Search

Search Results

• 1. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Wheeler County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066

  Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Wheeler ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Wheeler County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Wheeler County’s total population has declined slowly since 2000, with average annual growth rates of just above negative one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, some of its sub-areas experienced some population growth during the 2000s. Fossil, the most populous UGB, experienced small growth and Spray posted the highest average annual growth rate at 0.1 and 1.1 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Wheeler County’s population decline in the 2000s was the direct result of an aging population. The aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This, along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages, has led to fewer births in recent years. The larger number of deaths relative to births caused a natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2015 (Figure 12). While net in-migration and natural decrease compounded to create a substantial population decrease during the early and middle years of the last decade, migration into the county increased in the later part of the decade and helped to offset the natural decrease. Net out-migration was still substantial for populations between the ages of 20 and 29 years from 2000 to 2010, but there has been net in-migration for a slightly older population from 30 to 39 years of age. In more recent years (2010 to 2015) net in-migration has increased, bringing with it some slight population growth. Total population in Wheeler County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely decline at a slightly slower pace in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The declining of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to a steady natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Wheeler County’s total population is forecast to decrease by more than 90 over the next 19 years (2016- 2035) and by more than 300 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066). All sub-areas are expected to experience similar rates of population decline during the forecast period. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Wheeler County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Wheeler County’s total population has declined slowly since 2000, with average annual growth rates of just above negative one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, some of its sub-areas experienced some population growth during the 2000s. Fossil, the most populous UGB, experienced small growth and Spray posted the highest average annual growth rate at 0.1 and 1.1 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Wheeler County’s population decline in the 2000s was the direct result of an aging population. The aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This, along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages, has led to fewer births in recent years. The larger number of deaths relative to births caused a natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2015 (Figure 12). While net in-migration and natural decrease compounded to create a substantial population decrease during the early and middle years of the last decade, migration into the county increased in the later part of the decade and helped to offset the natural decrease. Net out-migration was still substantial for populations between the ages of 20 and 29 years from 2000 to 2010, but there has been net in-migration for a slightly older population from 30 to 39 years of age. In more recent years (2010 to 2015) net in-migration has increased, bringing with it some slight population growth. Total population in Wheeler County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely decline at a slightly slower pace in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The declining of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to a steady natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Wheeler County’s total population is forecast to decrease by more than 90 over the next 19 years (2016- 2035) and by more than 300 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066). All sub-areas are expected to experience similar rates of population decline during the forecast period. Close

• 2. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Gilliam County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066

  Gilliam County’s total population declined during the 2000s, with average annual growth rate of negative two-tenths of one percent (Figure 1); however, since 2010 the county has seen a slight increase ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Gilliam County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Gilliam County’s total population declined during the 2000s, with average annual growth rate of negative two-tenths of one percent (Figure 1); however, since 2010 the county has seen a slight increase in population, growing by more than 100 persons between 2010 and 2015 (Figure 2). Gilliam County’s population decline in the 2000s was the result of a steady natural decrease and periods of net out-migration (Figure 12). The larger number of deaths relative to births has led to a natural decrease in nearly every year from 2000 to 2010. While net in-migration fluctuated during the early and middle years of the last decade, the number of in-migrants has been increased stably during recent years, contributing to population increase since 2009. Total population in Gilliam County as a whole is expected to increase over the forecast period, with the majority of this growth occurring within Arlington UGB (Figure 1). Increasing net in-migration is expected to offset the growth in the natural decrease throughout the entire 50-year forecast period. An aging population in the near-term is expected to not only lead to an increase in deaths, but a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years will likely result in a steady number of births. During the final 31 years of the forecast period, the population is expected to shift toward younger ages leading to more births and a steady number of deaths. This combined with steady net in-migration is expected to lead to continued steady population growth. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Gilliam County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Gilliam County’s total population declined during the 2000s, with average annual growth rate of negative two-tenths of one percent (Figure 1); however, since 2010 the county has seen a slight increase in population, growing by more than 100 persons between 2010 and 2015 (Figure 2). Gilliam County’s population decline in the 2000s was the result of a steady natural decrease and periods of net out-migration (Figure 12). The larger number of deaths relative to births has led to a natural decrease in nearly every year from 2000 to 2010. While net in-migration fluctuated during the early and middle years of the last decade, the number of in-migrants has been increased stably during recent years, contributing to population increase since 2009. Total population in Gilliam County as a whole is expected to increase over the forecast period, with the majority of this growth occurring within Arlington UGB (Figure 1). Increasing net in-migration is expected to offset the growth in the natural decrease throughout the entire 50-year forecast period. An aging population in the near-term is expected to not only lead to an increase in deaths, but a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years will likely result in a steady number of births. During the final 31 years of the forecast period, the population is expected to shift toward younger ages leading to more births and a steady number of deaths. This combined with steady net in-migration is expected to lead to continued steady population growth. Close

• 3. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Josephine County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065

  Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the county and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Josephine ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Josephine County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the county and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Josephine County’s total population as a whole has grown slowly since 2000; with an average annual growth rate of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Grants Pass and Cave Junction posted average annual growth rates at 2.1 and 1.6 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Josephine County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of substantial net inmigration. Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to slow growth in the number of births. The growing number of deaths and shrinking number of births led to natural decrease—more deaths than births—in every year from 2000 to 2014. While net in-migration outweighed natural decrease during the early and middle years of the last decade, the gap between these two numbers shrank during the later years— bringing population decline in 2012. Since 2012 net in-migration has increased, driving population increase for 2013 and 2014. Total population in Josephine County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the first 20 years of the forecast period (2015 to 2035) relative to the last 30 years (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to lead to natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs over time population growth is expected to become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Josephine County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 16,000 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by nearly 38,000 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2015-2065). Subareas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Josephine County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the county and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Josephine County’s total population as a whole has grown slowly since 2000; with an average annual growth rate of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Grants Pass and Cave Junction posted average annual growth rates at 2.1 and 1.6 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Josephine County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of substantial net inmigration. Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to slow growth in the number of births. The growing number of deaths and shrinking number of births led to natural decrease—more deaths than births—in every year from 2000 to 2014. While net in-migration outweighed natural decrease during the early and middle years of the last decade, the gap between these two numbers shrank during the later years— bringing population decline in 2012. Since 2012 net in-migration has increased, driving population increase for 2013 and 2014. Total population in Josephine County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the first 20 years of the forecast period (2015 to 2035) relative to the last 30 years (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to lead to natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs over time population growth is expected to become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Josephine County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 16,000 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by nearly 38,000 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2015-2065). Subareas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Close

• 4. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Coos County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065

  Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the county, and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Coos ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Coos County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the county, and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Coos County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000; with average annual growth rates of nearly zero between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however some of its sub-areas experienced more population growth during the 2000s. Lakeside and Bandon, for example, posted the highest average annual growth rates at 2.2 and 0.6 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Coos County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of sporadic net in-migration. Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to fewer births in recent years. The larger number of deaths relative to births caused natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2014. While periods of net in-migration outweighed natural decrease during the last decade, the gap between these two numbers shrank during the later years—bringing population decline from 2009 to 2013. Total population in Coos County as a whole, as well as within its sub-areas, will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the first 20 years of the forecast period, and more slowly in the last 30 years (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend already yielding natural decrease (births minus deaths). As natural decrease persists and becomes more pronounced over time, population growth in Coos County is expected to become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Coos County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 1,200 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by more than 2,500 over the entire 50 year forecast period. Sub-areas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s will likely experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Some sub-areas that experienced population loss in the 2000s are expected to show population gains throughout the forecast period, although these gains will likely be small. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Coos County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the county, and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Coos County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000; with average annual growth rates of nearly zero between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however some of its sub-areas experienced more population growth during the 2000s. Lakeside and Bandon, for example, posted the highest average annual growth rates at 2.2 and 0.6 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Coos County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of sporadic net in-migration. Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to fewer births in recent years. The larger number of deaths relative to births caused natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2014. While periods of net in-migration outweighed natural decrease during the last decade, the gap between these two numbers shrank during the later years—bringing population decline from 2009 to 2013. Total population in Coos County as a whole, as well as within its sub-areas, will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the first 20 years of the forecast period, and more slowly in the last 30 years (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend already yielding natural decrease (births minus deaths). As natural decrease persists and becomes more pronounced over time, population growth in Coos County is expected to become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Coos County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 1,200 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by more than 2,500 over the entire 50 year forecast period. Sub-areas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s will likely experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Some sub-areas that experienced population loss in the 2000s are expected to show population gains throughout the forecast period, although these gains will likely be small. Close

• 5. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Crook County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065

  Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the Prineville UGB and the area outside the UGB collectively influence population growth rates for the county ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Crook County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the Prineville UGB and the area outside the UGB collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Crook County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000; with average annual growth rates of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however the area outside the Prineville UGB experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Prineville, the only UGB, posted an average annual growth rate of 0.6 percent, while the area outside the UGB grew at an average annual rate of 1.2 percent during the 2000 to 2010 period. Crook County experienced substantial swings in net migration throughout the last decade (2000 to 2010), as a result the countywide population growth rate also fluctuated. At the same time an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to a decline in the number of births. The growing number of deaths and shrinking number of births led to natural decrease—more deaths than births—beginning in 2011. While net inmigration and natural increase contributed to substantial population growth from 2005 to 2008, both of these numbers shrank during more recent years—leading to population decline between 2009 and 2012. Total population in Crook County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the first 20 years of the forecast period (2015 to 2035) relative to the last 30 years (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an expected aging population—a demographic trend which will lead to declining natural increase (births minus deaths). As natural increase declines, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Crook County’s total population is expected to increase by more than 2,700 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by more than 4,500 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2015-2065). The Prineville UGB is forecast to show slightly stronger population growth—relative to the 2000s— in the initial 20-year forecast period, but is expected to slow down substantially during the last 30 years. The area outside the UGB will likely grow at a steadier rate than Prineville throughout the forecast period. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Crook County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the Prineville UGB and the area outside the UGB collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Crook County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000; with average annual growth rates of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however the area outside the Prineville UGB experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Prineville, the only UGB, posted an average annual growth rate of 0.6 percent, while the area outside the UGB grew at an average annual rate of 1.2 percent during the 2000 to 2010 period. Crook County experienced substantial swings in net migration throughout the last decade (2000 to 2010), as a result the countywide population growth rate also fluctuated. At the same time an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to a decline in the number of births. The growing number of deaths and shrinking number of births led to natural decrease—more deaths than births—beginning in 2011. While net inmigration and natural increase contributed to substantial population growth from 2005 to 2008, both of these numbers shrank during more recent years—leading to population decline between 2009 and 2012. Total population in Crook County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the first 20 years of the forecast period (2015 to 2035) relative to the last 30 years (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an expected aging population—a demographic trend which will lead to declining natural increase (births minus deaths). As natural increase declines, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Crook County’s total population is expected to increase by more than 2,700 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by more than 4,500 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2015-2065). The Prineville UGB is forecast to show slightly stronger population growth—relative to the 2000s— in the initial 20-year forecast period, but is expected to slow down substantially during the last 30 years. The area outside the UGB will likely grow at a steadier rate than Prineville throughout the forecast period. Close

• 6. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Curry County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065

  Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Curry ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Curry County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Curry County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000; with an average annual growth rate of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Gold Beach posted the highest average annual growth rate at one percent during the 2000 to 2010 period. Curry County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of sporadic net in-migration. Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to fewer births in recent years. The larger number of deaths relative to births caused natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2014. While periods of net in-migration outweighed natural decrease during the last decade, the gap between these two numbers shrank during the later years—bringing population decline from 2009 to 2012. Total population in Curry County as a whole will likely grow at a faster pace in the first 20 years of the forecast period (2015 to 2035), relative to the last 30 years (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to exacerbate natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. For the area outside UGBs this will likely lead to population decline during the last 30 years of the forecast period. The remaining sub-areas are expected to see population increase over this same time period. Even so, Curry County’s total population is forecast to increase by nearly 3,900 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by more than 4,700 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2015-2065). Sub-areas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Curry County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Curry County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000; with an average annual growth rate of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Gold Beach posted the highest average annual growth rate at one percent during the 2000 to 2010 period. Curry County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of sporadic net in-migration. Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to fewer births in recent years. The larger number of deaths relative to births caused natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2014. While periods of net in-migration outweighed natural decrease during the last decade, the gap between these two numbers shrank during the later years—bringing population decline from 2009 to 2012. Total population in Curry County as a whole will likely grow at a faster pace in the first 20 years of the forecast period (2015 to 2035), relative to the last 30 years (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to exacerbate natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. For the area outside UGBs this will likely lead to population decline during the last 30 years of the forecast period. The remaining sub-areas are expected to see population increase over this same time period. Even so, Curry County’s total population is forecast to increase by nearly 3,900 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by more than 4,700 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2015-2065). Sub-areas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Close

• 7. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Deschutes County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065

  Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the county and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Deschutes ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Deschutes County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the county and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Deschutes County’s total population has grown rapidly since 2000, with an average annual growth rate of more than three percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); in addition, most of its sub-areas experienced even more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Sisters and La Pine posted the highest average annual growth rates at 7.8 and 6.3 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Deschutes County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the direct result of substantial net inmigration and steady natural increase (i.e., more births than deaths). Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to slower growth in births. The more rapid growth in deaths relative to that of births caused natural increase—the difference between births and deaths—to shrink between 2007 and 2014. While net in-migration and steady natural increase contributed to population growth during the early and middle years of the last decade, it is clear that in more recent years (i.e., 2010 to 2014) net inmigration played the most prominent role in population growth. Total population in Deschutes County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas is forecast to grow at a slightly faster pace in the first 20 years of the forecast period (2015 to 2035), relative to the last 30 years (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to lead to natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Deschutes County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 78,000 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by more than 186,000 over the entire 50 year forecast period (2015-2065). Sub-areas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Deschutes County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the county and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Deschutes County’s total population has grown rapidly since 2000, with an average annual growth rate of more than three percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); in addition, most of its sub-areas experienced even more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Sisters and La Pine posted the highest average annual growth rates at 7.8 and 6.3 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Deschutes County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the direct result of substantial net inmigration and steady natural increase (i.e., more births than deaths). Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to slower growth in births. The more rapid growth in deaths relative to that of births caused natural increase—the difference between births and deaths—to shrink between 2007 and 2014. While net in-migration and steady natural increase contributed to population growth during the early and middle years of the last decade, it is clear that in more recent years (i.e., 2010 to 2014) net inmigration played the most prominent role in population growth. Total population in Deschutes County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas is forecast to grow at a slightly faster pace in the first 20 years of the forecast period (2015 to 2035), relative to the last 30 years (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to lead to natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Deschutes County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 78,000 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by more than 186,000 over the entire 50 year forecast period (2015-2065). Sub-areas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Close

