Population

[RustTown]

Though, I'd definitely say to take these poorly contrived estimates with a grain of salt, at the same time I'd warn against being too optimistic, because unlike the 90's, our current economy situation much more closely mirrors the 80's when the state showed a 'growth' that was practically in the margin of error. I guess what I'm saying is that though the estimates may be off, they are probably much more closely aligned to reality, this time around, unlike in the 90's where for quite a few cities all across the country the estmates where much further removed from the reality of the economic situation.

[GRDadof3]

Though, I'd definitely say to take these poorly contrived estimates with a grain of salt, at the same time I'd warn against being too optimistic, because unlike the 90's, our current economy situation much more closely mirrors the 80's when the state showed a 'growth' that was practically in the margin of error. I guess what I'm saying is that though the estimates may be off, they are probably much more closely aligned to reality, this time around, unlike in the 90's where for quite a few cities all across the country the estmates where much further removed from the reality of the economic situation.

[Rhino6885]

I heard an interesting piece on NPR the other day after the numbers came out. There was a man from Social Compact discussing challenging the census data. His reasoning: many businesses look at census data when deciding on relocating/opening new location. For cities with declining population, this can have quite an impact. I believe he's representing Phili and Detroit, amongst others. I wonder if -500 people per year will have an impact on investment in GR...?...

[GRDadof3]

I heard an interesting piece on NPR the other day after the numbers came out. There was a man from Social Compact discussing challenging the census data. His reasoning: many businesses look at census data when deciding on relocating/opening new location. For cities with declining population, this can have quite an impact. I believe he's representing Phili and Detroit, amongst others. I wonder if -500 people per year will have an impact on investment in GR...?...

[Cabot]

Grdad you are correct.

In general site selectors that work for companies that are looking to relocate use metropolitan statistical area or combined statistical area. Both of these numbers are growing rather rapidly. Our CSA is growing at about 5.5% and is currently over 1.3 million.

[RustTown]

Whether it be 500 or 5,000, it is the psychological toll that are the most serious things about these fuzzy numbers. Even if a population is estimated to have simply stagnanted, many types of businesses will not even look at certain cities because of that. It has very little to do with hard science.

[Rizzo]

Anyone willing to predict the next census that will reunite the Metro? I can imagine splitting up the metro in groups of MSAs have made it a strain to think regionally.

[RustTown]

What exactly are you talking about? Every collective metropolitan area (CSA - Combined Statistical Area) is split into multiple MSA's. I doubt that has had much of an effect on anything. Grand Rapids metro is a multi-nodular metro. It is what it is.

[GRDadof3]

Anyone willing to predict the next census that will reunite the Metro? I can imagine splitting up the metro in groups of MSAs have made it a strain to think regionally.

[Rizzo]

You never know. It could change with the next change of congress in 2009 (?). It seems like different congresses have differing opinions on what constitutes a metro area, depending on if funding for a bill is tied to a population number.

In related news, the Non-Farm Payroll figure for the Grand Rapids-Wyoming area reached the highest point in May since Dec. 02 (when the job market took a precipitous fall), at 400,600. A preliminary number right now, so we shall see if the BLS holds at that number, but still encouraging.

http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutp...l=%2522EaG%2522

[RustTown]

I'd imagine that this isn't any different than almost every metro in this state, and beyond. I know that when I think Metro Grand Rapids, because its multi-nodular and sprawled (for its size), I almost always think about it as West Michigan, and it would seem that most mean West Michigan (at least outside of the region) when they think of Metro Grand Rapids. I mean, the same could be said for "Metro Detroit" which can simply mean the tri-county area, the MSA, or "Southeast Michigan". At the end of the day, your average resident takes the largest, broadest meaning. I'm just not sure why the Census needs to merge more counties into the official statistical area. It's based on commuting not whether you or I believe that more counties should be added or others taken away.

[superNOVA]

What I found odd about the break up of the old MSA was that the argument was made that we did not reach the intra-metro transportation criteria. Or the number of commuters flowing between regions of the metro. This argument was made between Ottawa and Kent County - we actually hit the mark between Kent and Muskegon County. Now, tell me, when the majority of people in Ottawa County live literally on the border of Kent County, how could they have missed the mark. Missing this number resulted in the total breakup of the MSA, even removing Muskegon even though the criteria in question was actually met.

I have a feeling that the GR MSA break up was political - a way to steer funding to the state and to boost Detroit a bit due to their sagging core numbers. Don't have a huge problem with this, but I cannot buy the argument that was made by the government.

[bwindi25]

I don't know now that I'm totally tracking this conversation, but...

I know there was a local constituency (The Right Place, WMSA) that went down to DC mid-year to "lobby" for our CSA to be the 7 county area with the Office of Management and Budget.

"Combined Statistical Areas are composed of adjacent Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas which have demonstrated economic or social linkage. It may comprise two or more Metropolitan areas, a Metropolitan and Micropolitan area, two or more Micropolitan areas, or multiples of each.

Combined Statistical Areas are automatically created when there is 25% or more of employment "interchange" (commuting). For areas between 15% and 25% interchange, the decision to create a Combined area was based upon local opinion as provided by the Congressional delegation.

The OMB has defined 126 Combined Statistical Areas as of January 1, 2007."

WMSA used the CSA in their regional indicator report called "Vital Signs" for that reason...

[GRGyp]

Anyone willing to predict the next census that will reunite the Metro? I can imagine splitting up the metro in groups of MSAs have made it a strain to think regionally.

[Rizzo]

I'm not sure, but I believe Muskegon is experiencing some healthy growth. I do remember hearing about some expansions in Muskegon.

What is most interesting is that some how Barry, Ionia and Newaygo Counties met that 25% threshold for inclusion in the Metropolitan area. The Grand Rapids-Wyoming MSA does not alone include the suburbs, but in addition the counties listed above.

A common misconception arises in Ottawa county for inclusion in the GR MSA. Some make the assertion that most of the counties population reside in the eastern part of this county. When in fact the Holland area constitutes 82,000 residents of the county population in its urban area. With Grand Rapids picking up 59,000 of Ottawa county's population in its urban area. This population difference tipped the scale into Holland's favor for making it its own separate metropolitan area.

A surprising note from the data is that Oceana county almost meets the threshold at 24% for inclusion in Muskegon's MSA. If a trend develops and Muskegon captures 25% of Ocean's commuters it is possible that Oceana could become an outlying GR Metro County.

Commuting percentages into Kent County:

Newaygo (26.7%)

Ionia (26.6%)

Barry (25.8%)

Ottawa (24.7%)

Montcalm (24.6 percent)

Allegan (16.4%)

Muskegon (N/A)

-- http://www.michigan.gov/documents/Hal_lm_c...003_67117_7.pdf

[Phizzy]

What I found odd about the break up of the old MSA was that the argument was made that we did not reach the intra-metro transportation criteria. Or the number of commuters flowing between regions of the metro. This argument was made between Ottawa and Kent County - we actually hit the mark between Kent and Muskegon County. Now, tell me, when the majority of people in Ottawa County live literally on the border of Kent County, how could they have missed the mark. Missing this number resulted in the total breakup of the MSA, even removing Muskegon even though the criteria in question was actually met.