Mayor Marvin's Column: Census Concerns

The Village just recently received our population data from the Census Bureau and we are quite dismayed with the results.

The Census Bureau divided the Village into two districts:  a Downtown and its neighboring streets and a Rest of Village category.  They recorded 2,784 residents living in the Downtown district vs. 2,815 in 2000, representing a loss of 31 residents or a 1.10% drop in population.

The Census Bureau’s data for the Rest of Village shows a 5% drop in population from 3,828 to 3,539 residents or 189 persons.  We at Village Hall just do not see this population drop confirmed by data we have at the local level.  What makes this data particularly suspect is that the Bureau recorded a loss of 83 housing units in the Downtown district and an incredible 40 houses “disappeared” in the residential Rest of Village zone.  Anyone with common sense can see that the Village does not have 40 vacant lots.  A quick call to our Building Department by a Census Bureau staffer could have easily confirmed that we actually issued only one demolition permit in the ten years in question and that lot is slated for rebuilding.

In addition to this blatant error, the Census also recorded the Village having 171 vacant homes/housing units – again a number not supported by local real estate and rental agents’ data.  I simply cannot fathom how data showing the “disappearance” of forty homes was verified without one call to Village Hall.

Some of our senior residents were very wary about filling out the Census forms that would reveal their income and the fact that they lived alone and so they chose not to respond.  With the recent spate of the well publicized leaks of secure computer data, I understand their trepidation.  My theory is that their homes were part of the “disappearance”.

This obvious mistake made in the housing unit total makes me question the accuracy of the entire Census for our Village, including our tabulated population of 6,323 residents.

It is of particular concern because the Census, which is mandated by Article 1 of the Constitution to be undertaken every 10 years, has far reaching effects.

The population data is used to determine the number of seats in Congress and Congressional districts are redrawn to reflect population shifts.

Over 400 billion dollars in funds are distributed based on the numbers tabulated, and the data is used to support community initiatives such as increased funding for expanding senior programs or evidence of overdevelopment and overcrowding.

74% of residents nationwide returned the Census by mail and the remaining residents were counted by Census workers walking door-to-door in neighborhoods.

However, I am still frankly perplexed by some of the methodology used to calculate what are to be accurate numbers of residents living in each community.

For example, if a housekeeper of foreign nationality is living in one’s home for a few months, they are counted as a resident vs. a college student at home on break or vacation can only be counted in his college town.  Foreign students attending a U.S. college are counted in their college town but if an American student is studying abroad at the time of the Census, he or she is not counted anywhere.

Unfortunately, our Village staff will now have to spend time and money to challenge these results because this impacts our share of Federal, State and County financial allocations for a decade.  For example, our “loss” of 220 residents will directly impact our share of this year’s County sales tax revenue. 

Our avenue of challenge is called Count Question Resolution.  The process opens on June 1, 2011 and extends until June 1, 2013.  During this challenge period, the Census Bureau will not fix their numbers by collecting any additional data or conducting additional surveys.

If a community wins a challenge, they will receive a revised count.  However, it is our understanding that the only way a population count can change is if the Census Bureau finds that they made an internal administrative error and can figure out that they somehow included people or units twice or did not include people or units they can find in their own records.  This limited challenge is very different from a challenge based on the Bureau acknowledging that they did not record some people or units at all.  So if bad data went in to the Bureau, it appears we have no recourse.

The County Planning Department has pledged to help us with data support to substantiate and prepare the Draconian levels of documentation.  Unfortunately, the Census results further confirm my belief that the most accurate, accountable government exists at the local level.