• 8. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Douglas County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065

  Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Douglas ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Douglas County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Douglas County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with average annual growth rates of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Sutherlin, the second most populous UGB, and Canyonville posted the highest average annual growth rates at 1.7 and 3.0 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Douglas County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the direct result of substantial net inmigration. Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to fewer births in recent years. The larger number of deaths relative to births caused natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2014. While net in-migration outweighed declining natural increase during the early and middle years of the last decade, the gap between these two numbers shrank during the later years—bringing population growth nearly to a halt by 2010. In more recent years (2010 to 2014) net in-migration has increased, bringing with it population growth Total population in Douglas County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the near-term (2015 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration Even so, Douglas County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 20,000 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by more than 43,000 over the entire 50 year forecast period (2015-2065). Subareas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Douglas County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Douglas County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with average annual growth rates of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Sutherlin, the second most populous UGB, and Canyonville posted the highest average annual growth rates at 1.7 and 3.0 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Douglas County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the direct result of substantial net inmigration. Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to fewer births in recent years. The larger number of deaths relative to births caused natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2014. While net in-migration outweighed declining natural increase during the early and middle years of the last decade, the gap between these two numbers shrank during the later years—bringing population growth nearly to a halt by 2010. In more recent years (2010 to 2014) net in-migration has increased, bringing with it population growth Total population in Douglas County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the near-term (2015 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration Even so, Douglas County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 20,000 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by more than 43,000 over the entire 50 year forecast period (2015-2065). Subareas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Close

• 9. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Jackson County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065

  Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the county and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Jackson ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Jackson County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the county and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Jackson County’s total population has grown steadily since 2000, with an average annual growth rate of above one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Eagle Point and Central Point UGBs posted the highest average annual growth rates at 5.6 and 2.9 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Jackson County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of substantial net in-migration and natural increase. Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to slower growth in births. The more rapid growth in deaths relative to that of births caused natural increase—the difference between births and deaths—to decline to almost nothing by 2014. While net in-migration outweighed declining natural increase during the early and middle years of the last decade, the gap between these two numbers shrank during the later years—slowing population growth by 2010. Since 2010 net in-migration has driven rising population growth rates, while natural increase continues to shrink. Total population in Jackson County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the first 20 years of the forecast period (2015 to 2035), relative to the last 30 years (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to lead to natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Jackson County’s total population is forecast to increase by nearly 44,600 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by nearly 95,600 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2015-2065). Sub-areas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Jackson County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the county and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Jackson County’s total population has grown steadily since 2000, with an average annual growth rate of above one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Eagle Point and Central Point UGBs posted the highest average annual growth rates at 5.6 and 2.9 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Jackson County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of substantial net in-migration and natural increase. Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to slower growth in births. The more rapid growth in deaths relative to that of births caused natural increase—the difference between births and deaths—to decline to almost nothing by 2014. While net in-migration outweighed declining natural increase during the early and middle years of the last decade, the gap between these two numbers shrank during the later years—slowing population growth by 2010. Since 2010 net in-migration has driven rising population growth rates, while natural increase continues to shrink. Total population in Jackson County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the first 20 years of the forecast period (2015 to 2035), relative to the last 30 years (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to lead to natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Jackson County’s total population is forecast to increase by nearly 44,600 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by nearly 95,600 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2015-2065). Sub-areas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Close

• 10. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Lane County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065

  Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the county and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Lane ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Lane County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the county and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Lane County’s total population has grown steadily since 2000; with an average annual growth rate of just under one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Veneta and Creswell posted the highest average annual growth rates at 5.2 and 3.1 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Lane County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the direct result of substantial net inmigration and in the early years, natural increase. Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to slower growth in births. The more rapid growth in deaths relative to that of births caused natural increase—the difference between births and deaths—to shrink between 2007 and 2012. Since 2012, net in-migration has outpaced natural increase, driving rising population growth rates. Total population in Lane County as a whole as well as within many of its sub-areas is forecast to grow at a slightly faster pace in the first 20 years of the forecast period (2015 to 2035), relative to the last 30 years (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to lead to declining natural increase (births minus deaths). As natural increase declines and eventually becomes natural decrease, population growth is expected to become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Lane County’s total population is forecast to increase by nearly 67,300 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by nearly 152,400 over the entire 50 year forecast period (2015-2065). Sub-areas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Lane County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the county and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Lane County’s total population has grown steadily since 2000; with an average annual growth rate of just under one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Veneta and Creswell posted the highest average annual growth rates at 5.2 and 3.1 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Lane County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the direct result of substantial net inmigration and in the early years, natural increase. Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to slower growth in births. The more rapid growth in deaths relative to that of births caused natural increase—the difference between births and deaths—to shrink between 2007 and 2012. Since 2012, net in-migration has outpaced natural increase, driving rising population growth rates. Total population in Lane County as a whole as well as within many of its sub-areas is forecast to grow at a slightly faster pace in the first 20 years of the forecast period (2015 to 2035), relative to the last 30 years (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to lead to declining natural increase (births minus deaths). As natural increase declines and eventually becomes natural decrease, population growth is expected to become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Lane County’s total population is forecast to increase by nearly 67,300 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by nearly 152,400 over the entire 50 year forecast period (2015-2065). Sub-areas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Close

• 11. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Morrow County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066

  Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Morrow ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Morrow County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Morrow County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with average annual growth rates of less than half percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Boardman, the most populous UGB, and Irrigon posted the highest average annual growth rates at 1.0 and 0.5 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Morrow County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the direct result of a substantial natural increase (Figure 12). Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to fewer births in recent years. The larger number of births relative to deaths caused a natural increase in every year from 2000 to 2014. In more recent years (2010 to 2015) net in-migration has increased, bringing with it population more growth. Total population in Morrow County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by a larger base population—the denominator to calculate growth rates. As baby boomers age into the mid-term of the future, natural increase will reach its low point around 2045 and then rebound. Even so, Morrow County’s total population is forecast to increase by nearly 1,900 over the next 19 years (2016-2035) and by almost 4,900 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066). Sub-areas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Morrow County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Morrow County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with average annual growth rates of less than half percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Boardman, the most populous UGB, and Irrigon posted the highest average annual growth rates at 1.0 and 0.5 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Morrow County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the direct result of a substantial natural increase (Figure 12). Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to fewer births in recent years. The larger number of births relative to deaths caused a natural increase in every year from 2000 to 2014. In more recent years (2010 to 2015) net in-migration has increased, bringing with it population more growth. Total population in Morrow County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by a larger base population—the denominator to calculate growth rates. As baby boomers age into the mid-term of the future, natural increase will reach its low point around 2045 and then rebound. Even so, Morrow County’s total population is forecast to increase by nearly 1,900 over the next 19 years (2016-2035) and by almost 4,900 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066). Sub-areas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Close

