Tulsa Population Declining

[waterboy]

This just in. The U.S. Census Bureau today released the latest population figures (as of July 1, 2007) for incorporated cities. (Figures for metropolitan areas were released several months ago.) Here are the numbers for Oklahoma City, Tulsa, and Norman.
The first figure is the new 2007 number, the second is the population in the census of 2000, and the third is the percent gain (or loss)

Oklahoma City 547,274 506,129 +8.1%
Tulsa 384,037 392,851 -2.3%
Norman 106,707 96,819 +10.3%

Saw this on an OKC forum. Our metropolitan population actually grew about 5% but the city pop is declining. How does that square with planning for downtown growth? Does this just reflect declining near south populations as those boomers retire and move away? Is there any nearby town with growth like Norman's?

[TURobY]

From the Tulsa World:
BA continues to boom

For Tulsa, the 2007 estimate marks the second consecutive year the city has seen an increase in its population since it peaked at 393,049 in 2000 and then begin to decline. Tulsa's 2007 population was estimated to be 384,037.

[TheArtist]

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

This just in. The U.S. Census Bureau today released the latest population figures (as of July 1, 2007) for incorporated cities. (Figures for metropolitan areas were released several months ago.) Here are the numbers for Oklahoma City, Tulsa, and Norman.
The first figure is the new 2007 number, the second is the population in the census of 2000, and the third is the percent gain (or loss)

Oklahoma City 547,274 506,129 +8.1%
Tulsa 384,037 392,851 -2.3%
Norman 106,707 96,819 +10.3%

Saw this on an OKC forum. Our metropolitan population actually grew about 5% but the city pop is declining. How does that square with planning for downtown growth? Does this just reflect declining near south populations as those boomers retire and move away? Is there any nearby town with growth like Norman's?

Hey, I am telling ya..its because we dont have any locks or decent V-ball facilities. [8D]

We did increase, by .4%  Thats kind of low considering we have been supposedly doing quite well compared to the rest of the nation on many fronts. Guess that explains my "why arent we seeing the kind of midrise lofts and lifing options that every other place has" refrain. We just arent seeing any real population growth. Makes you wonder what percentage of that percentage is the coveted, Young Professional, creative class? This does not bode well for our cities future.

[BierGarten]

I don't find this to be alarming or surprising.  Until (1) people actually start living downtown, (2) developers actually develop large apartment and/or condo complexes within the city limits, (3) north Tulsa expands residentially or (4) west Tulsa expands residentially, why would anyone think that our city population would be growing?  Our city population isn't growing because none of those things are happening yet and the rest of the city limits is built up already.  People building homes in Bixby and Owasso isn't necessarily bad.  It's better than the alternative which would be Tulsa being stagnant in terms of population growth AND our suburbs being stagnant in terms of population growth.  I think all of (1) through (4) will happen in due time.

[RecycleMichael]

I am doing my part. I am a breeder and have two offspring.

[TURobY]

It would be interesting to see the demographic changes. I know a lot of my peers ran off to cities like Austin and Denver. Despite popular opinion, it was not because of "job opportunities" or "high-tech industry", but instead it was livability issues (the music scene, the "progressive city" aspect, etc.).

Most young professionals that I know and have met look for cities which appear like they would be fun places to live, and only then do they consider what jobs are available.

[kylieosu]

quote:Originally posted by TURobY

It would be interesting to see the demographic changes. I know a lot of my peers ran off to cities like Austin and Denver. Despite popular opinion, it was not because of "job opportunities" or "high-tech industry", but instead it was livability issues (the music scene, the "progressive city" aspect, etc.).

Most young professionals that I know and have met look for cities which appear like they would be fun places to live, and only then do they consider what jobs are available.

Agreed. Same with most of my friends from college.

[Breadburner]

I don't see any empty houses in Tulsa...

[waterboy]

What concerns me is that Norman's 10% growth was not at the expense of OKC. BA had a 2% growth and brags about it when it was at the expense of the city. Maybe there are demographics within those figures that would be heartening to us.

