://news.cincinnati.com/assets/AB103597320.PDF

 

Something just doesn't seem right.

Wait for the decimal census, which, for all it's shortcomings, is far superior to these estimates that seem very nearly worthless.

 

This forum is going to lose it when the 2010 census comes out and it looks nothing like the revised estimates that showed Cincinnati leveling off or gaining slightly.

Wait for the decimal census, which, for all it's shortcomings, is far superior to these estimates that seem very nearly worthless.

 

This forum is going to lose it when the 2010 census comes out and it looks nothing like the revised estimates that showed Cincinnati leveling off or gaining slightly.

 

We will see...but I think the people who claim big losses have about as much evidence as those who claim that those losses don't exist.  I tend to think that we are not hemorrhaging population, but the fact of the matter is that we are still at a dismal growth rate that we should be looking to improve.

 

I just don't like the doom/gloom articles that get published at every waking opportunity.  As I've said before, life is black and white...with many shades of gray.

This forum is going to lose it when the 2010 census comes out and it looks nothing like the revised estimates that showed Cincinnati leveling off or gaining slightly.

 

What do you mean by this? In your opinion, do you think it's going to show the population declining or increasing?

I could be wrong... but I don't think that the Census uses revisions to estimates, or probably even annual estimates when conducting the decennial census. So that bump we got thanks to Mssrs Saggar and Mallory is not going to stand.

 

My hope is that we're at least in the 320s, which is down from 2000, but up from 2003 estimate, but down from 2006 estimate. Who knows?

Alot can happen between now and 2010.   The economic situation we are in now will probably still be the buzz by the 2010 Census, plus throw in an always present "Oil Factor".  (We could bee talking $5 oil by then.)

 

I personally think these numbers are already in motion of reversing themselves.  Just no group has nailed down how to gauge it effectively.

I could be wrong... but I don't think that the Census uses revisions to estimates, or probably even annual estimates when conducting the decennial census. So that bump we got thanks to Mssrs Saggar and Mallory is not going to stand.

 

My hope is that we're at least in the 320s, which is down from 2000, but up from 2003 estimate, but down from 2006 estimate. Who knows?

 

Don't worry, Mallory has a plan:

 

He's also in the process of putting together the census Complete Count Committee, which will work on getting residents to understand the importance of an accurate census and how they can help make the next one so. But the group will take a different approach - they'll be working on ways to account for all the more than 378,000 people the private study by Social Compact said live here, rather than just counting as many people as possible. (That number's a lot higher than the 332,000 estimated by the Census last year as living in Cincinnati)

 

 

He's planning to put on the committee people connected with difficult-to-count groups, like homeless people, college students and lower-income folks.

 

 

"This is our opportunity to get this number right," he said.

 

Alot can happen between now and 2010.   The economic situation we are in now will probably still be the buzz by the 2010 Census, plus throw in an always present "Oil Factor".  (We could bee talking $5 oil by then.)

 

I agree that these population trends will present themselves, but I don't think it will be anything substantial by the 2010 Census count.  This will be a much longer-term trend that will really start to show itself probably by 2020.

New Census county numbers are out. Hamilton County only lost 0.3% since 2000.

 

2006

822,596

 

 

 

 

2007

842,369

 

I'm sure the count was from the correction of the City of Cincinnati  when they challenged it last year.

 

Anyway the CSA is just short of 2.2 million at 2,176,749.

The MSA is at 2,133,678.

 

I am not completely sold on the revisions and think it would probably be wise to assume Hamilton County is closer to 817,000 than 842,000 until the census.  Interestingly the paper shows that Clermont and Butler increased by over 4,000 each, but I have seen other numbers that show them as increasing by 1,000 and 3,000 respectively - these were based on numbers that were components of the 2006 estimate.  Anyway, the 2006 estimate used 822,000 for Hamilton County as part of the 2,104,000 figure.  Therefore, I am going with 817,000 for Hamilton this year, but I am going to bump Clermont and Butler up by a total of 4,000 (for an increase of 8,000) to arrive at the scientific estimate of 2,113,000 for the MSA.  An increase for the metro of 9,000 is safe and probably conservative considering we have averaged 15,000 per year since 2000.

 

Has the official MSA been posted anywhere yet or is this only at the county level at this point?  It seems these numbers shift a little prior to the roll-up.

The key is to get all the college students from Hamilton Cty to go to UC and XU and MSJ and Cincy State for the spring semester of 2010 so they count in Hamilton Cty.

 

I haven't counted in Hamilton Cty since 1990 even though I've lived in Cincy for all but 5 years since then. (4 in Toledo and 1 in Virginia). I was living off campus at college when we were enumerated in 2000.