• 12. [Article] College-Educated Flock to Central Oregon, Metropolitan Portland

  The number of college-educated Oregonians grew steadily during the past two decades — especially in Central Oregon — but there were significant regional disparities across the state, census data show. ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: College-Educated Flock to Central Oregon, Metropolitan Portland Author: Jurjevich, Jason R., Burnham, Michael Year: 2011 The number of college-educated Oregonians grew steadily during the past two decades — especially in Central Oregon — but there were significant regional disparities across the state, census data show. The proportion of Oregon residents age 25 and older with at least a bachelor’s degree grew from 20.6 percent in 1990 to 25.1 percent in 2000. The figure climbed to 28.3 percent during the 2005-2009 period, according to newly released American Community Survey (ACS) estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau. The margin of error for the five-year period was plus or minus 0.3 percent. Average educational attainment in the Portland metropolitan area, which includes Multnomah, Clackamas and Washington counties, was consistently higher than the state average during the past two decades. What’s more, the proportion of college-educated people in the three counties increased more precipitously than any other part of Oregon. Title: College-Educated Flock to Central Oregon, Metropolitan Portland Author: Jurjevich, Jason R., Burnham, Michael Year: 2011 The number of college-educated Oregonians grew steadily during the past two decades — especially in Central Oregon — but there were significant regional disparities across the state, census data show. The proportion of Oregon residents age 25 and older with at least a bachelor’s degree grew from 20.6 percent in 1990 to 25.1 percent in 2000. The figure climbed to 28.3 percent during the 2005-2009 period, according to newly released American Community Survey (ACS) estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau. The margin of error for the five-year period was plus or minus 0.3 percent. Average educational attainment in the Portland metropolitan area, which includes Multnomah, Clackamas and Washington counties, was consistently higher than the state average during the past two decades. What’s more, the proportion of college-educated people in the three counties increased more precipitously than any other part of Oregon. Close

• 13. [Article] Oregon's Health Insurance Coverage Holds Steady, but the State's Uninsured Rate Remains High

  Data released in August 2012 from the U.S. Census Bureau’s Small Area Health Insurance Estimates (SAHIE) program show that Oregon continues to have one of highest rates of uninsured residents in the U.S. ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Oregon's Health Insurance Coverage Holds Steady, but the State's Uninsured Rate Remains High Author: Jurjevich, Jason R., Byerly, Jack Year: 2012 Data released in August 2012 from the U.S. Census Bureau’s Small Area Health Insurance Estimates (SAHIE) program show that Oregon continues to have one of highest rates of uninsured residents in the U.S. According to Census estimates, 639,710 or 19.7 percent of Oregonians under age 65 were without health insurance coverage in 2010. For the under-65 population, Oregon’s uninsured rate ranks as the 15th highest rate in the country. Compared to 2009, the 2010 data show no statistically significant change in the overall uninsured rate for Oregon. Similarly, there were no statistically significant changes for Oregon between 2009 and 2010 by race/ethnicity or by income (Table 1). The highest rate of uninsured continue to be observed for Hispanic persons at 34.3 percent ( /- 1.3 percent) and for Oregonians earning 138% of the poverty level or less (34.7 percent [ /- 1.0 percent]). Title: Oregon's Health Insurance Coverage Holds Steady, but the State's Uninsured Rate Remains High Author: Jurjevich, Jason R., Byerly, Jack Year: 2012 Data released in August 2012 from the U.S. Census Bureau’s Small Area Health Insurance Estimates (SAHIE) program show that Oregon continues to have one of highest rates of uninsured residents in the U.S. According to Census estimates, 639,710 or 19.7 percent of Oregonians under age 65 were without health insurance coverage in 2010. For the under-65 population, Oregon’s uninsured rate ranks as the 15th highest rate in the country. Compared to 2009, the 2010 data show no statistically significant change in the overall uninsured rate for Oregon. Similarly, there were no statistically significant changes for Oregon between 2009 and 2010 by race/ethnicity or by income (Table 1). The highest rate of uninsured continue to be observed for Hispanic persons at 34.3 percent ( /- 1.3 percent) and for Oregonians earning 138% of the poverty level or less (34.7 percent [ /- 1.0 percent]). Close

• 14. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Jefferson County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065

  Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the county and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Jefferson ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Jefferson County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the county and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Jefferson County’s total population has grown steadily since 2000, with average annual growth rates of a little more than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Culver posted the highest average annual growth rate 5.4 percent during the 2000 to 2010 period. Jefferson County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of steady natural increase— the difference between births and deaths—and substantial net in-migration from 2006 to 2008. Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years and a consequent decline in births. The growing number of deaths and shrinking number of births led to declining natural increase. While net inmigration and steady natural increase contributed to population growth during the early and middle years of the last decade, both of these numbers shrank during more recent years—slowing population growth from 2010 to 2013. Total population in Jefferson County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the first 20 years of the forecast period (2015 to 2035) relative to the last 30 years (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to lead to declining natural increase (births minus deaths). As natural increase declines population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Jefferson County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 5,100 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by nearly 11,000 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2015-2065). The Madras UGB will likely show slightly stronger population growth—relative to the 2000s—in the initial 20 year forecast period, but population growth is expected to slow during the last 30 years. Population within the Culver UGB is expected to grow at a much slower rate—relative to the 2000s—in the initial 20-year forecast period. Population growth in Culver is also expected to taper throughout the last 30 years of the forecast period. The area outside UGBs is forecast to grow at a steadier, although lower rate than the UGBs throughout the forecast period. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Jefferson County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the county and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Jefferson County’s total population has grown steadily since 2000, with average annual growth rates of a little more than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Culver posted the highest average annual growth rate 5.4 percent during the 2000 to 2010 period. Jefferson County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of steady natural increase— the difference between births and deaths—and substantial net in-migration from 2006 to 2008. Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years and a consequent decline in births. The growing number of deaths and shrinking number of births led to declining natural increase. While net inmigration and steady natural increase contributed to population growth during the early and middle years of the last decade, both of these numbers shrank during more recent years—slowing population growth from 2010 to 2013. Total population in Jefferson County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the first 20 years of the forecast period (2015 to 2035) relative to the last 30 years (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to lead to declining natural increase (births minus deaths). As natural increase declines population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Jefferson County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 5,100 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by nearly 11,000 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2015-2065). The Madras UGB will likely show slightly stronger population growth—relative to the 2000s—in the initial 20 year forecast period, but population growth is expected to slow during the last 30 years. Population within the Culver UGB is expected to grow at a much slower rate—relative to the 2000s—in the initial 20-year forecast period. Population growth in Culver is also expected to taper throughout the last 30 years of the forecast period. The area outside UGBs is forecast to grow at a steadier, although lower rate than the UGBs throughout the forecast period. Close