I think OKC can justifiably brag because it appears alot of their growth is in the coveted young professionals (my son is one of them). And maybe we are just reclaiming the loss suffered during the first few years of the decade. Looks like their "tax vampire" program of growth works better than ours does.

[TURobY]

There is one key thing though that several people keep hitting on, and that is the need for a 4-year, public Tulsa college. When I went to TU, several friends of mine were from out-of-state, and commented on how nice Tulsa was. They had never been to the city before, and a few of them even decided to stay after graduation.

While we have seemingly little power over public higher education, what we can do is present Tulsa to the college students we currently have. Tell them about the great job opportunnities here, sure. But you also have to present the exciting events, festivals, clubs, points of interest, etc. Those are the things that really get them to stay after graduation.

[SXSW]

quote:Originally posted by kylieosu

quote:Originally posted by TURobY

It would be interesting to see the demographic changes. I know a lot of my peers ran off to cities like Austin and Denver. Despite popular opinion, it was not because of "job opportunities" or "high-tech industry", but instead it was livability issues (the music scene, the "progressive city" aspect, etc.).

Most young professionals that I know and have met look for cities which appear like they would be fun places to live, and only then do they consider what jobs are available.

Agreed. Same with most of my friends from college.

+1.  But I also had several friends move to Tulsa who were from other cities like OKC and Dallas.  Most work in the energy industry or as architects, and all of them love living in Tulsa.  However it is hard to compete with "hot spots" like Austin, Denver, Portland, Atlanta, etc. for recent college grads, as any city similar to Tulsa can attest.  We have the scenery we just need a change in attitude.  How you do that I have no idea.

[cannon_fodder]

Some clarification is in order:

1) Our population peaked in the 2000 Census at 393,049.

2) No census has been taken since, the numbers are estimates.

3) From 2000 to 2005 our population declined, part of that time Tulsa and the MSA both.  But the overall trend tells a better story.

1980    360,919 (MSA 657,000)
1990    367,302 (MSA 708,954)

2000   393,049   N/A (MSA 803,235) (employment    395,800)
2001   391,892   -0.29%
2002   390,884   -0.26%
2003   387,560   -0.85%
2004   383,380   -1.08%
2005   382,457   -0.24%
2006    382,872 +0.01%
2007    384,037 +0.30% (MSA 905,755) (employment 428,600)


We took a hit in the early 2000's.  We all know that.  But our more recent trend is on the rise.  The area as a whole is doing MUCH better than anticipate (the 2000 Census Projection was to hit 850K by 2015).  429,000 area jobs is the highest we have ever had (last October) and we are approaching that number again.

The MSA is strong. Tulsa itself is doing OK.  We need to lour more people to "the city" and I think our current initiatives (parks, river, ball park, life downtown) as well as economics (ga$) will help us do that.  Don't forget that 1 or 2 bedroom lofts for young professionals do not add that much to the population - suburbs deemed "family friendly" will see 3 or 4 people for every 1 Tulsa sees attracting the younger crowd.  If that's what we manage to do.

Anyway, the data trends are interesting.  I am impressed that we stopped the slide.  It could have been the start of a death spiral.

Sources -
Employment:
http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?series_id=SMU4046140000000001&data_tool=%2522EaG%2522
Population:
Census.gov (several searches)

[SXSW]

quote:Originally posted by TURobY

There is one key thing though that several people keep hitting on, and that is the need for a 4-year, public Tulsa college. When I went to TU, several friends of mine were from out-of-state, and commented on how nice Tulsa was. They had never been to the city before, and a few of them even decided to stay after graduation.

While we have seemingly little power over public higher education, what we can do is present Tulsa to the college students we currently have. Tell them about the great job opportunnities here, sure. But you also have to present the exciting events, festivals, clubs, points of interest, etc. Those are the things that really get them to stay after graduation.

