DC Population Declines 2.9% Between 2020/2021

[Manitopiaaa]

https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2021...6631640111443/

July 1, 2020: 690,093
July 1, 2021: 670,050

Home prices up 6.7% in the same time period.

[C.]

Originally Posted by Manitopiaaa

https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2021...6631640111443/

July 1, 2020: 690,093
July 1, 2021: 670,050

Home prices up 6.7% in the same time period.

Entirely pandemic related and the resulting WFH policies of the Federal government and non-profits.

[Crawford]

Yeah, putting aside the huge problems with the intercensal estimates, DC would almost certainly have some wealthy, govt. and professional people occupying other residences at the height of the pandemic, whether second homes or temporary pads.

[Steely Dan]

Census estimates......



The CB couldn't estimate its way through an open door.

[202_Cyclist]

I enjoyed my time in Washington but my wife and I are two of the people who left DC in 2020 (although I still have a DC drivers' license-- so I haven't officially moved). We moved in May 2020. We were living in a two bedroom apartment and had a 1 1/2 year old. We moved to Westchester and had a baby girl this past year. There would be no way we could telework in a two bedroom apartment with two kids under three years old.

There are quite a few people in our apartment building who moved away this past year.

I really like DC and hope to move back to the region at some point.

[DCReid]

Interesting on Census estimates - seems to be a WFH and Covid impact. Population of entire country barely grew (0.1%) and Mountain states were obviously winners but Census estimates that Delaware and South Dakota were also winners and Delaware grew faster than Florida and Texas.

[C.]

Originally Posted by 202_Cyclist

I enjoyed my time in Washington but my wife and I are two of the people who left DC in 2020 (although I still have a DC drivers' license-- so I haven't officially moved). We moved in May 2020. We were living in a two bedroom apartment and had a 1 1/2 year old. We moved to Westchester and had a baby girl this past year. There would be no way we could telework in a two bedroom apartment with two kids under three years old.

There are quite a few people in our apartment building who moved away this past year.

I really like DC and hope to move back to the region at some point.

I think the Census uses USPS mail address data to determine moves and not state identification changes. When you think of it, the change of address procedures for USPS is going to be more accurate anyway.

[summersm343]

I don’t think we can trust these yearly census “estimates.” Take them with a grain of salt. They’re only about as accurate as ballpark estimates. Moving forward, I’ll put very little trust in these “estimates” and really only believe the actual census counts every decade.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by C.

I think the Census uses USPS mail address data to determine moves and not state identification changes. When you think of it, the change of address procedures for USPS is going to be more accurate anyway.

When I do get around to moving to California, I am keeping my TX license and mailing address even though after six or so months, I would be a CA resident. Not sure what state I would be officially counted in.

[C.]

Originally Posted by summersm343

I don’t think we can trust these yearly census “estimates.” Take them with a grain of salt. They’re only about as accurate as ballpark estimates. Moving forward, I’ll put very little trust in these “estimates” and really only believe the actual census counts every decade.

But... the actual Census is always going to undercount the immigrate population in cities. In theory, estimates, using an appropriate methodology, would be able to compensate for these known undercounts and get better numbers. I have my theories why the Census estimates as of late have been severely underestimating cities and over inflating the sunbelt, but until we see better data backed up with what the locals know to be correct, looks like the decennial Census is the best data.

[C.]

Originally Posted by JManc

When I do get around to moving to California, I am keeping my TX license and mailing address even though after six or so months, I would be a CA resident. Not sure what state I would be officially counted in.

My guess is you will still be counted as a TX resident since they don't know you left.

[C.]

Again, DC likely loss population in 2021 as many organizations in DC, including the federal workforce, can work from home. There are probably a whole lot of young adults that moved back in with their parents since they were no longer physically required to report to an office in DC.

A 2.9% drop is expected and perfectly within reason due to these work from home policies in response to the pandemic. I'm not sure why anyone would be surprised with these numbers. It's temporary.

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by JManc

When I do get around to moving to California, I am keeping my TX license and mailing address even though after six or so months, I would be a CA resident. Not sure what state I would be officially counted in.

Just an FYI, once you do become a California resident, you have 10 days to get a California driver's license and 20 days to register your car.

https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/driver...to-california/

[craigs]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

Just an FYI, once you do become a California resident, you have 10 days to get a California driver's license and 20 days to register your car.

https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/driver...to-california/

Yeah, I got popped for driving around San Jose with out-of-state plates about two months after moving to CA. Not sure how the cop knew, but he did.