• 15. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Klamath County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065

  Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the county, and the local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Klamath ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Klamath County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the county, and the local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Klamath County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000 with average annual growth rates of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Malin and the area outside UGBs posted the highest average annual growth rates at 2.4 and 0.7 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Klamath County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was due to the combination of net inmigration and natural increase (births minus deaths). At the same time an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years and a consequent decline in births. The growing number of deaths and shrinking number of births led natural increase—the difference between births and deaths—to decline from 2000 to 2014. While net in-migration and natural increase both contributed to population growth from 2000 to 2010, in recent years (i.e., 2011-2014) these two numbers shrank—slowing population growth. Total population in Klamath County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the first 20 years of the forecast period (2015 to 2035), and more slowly in the last 30 years (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to lead to declining natural increase. As natural increase declines and becomes natural decrease, population growth is expected to become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Klamath County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 5,100 over the next 20 years (2015-2035), but the county as whole is expected to see population decline over the last 30 years of the forecast period. With the exception of the area outside UGBs most sub-areas that saw population growth in the 2000s are forecast to have growth throughout the forecast period. Some sub-areas that experienced population loss in the 2000s are expected to show population increase throughout the forecast period, but these gains will likely be small. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Klamath County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the county, and the local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Klamath County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000 with average annual growth rates of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Malin and the area outside UGBs posted the highest average annual growth rates at 2.4 and 0.7 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Klamath County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was due to the combination of net inmigration and natural increase (births minus deaths). At the same time an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years and a consequent decline in births. The growing number of deaths and shrinking number of births led natural increase—the difference between births and deaths—to decline from 2000 to 2014. While net in-migration and natural increase both contributed to population growth from 2000 to 2010, in recent years (i.e., 2011-2014) these two numbers shrank—slowing population growth. Total population in Klamath County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the first 20 years of the forecast period (2015 to 2035), and more slowly in the last 30 years (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to lead to declining natural increase. As natural increase declines and becomes natural decrease, population growth is expected to become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Klamath County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 5,100 over the next 20 years (2015-2035), but the county as whole is expected to see population decline over the last 30 years of the forecast period. With the exception of the area outside UGBs most sub-areas that saw population growth in the 2000s are forecast to have growth throughout the forecast period. Some sub-areas that experienced population loss in the 2000s are expected to show population increase throughout the forecast period, but these gains will likely be small. Close

• 16. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Union County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066

  Union County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with an average annual growth rate of half percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). However, some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Union County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Union County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with an average annual growth rate of half percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). However, some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Summerville posted the highest average annual growth rate of 1.4 percent, and Imbler and Union were close behind with average annual growth rates of about 1.2 percent each. Union County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the combined result of a consistent natural increase and a net in-migration. The larger number of births relative to deaths has led to a natural increase (more births than deaths) in every year from 2000 to 2015 (Figure 12). While net in-migration fluctuated dramatically during the early years of the last decade, the number of in-migrants has been slightly more stable during recent years, accounting for the majority of Union County’s population increase. Total population in Union County as a whole as well as within some of its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the nearer-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the longer-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Steady increase in net in-migration is expected to offset the growing natural decrease, leading to relatively steady population growth over the forecast period. However, an aging population is expected to not only lead to an increase in deaths, but a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years will likely result in a long-term stabilization in the number of births. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Union County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Union County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with an average annual growth rate of half percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). However, some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Summerville posted the highest average annual growth rate of 1.4 percent, and Imbler and Union were close behind with average annual growth rates of about 1.2 percent each. Union County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the combined result of a consistent natural increase and a net in-migration. The larger number of births relative to deaths has led to a natural increase (more births than deaths) in every year from 2000 to 2015 (Figure 12). While net in-migration fluctuated dramatically during the early years of the last decade, the number of in-migrants has been slightly more stable during recent years, accounting for the majority of Union County’s population increase. Total population in Union County as a whole as well as within some of its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the nearer-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the longer-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Steady increase in net in-migration is expected to offset the growing natural decrease, leading to relatively steady population growth over the forecast period. However, an aging population is expected to not only lead to an increase in deaths, but a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years will likely result in a long-term stabilization in the number of births. Close

• 17. [Article] Is Portland Really the Place Where Young People Go To Retire? Migration Patterns of Portland’s Young and College-Educated, 1980-2010

  For many metro areas, including Portland, being economically competitive in today’s knowledge and information economy depends on attracting and retaining young, college-­‐educated (YCE) migrants. On this ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Is Portland Really the Place Where Young People Go To Retire? Migration Patterns of Portland’s Young and College-Educated, 1980-2010 Author: Jurjevich, Jason R., Schrock, Greg Year: 2012 For many metro areas, including Portland, being economically competitive in today’s knowledge and information economy depends on attracting and retaining young, college-­‐educated (YCE) migrants. On this indicator, Portland has been most successful: since 1980, the Portland metropolitan region has attracted college-­‐educated individuals under the age of 40 at some of the country’s highest net migration rates in good economic times and bad. Though not unique to Portland, the resiliency of Portland’s migration streams, even in periods of economic uncertainty, calls attention to an increasingly selective group of YCE migrants who appear to place greater relative value on non-­‐economic factors—from political milieu to access to quality public transportation—compared to employment opportunities. This trend directly challenges a long-­‐established cornerstone of traditional migration theory suggesting that the decision to move is predicated on benefits exceeding costs, and linked to the importance of jobs and economic opportunity as attractive forces for working-­‐age households. Reading between the lines of recent media accounts, and in particular the television show Portlandia, the shift from economic to non-­‐economic factors has been portrayed in a most interesting way: because young migrants to Portland place relatively low value on work and traditional careers, their desire to exchange employment opportunities for quality of life (amenity) factors indeed makes Portland the city “where young people go to retire.” The question is: in the short and long-­‐term, how sustainable is Portland’s trend of attracting and retaining YCE migrants if labor market outcomes continue to remain worse compared to other metro areas? What are the facts? In this paper we draw upon U.S. Census Bureau data from the 2000 Census and more recent American Community Surveys from 2005-­‐2007 and 2008-­‐2010, to compare migration patterns in Portland to the other 50 largest U.S. metros. Title: Is Portland Really the Place Where Young People Go To Retire? Migration Patterns of Portland’s Young and College-Educated, 1980-2010 Author: Jurjevich, Jason R., Schrock, Greg Year: 2012 For many metro areas, including Portland, being economically competitive in today’s knowledge and information economy depends on attracting and retaining young, college-­‐educated (YCE) migrants. On this indicator, Portland has been most successful: since 1980, the Portland metropolitan region has attracted college-­‐educated individuals under the age of 40 at some of the country’s highest net migration rates in good economic times and bad. Though not unique to Portland, the resiliency of Portland’s migration streams, even in periods of economic uncertainty, calls attention to an increasingly selective group of YCE migrants who appear to place greater relative value on non-­‐economic factors—from political milieu to access to quality public transportation—compared to employment opportunities. This trend directly challenges a long-­‐established cornerstone of traditional migration theory suggesting that the decision to move is predicated on benefits exceeding costs, and linked to the importance of jobs and economic opportunity as attractive forces for working-­‐age households. Reading between the lines of recent media accounts, and in particular the television show Portlandia, the shift from economic to non-­‐economic factors has been portrayed in a most interesting way: because young migrants to Portland place relatively low value on work and traditional careers, their desire to exchange employment opportunities for quality of life (amenity) factors indeed makes Portland the city “where young people go to retire.” The question is: in the short and long-­‐term, how sustainable is Portland’s trend of attracting and retaining YCE migrants if labor market outcomes continue to remain worse compared to other metro areas? What are the facts? In this paper we draw upon U.S. Census Bureau data from the 2000 Census and more recent American Community Surveys from 2005-­‐2007 and 2008-­‐2010, to compare migration patterns in Portland to the other 50 largest U.S. metros. Close