I've said it many times, OSU-Tulsa and OU-Tulsa are absolutely key to improving Tulsa.  Yes we have the river, the ballpark, light rail, the roads, public schools, and a collection of other major issues right now but I'd say higher education should be the priority.  Especially since OSU has a multi-billionaire just giving out money, some of which could really build up OSU-Tulsa into the comprehensive 4 year university it needs to be.  Even if it has to be a partnership with TCC to happen it needs to be done.  The same can be said for OU-Tulsa in midtown although that campus has been growing fast.  

TU is a great asset but is a relatively small private university.  I would love to see their enrollment increase and their campus continue to expand.  The public universities though, and their students, have the best potential to really change the city.  

Austin is no prettier than Tulsa but is considered a good place to live because of its liberal attitude and educated populace.  Why?  The University of Texas.  While OSU-Tulsa and OU-Tulsa will never be like UT they can at least be respectable institutions at least on par with universities like UCO and UNT, real universities with students living on-campus, tons of undergrad and grad programs, extensive facilities, etc.  TU has the potential to be like a Vanderbilt or Rice that could attract very bright students to Tulsa.  Are the leadership and financial resources in place to make that happen?

[YoungTulsan]

I know this potentially opens up a can of political worms, but I wonder how illegal immigrants factor into this equation?

For years there has been tons of new construction going on in Tulsa.  For there to be a population drop in the city, at the same time new homes are being built at a decent, maybe not feverish, pace - Where are all the empty dwellings?  There are always a few here and there, but there really don't seem to be a lot of homes just sitting unoccupied like you would think would be the case.  I'm just saying, in the neighborhoods, out on the streets, does it really LOOK like the population went down?  I'm leaning towards no.

I suppose another factor could be McMansions.  Are they actually DECREASING population density?  Say they demolish a 1500 sq. ft home that 5 people were living in, and erect a 4,000 sq. ft monster that 2 adults and 1 child proceed to occupy?

[TheArtist]

quote:Originally posted by SXSW

quote:Originally posted by TURobY

There is one key thing though that several people keep hitting on, and that is the need for a 4-year, public Tulsa college. When I went to TU, several friends of mine were from out-of-state, and commented on how nice Tulsa was. They had never been to the city before, and a few of them even decided to stay after graduation.

While we have seemingly little power over public higher education, what we can do is present Tulsa to the college students we currently have. Tell them about the great job opportunnities here, sure. But you also have to present the exciting events, festivals, clubs, points of interest, etc. Those are the things that really get them to stay after graduation.

I've said it many times, OSU-Tulsa and OU-Tulsa are absolutely key to improving Tulsa.  Yes we have the river, the ballpark, light rail, the roads, public schools, and a collection of other major issues right now but I'd say higher education should be the priority.  Especially since OSU has a multi-billionaire just giving out money, some of which could really build up OSU-Tulsa into the comprehensive 4 year university it needs to be.  Even if it has to be a partnership with TCC to happen it needs to be done.  The same can be said for OU-Tulsa in midtown although that campus has been growing fast.  

TU is a great asset but is a relatively small private university.  I would love to see their enrollment increase and their campus continue to expand.  The public universities though, and their students, have the best potential to really change the city.  

Austin is no prettier than Tulsa but is considered a good place to live because of its liberal attitude and educated populace.  Why?  The University of Texas.  While OSU-Tulsa and OU-Tulsa will never be like UT they can at least be respectable institutions at least on par with universities like UCO and UNT, real universities with students living on-campus, tons of undergrad and grad programs, extensive facilities, etc.  TU has the potential to be like a Vanderbilt or Rice that could attract very bright students to Tulsa.  Are the leadership and financial resources in place to make that happen?

I agree that OSU Tulsa could be a very important factor towards improving our city on several fronts. Was mentioning that on a different forum and people from Stillwater said that there were a billion plus dollars being spent on the campus there and that the rumor is they do not at all want to grow the Tulsa campus.