[UrbanRevival]

Originally Posted by C.

Again, DC likely loss population in 2021 as many organizations in DC, including the federal workforce, can work from home. There are probably a whole lot of young adults that moved back in with their parents since they were no longer physically required to report to an office in DC.

A 2.9% drop is expected and perfectly within reason due to these work from home policies in response to the pandemic. I'm not sure why anyone would be surprised with these numbers. It's temporary.

Not trying to be contrarian here, but needless to say we're nearly two years out from the onset of the pandemic. With each passing day, it becomes harder and harder to make the the case that widespread WFH policies will continue to result in a "temporary" impact. In fact, it's basically a farce at this point, what with many companies/organizations delaying their office re-introduction plans with even a hint of news of a potential uptick in cases.

I think the notion that an office environment is inherently more dangerous for spreading COVID at this point than essentially any other in-person activity that has resumed is pretty baseless. What's really driving WFH policies in December 2021 is convenience.

And in a town like DC with a multitude of federal agencies and legal/lobbying/research-related organizations that have proven that they can function primarily without a traditional office after nearly two years, it may come as a surprise just how little the remote-work shift is "temporary" once the pandemic is truly in the rear-view mirror.

That being said, I have no doubt that DC will recoup most or even all of its (estimated) population loss. But the paradigm of cities as centers of employment has clearly been called into question, and where the chips fall is still very much uncertain.

[EastSideHBG]

Originally Posted by UrbanRevival

Not trying to be contrarian here, but needless to say we're nearly two years out from the onset of the pandemic. With each passing day, it becomes harder and harder to make the the case that widespread WFH policies will continue to result in a "temporary" impact. In fact, it's basically a farce at this point, what with many companies/organizations delaying their office re-introduction plans with even a hint of news of a potential uptick in cases.

I think the notion that an office environment is inherently more dangerous for spreading COVID at this point than essentially any other in-person activity that has resumed is pretty baseless. What's really driving WFH policies in December 2021 is convenience.

And in a town like DC with a multitude of federal agencies and legal/lobbying/research-related organizations that have proven that they can function primarily without a traditional office after nearly two years, it may come as a surprise just how little the remote-work shift is "temporary" once the pandemic is truly in the rear-view mirror.

That being said, I have no doubt that DC will recoup most or even all of its (estimated) population loss. But the paradigm of cities as centers of employment has clearly been called into question, and where the chips fall is still very much uncertain.

Many keep hanging their hats on "it's temporary" but when you start to peel back the layers as to why people actually moved, outside of the ones that simply say, "Needed more space," much of it comes down to quality of life issues and there's a lot wrong in our cities right now. Address much of that and you will keep people/get people back.

[3rd&Brown]

Originally Posted by summersm343

I don’t think we can trust these yearly census “estimates.” Take them with a grain of salt. They’re only about as accurate as ballpark estimates. Moving forward, I’ll put very little trust in these “estimates” and really only believe the actual census counts every decade.

Exactly. These are the same estimates that undercounted every NE city by tens of thousands of people in the decade leading up to the physical census last year.

Grain.Of.Salt.

My eyes and other data (competitiveness of rental market, new construction, etc) say the same cities are still growing.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by UrbanRevival

Not trying to be contrarian here, but needless to say we're nearly two years out from the onset of the pandemic. With each passing day, it becomes harder and harder to make the the case that widespread WFH policies will continue to result in a "temporary" impact.

DC residents weren't in second homes or living with Mom/Dad because of WFH policies. They temporarily left because there was no point to being in DC with everything shut down and nothing to do.

And, once again, it's this false premise raised by people who don't understand the attraction of urban centers. WFH policies don't harm cities because urbanists want to be in cities; they generally aren't there due to work. Which is exactly why urban office RE has fared much better than suburban office RE.

And urban areas have outperformed suburban/rural areas in 2021, which makes sense, as they underperformed in 2020, so the demand is now evening out to equilibrium.

[iheartthed]

I would accept almost any other population estimate over the ACS at this point. It's not even worth arguing how policy may be affecting urban population trends if the discussion is based on an estimate with such a terrible track record.

Also a 3% drop in population for D.C. would be one of the largest single year drops that any major American city has ever seen in history. Another reason to call bullshit.

[The North One]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Census estimates......



The CB couldn't estimate its way through an open door.

They don't know how to count either.