• 18. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Harney County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066

  Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Harney ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Harney County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Harney County’s total population has slowly declined since 2000, with an average annual rate of negative 0.2 percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). Burns is accountable for the county’s overall declining population. All other sub-areas experienced very slight population growths during the 2000 to 2010 period, increasing by a total of 32 persons. Harney County’s population decline in the 2000s was the direct result of frequent net out-migration. The county’s aging population has contributed to an increase in deaths, however, a larger number of births relative to deaths caused a natural increase for 8 out of the 15 years between 2000 and 2015 (Figure 12). Even so, net out-migration outweighed these slight natural increases, causing a slow decrease in the Harney County’s population since 2000. Total population in Harney County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas are forecast to all decrease at a slightly faster rate in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to a natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Harney County’s total population is forecast to decrease by more than 500 persons over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066), a loss in population mostly happening in areas outside the UGBs. Sub-areas are expected to generally follow historical patterns of population decrease over the forecast period. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Harney County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Harney County’s total population has slowly declined since 2000, with an average annual rate of negative 0.2 percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). Burns is accountable for the county’s overall declining population. All other sub-areas experienced very slight population growths during the 2000 to 2010 period, increasing by a total of 32 persons. Harney County’s population decline in the 2000s was the direct result of frequent net out-migration. The county’s aging population has contributed to an increase in deaths, however, a larger number of births relative to deaths caused a natural increase for 8 out of the 15 years between 2000 and 2015 (Figure 12). Even so, net out-migration outweighed these slight natural increases, causing a slow decrease in the Harney County’s population since 2000. Total population in Harney County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas are forecast to all decrease at a slightly faster rate in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to a natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Harney County’s total population is forecast to decrease by more than 500 persons over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066), a loss in population mostly happening in areas outside the UGBs. Sub-areas are expected to generally follow historical patterns of population decrease over the forecast period. Close

• 19. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Wasco County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066

  Wasco County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with average annual growth rates of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). The Dalles UGB and the area outside UGBs posted ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Wasco County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Wasco County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with average annual growth rates of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). The Dalles UGB and the area outside UGBs posted the highest average annual growth rates, both at about 0.6 percent during the 2000 to 2010 period. Wasco County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of a substantial net in-migration and periods of small natural increases and decreases (Figure 12). While net in-migration fluctuated dramatically during the early years of the last decade, the number of in-migrants has been more stable during second half of the decade and the recent years, contributing to a population increase. Total population in Wasco County as a whole as well as within some of its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to a natural decrease (more deaths than births)—as well as a decline in net in-migration toward the end of the forecast. Even so, Wasco County’s total population is forecast to increase by nearly 4,400 over the next 19 years (2016-2035) and by more than 10,500 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066). The Dalles, Mosier, and the area outside UGBs are expected to grow the most of all of Wasco County’s sub-areas. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Wasco County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Wasco County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with average annual growth rates of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). The Dalles UGB and the area outside UGBs posted the highest average annual growth rates, both at about 0.6 percent during the 2000 to 2010 period. Wasco County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of a substantial net in-migration and periods of small natural increases and decreases (Figure 12). While net in-migration fluctuated dramatically during the early years of the last decade, the number of in-migrants has been more stable during second half of the decade and the recent years, contributing to a population increase. Total population in Wasco County as a whole as well as within some of its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to a natural decrease (more deaths than births)—as well as a decline in net in-migration toward the end of the forecast. Even so, Wasco County’s total population is forecast to increase by nearly 4,400 over the next 19 years (2016-2035) and by more than 10,500 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066). The Dalles, Mosier, and the area outside UGBs are expected to grow the most of all of Wasco County’s sub-areas. Close

• 20. [Article] Is Portland Really the Place Where Young People Go To Retire? Analyzing Labor Market Outcomes for Portland’s Young and College-Educated

  Few segments of the population are more critical to Portland’s future economic vitality than the young and college‐educated (YCE). In the last several decades the Portland metropolitan region has become ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Is Portland Really the Place Where Young People Go To Retire? Analyzing Labor Market Outcomes for Portland’s Young and College-Educated Author: Jurjevich, Jason R., Schrock, Greg Year: 2012 Few segments of the population are more critical to Portland’s future economic vitality than the young and college‐educated (YCE). In the last several decades the Portland metropolitan region has become a magnet for YCEs nationally, boasting one of the country’s highest net migration rates for college‐educated individuals under the age of 40, a trend that has continued in good economic times and bad. The infusion of human capital from other regions has undoubtedly been a benefit to Portland, especially given Oregon’s historically low levels of investment in higher education. However, in recent years there has been growing concern about the poor labor market prospects for Portland’s YCEs, in particular the problem of underemployment. The television show Portlandia has amusingly captured this concern, dubbing the city "the place where young people go to retire." To the extent that Portland’s YCEs face a chronically difficult job market, there is cause for concern that college graduates will stop moving to Portland, or that those who have moved here won’t stay. Title: Is Portland Really the Place Where Young People Go To Retire? Analyzing Labor Market Outcomes for Portland’s Young and College-Educated Author: Jurjevich, Jason R., Schrock, Greg Year: 2012 Few segments of the population are more critical to Portland’s future economic vitality than the young and college‐educated (YCE). In the last several decades the Portland metropolitan region has become a magnet for YCEs nationally, boasting one of the country’s highest net migration rates for college‐educated individuals under the age of 40, a trend that has continued in good economic times and bad. The infusion of human capital from other regions has undoubtedly been a benefit to Portland, especially given Oregon’s historically low levels of investment in higher education. However, in recent years there has been growing concern about the poor labor market prospects for Portland’s YCEs, in particular the problem of underemployment. The television show Portlandia has amusingly captured this concern, dubbing the city "the place where young people go to retire." To the extent that Portland’s YCEs face a chronically difficult job market, there is cause for concern that college graduates will stop moving to Portland, or that those who have moved here won’t stay. Close

• 21. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Malheur County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066

  During the 2000s, Malheur County, as a whole, experienced population decline (Figure 1); however three of its sub-areas recorded a slight population increase. Adrian grew at an average annual rate of nearly ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Malheur County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 During the 2000s, Malheur County, as a whole, experienced population decline (Figure 1); however three of its sub-areas recorded a slight population increase. Adrian grew at an average annual rate of nearly two percent, while Ontario and the area outside UGBs saw more modest growth rates. Even so the population loss recorded by Vale, Nyssa, and Jordan Valley totaled nearly 600, leading the countywide population to decrease. Malheur County’s population decline in the 2000s was the combined result of a diminishing natural increase and periods of substantial net out-migration (Figure 12). The larger number of births relative to deaths has led to a natural increase (more births than deaths) in every year from 2000 to 2015. Net out-migration slowed toward the end of the last decade (2000-2010) combining with a relatively steady natural increase for moderate population increase in four out of the five years since 2010. Malheur County’s total population is forecast to grow by a little more than 400 persons (1.3 percent) from 2016 to 2066, which translates into a total countywide population of nearly 32,000 in 2066 (Figure 1). Population growth is forecast to be modest, becoming increasingly so as time progresses through the forecast period. Forecasting modest population growth is driven by both an aging population—contributing to a steady increase in deaths over the entire forecast period—as well as diminishing net out-migration. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Malheur County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 During the 2000s, Malheur County, as a whole, experienced population decline (Figure 1); however three of its sub-areas recorded a slight population increase. Adrian grew at an average annual rate of nearly two percent, while Ontario and the area outside UGBs saw more modest growth rates. Even so the population loss recorded by Vale, Nyssa, and Jordan Valley totaled nearly 600, leading the countywide population to decrease. Malheur County’s population decline in the 2000s was the combined result of a diminishing natural increase and periods of substantial net out-migration (Figure 12). The larger number of births relative to deaths has led to a natural increase (more births than deaths) in every year from 2000 to 2015. Net out-migration slowed toward the end of the last decade (2000-2010) combining with a relatively steady natural increase for moderate population increase in four out of the five years since 2010. Malheur County’s total population is forecast to grow by a little more than 400 persons (1.3 percent) from 2016 to 2066, which translates into a total countywide population of nearly 32,000 in 2066 (Figure 1). Population growth is forecast to be modest, becoming increasingly so as time progresses through the forecast period. Forecasting modest population growth is driven by both an aging population—contributing to a steady increase in deaths over the entire forecast period—as well as diminishing net out-migration. Close

• 22. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Grant County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066

  Grant County’s total population has declined since 2000, losing an average of about 50 persons per year between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). With the exception of minimal population increase among three small ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Grant County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Grant County’s total population has declined since 2000, losing an average of about 50 persons per year between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). With the exception of minimal population increase among three small UGBs, every sub-area recorded population loss during the 2000s. Prairie City and the area outside UGBs posted the largest losses, losing on average about 17 and 19 persons per year, respectively. Grant County’s population decline in the 2000s was the result of a consistent natural decrease as well as relatively steady net out-migration (Figure 12). The smaller number of births relative to deaths led to a natural decrease (more deaths than births) in nearly every year from 2000 to 2015. While net out-migration was common during the last decade (2000-2010), in recent years (2010-2015) net in-migration has occurred. Even so, natural decrease has persisted and generally exceeded net in-migration, leading to continued population decline. Grant County is expected to experience population decline over the 50-year forecast period. This population loss will likely occur at a relatively uniform rate among the county’s sub-areas, with losses occurring at an increasing rate as time progresses. For Grant County as a whole, increasing natural decrease and relatively steady net in-migration are expected to lead to population decline. An aging population is expected to not only lead to an increase in deaths, but a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years will likely result in a long-term decline in births. Net in-migration is expected to persist throughout the entire forecast period, but will not fully offset the natural decrease, leading to population decline. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Grant County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Grant County’s total population has declined since 2000, losing an average of about 50 persons per year between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). With the exception of minimal population increase among three small UGBs, every sub-area recorded population loss during the 2000s. Prairie City and the area outside UGBs posted the largest losses, losing on average about 17 and 19 persons per year, respectively. Grant County’s population decline in the 2000s was the result of a consistent natural decrease as well as relatively steady net out-migration (Figure 12). The smaller number of births relative to deaths led to a natural decrease (more deaths than births) in nearly every year from 2000 to 2015. While net out-migration was common during the last decade (2000-2010), in recent years (2010-2015) net in-migration has occurred. Even so, natural decrease has persisted and generally exceeded net in-migration, leading to continued population decline. Grant County is expected to experience population decline over the 50-year forecast period. This population loss will likely occur at a relatively uniform rate among the county’s sub-areas, with losses occurring at an increasing rate as time progresses. For Grant County as a whole, increasing natural decrease and relatively steady net in-migration are expected to lead to population decline. An aging population is expected to not only lead to an increase in deaths, but a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years will likely result in a long-term decline in births. Net in-migration is expected to persist throughout the entire forecast period, but will not fully offset the natural decrease, leading to population decline. Close

• 23. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Wallowa County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066

  Wallowa County’s total population has declined since 2000 at an average annual rate of about threetenths of one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, Enterprise and Joseph experienced population ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Wallowa County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Wallowa County’s total population has declined since 2000 at an average annual rate of about threetenths of one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, Enterprise and Joseph experienced population growth during the 2000s. In spite of population increases in the two most populous UGBs, the area outside UGBs declined by nearly one percent per year between 2000 and 2010, losing nearly 200 persons and effectively driving countywide population decline. Even so, Wallowa County’s population has slightly increased in recent years, growing by roughly 100 people between 2010 and 2015 (Figure 2). Wallowa County’s population decline in the 2000s was the result of a natural decrease and periods of net out-migration. The larger number of deaths relative to births has led to a natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2015 (Figure 12). While net migration fluctuated dramatically during the last decade, net in-migration has been consistent during recent years, contributing to a population increase. Total population in Wallowa County as a whole will likely increase in the near-term (2015 to 2035), driven by population growth in Enterprise, Joseph, and the area outside UGBs (Figure 1). However, in the remaining 31-year period, the county is forecast to see population decline. A rise in the magnitude of natural decrease and slow growth of net in-migration are expected to cause population growth to reach its peak in 2025, turning to population decline through the remainder of the forecast period. An aging population is expected to not only lead to an increase in deaths, but a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years will likely result in a long-term decline in births. Net migration is expected to remain relatively steady throughout the forecast period, but will not offset natural decrease after 2025. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Wallowa County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Wallowa County’s total population has declined since 2000 at an average annual rate of about threetenths of one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, Enterprise and Joseph experienced population growth during the 2000s. In spite of population increases in the two most populous UGBs, the area outside UGBs declined by nearly one percent per year between 2000 and 2010, losing nearly 200 persons and effectively driving countywide population decline. Even so, Wallowa County’s population has slightly increased in recent years, growing by roughly 100 people between 2010 and 2015 (Figure 2). Wallowa County’s population decline in the 2000s was the result of a natural decrease and periods of net out-migration. The larger number of deaths relative to births has led to a natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2015 (Figure 12). While net migration fluctuated dramatically during the last decade, net in-migration has been consistent during recent years, contributing to a population increase. Total population in Wallowa County as a whole will likely increase in the near-term (2015 to 2035), driven by population growth in Enterprise, Joseph, and the area outside UGBs (Figure 1). However, in the remaining 31-year period, the county is forecast to see population decline. A rise in the magnitude of natural decrease and slow growth of net in-migration are expected to cause population growth to reach its peak in 2025, turning to population decline through the remainder of the forecast period. An aging population is expected to not only lead to an increase in deaths, but a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years will likely result in a long-term decline in births. Net migration is expected to remain relatively steady throughout the forecast period, but will not offset natural decrease after 2025. Close

• 24. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Umatilla County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066

  Umatilla County’s total population has grown steadily since 2000, with average annual growth rates near one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Umatilla County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Umatilla County’s total population has grown steadily since 2000, with average annual growth rates near one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Hermiston, the most populous UGB, and Umatilla UGB posted the highest average annual growth rates at 2.1 and 2.8 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Umatilla County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of a steady natural increase and periods of substantial net in-migration. A larger number of births relative to deaths led to a natural increase (more births than deaths) in every year from 2000 to 2015 (Figure 12). While net in-migration fluctuated dramatically during the early and middle years of the last decade, the number of in-migrants has been slightly more stable during recent years, contributing to a population increase. Even so the natural increase continues to account for most of the population growth. Total population in Umatilla County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (2035-2066) (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to an increase in deaths. Even so, natural increase is expected to persist, combining with steady in-migration for continued strong population growth. Umatilla County’s total population is forecast to increase by nearly 13,300 over the next 19 years (2016- 2035) and by close to 36,800 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066). All sub-areas are expected to experience population growth during the forecast period. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Umatilla County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Umatilla County’s total population has grown steadily since 2000, with average annual growth rates near one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Hermiston, the most populous UGB, and Umatilla UGB posted the highest average annual growth rates at 2.1 and 2.8 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Umatilla County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of a steady natural increase and periods of substantial net in-migration. A larger number of births relative to deaths led to a natural increase (more births than deaths) in every year from 2000 to 2015 (Figure 12). While net in-migration fluctuated dramatically during the early and middle years of the last decade, the number of in-migrants has been slightly more stable during recent years, contributing to a population increase. Even so the natural increase continues to account for most of the population growth. Total population in Umatilla County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (2035-2066) (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to an increase in deaths. Even so, natural increase is expected to persist, combining with steady in-migration for continued strong population growth. Umatilla County’s total population is forecast to increase by nearly 13,300 over the next 19 years (2016- 2035) and by close to 36,800 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066). All sub-areas are expected to experience population growth during the forecast period. Close

• 25. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Sherman County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066

  Sherman County’s total population has declined since 2000, at an average annual rate of nearly one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, Wasco UGB, one of its sub-areas, experienced population ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Sherman County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Sherman County’s total population has declined since 2000, at an average annual rate of nearly one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, Wasco UGB, one of its sub-areas, experienced population growth during the 2000s. Wasco, the most populous UGB, posted an average annual growth rate of a little less than one percent during the 2000 to 2010 period. This translated into a population increase of about 30 persons. Sherman County’s population decline in the 2000s was the direct result of consistent net out-migration and periods of natural decreases (more deaths than births, Figure 12). The county’s aging population has contributed to an increase in deaths, which combined with a relatively steady number of births has resulted in a natural decrease for nine out of the 15 years between 2000 and 2015. While net out-migration and natural decrease were common during the last decade, in more recent years (2010 to 2015) net in-migration has occurred, bringing with it some population growth. Total population in Sherman County is forecast to increase in the near-term (2016 to 2035), a trend that is driven by growth in the two sub-areas of Rufus and Wasco (Figure 1); however population decline is expected for the county over the remaining 31 years of the forecast period. This population decrease is the result of a growing natural decrease, which is expected to exceed net in-migration around 2030. Sherman County’s total population is forecast to increase by about 50 persons over the next 19 years (2016-2035), but will likely see population decline of more than 80 persons during the last 31 years of the forecast period (2035-2066). Sub-areas are expected to generally follow their historical patterns of population increase or decrease over the forecast period. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Sherman County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Sherman County’s total population has declined since 2000, at an average annual rate of nearly one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, Wasco UGB, one of its sub-areas, experienced population growth during the 2000s. Wasco, the most populous UGB, posted an average annual growth rate of a little less than one percent during the 2000 to 2010 period. This translated into a population increase of about 30 persons. Sherman County’s population decline in the 2000s was the direct result of consistent net out-migration and periods of natural decreases (more deaths than births, Figure 12). The county’s aging population has contributed to an increase in deaths, which combined with a relatively steady number of births has resulted in a natural decrease for nine out of the 15 years between 2000 and 2015. While net out-migration and natural decrease were common during the last decade, in more recent years (2010 to 2015) net in-migration has occurred, bringing with it some population growth. Total population in Sherman County is forecast to increase in the near-term (2016 to 2035), a trend that is driven by growth in the two sub-areas of Rufus and Wasco (Figure 1); however population decline is expected for the county over the remaining 31 years of the forecast period. This population decrease is the result of a growing natural decrease, which is expected to exceed net in-migration around 2030. Sherman County’s total population is forecast to increase by about 50 persons over the next 19 years (2016-2035), but will likely see population decline of more than 80 persons during the last 31 years of the forecast period (2035-2066). Sub-areas are expected to generally follow their historical patterns of population increase or decrease over the forecast period. Close

• 26. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Lake County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066

  Lake County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with average annual growth rates of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). While the county, as a whole, experienced a population ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Lake County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Lake County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with average annual growth rates of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). While the county, as a whole, experienced a population increase, the two UGB areas both recorded population decline. At the same time the area outside UGBs posted substantial population growth during the 2000s, adding an average of nearly 90 new persons per year. Lake County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of periods of substantial net in-migration. The larger number of deaths relative to births has led to a natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2015 (Figure 12). While net in-migration fluctuated dramatically during the early and middle years of the last decade, the number of in-migrants has been slightly more stable during recent years, continuing to account for all of Lake County’s population increase. Total population in Lake County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to a natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Lake County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 600 over the next 19 years (2016-2035) and by more than 1,400 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066). Sub-areas that showed some population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience slower rates of population growth during the forecast period. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Lake County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Lake County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with average annual growth rates of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). While the county, as a whole, experienced a population increase, the two UGB areas both recorded population decline. At the same time the area outside UGBs posted substantial population growth during the 2000s, adding an average of nearly 90 new persons per year. Lake County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of periods of substantial net in-migration. The larger number of deaths relative to births has led to a natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2015 (Figure 12). While net in-migration fluctuated dramatically during the early and middle years of the last decade, the number of in-migrants has been slightly more stable during recent years, continuing to account for all of Lake County’s population increase. Total population in Lake County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to a natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Lake County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 600 over the next 19 years (2016-2035) and by more than 1,400 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066). Sub-areas that showed some population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience slower rates of population growth during the forecast period. Close