Search

Search Results

• 21. [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

• 22. [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

• 23. [Article] Canby School District: Enrollment Forecast Update 2012-13 to 2021-22

  The Population Research Center (PRC) has prepared district‐wide and individual school Enrollment Forecasts for the Canby School District (CSD) annually for the past six years. This study includes forecasts ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Canby School District: Enrollment Forecast Update 2012-13 to 2021-22 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Rynerson, Charles, Siu, Vivian, Rancik, Kevin Year: 2012 The Population Research Center (PRC) has prepared district‐wide and individual school Enrollment Forecasts for the Canby School District (CSD) annually for the past six years. This study includes forecasts of district‐wide enrollment for the 10 years from 2012‐13 to 2021‐22 and forecasts for individual schools for the five years from 2012‐13 to 2016‐17. The 10 year horizon of the district‐wide forecast enhances opportunities for school districts to coordinate long range planning with city and county comprehensive plans, which may extend for 20 or more years. Overall K‐12 enrollment is forecast to increase by 364 students (8 percent) in the next 10 years. K‐12 enrollment loss of three students (0.1 percent) is forecast for 2012‐13 and only moderate growth, averaging 0.8 percent, is forecast for the remaining nine years of the forecast. K‐6 enrollments begin to grow gradually after 2012‐13, but grades 7‐8 enrollments remain flat or decline until 2017‐18, begin to grow in between 2017‐18 and 2019‐20, and decline slightly in the last two years of the forecast horizon. High school enrollment changes very little throughout the 10 year forecast period. Title: Canby School District: Enrollment Forecast Update 2012-13 to 2021-22 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Rynerson, Charles, Siu, Vivian, Rancik, Kevin Year: 2012 The Population Research Center (PRC) has prepared district‐wide and individual school Enrollment Forecasts for the Canby School District (CSD) annually for the past six years. This study includes forecasts of district‐wide enrollment for the 10 years from 2012‐13 to 2021‐22 and forecasts for individual schools for the five years from 2012‐13 to 2016‐17. The 10 year horizon of the district‐wide forecast enhances opportunities for school districts to coordinate long range planning with city and county comprehensive plans, which may extend for 20 or more years. Overall K‐12 enrollment is forecast to increase by 364 students (8 percent) in the next 10 years. K‐12 enrollment loss of three students (0.1 percent) is forecast for 2012‐13 and only moderate growth, averaging 0.8 percent, is forecast for the remaining nine years of the forecast. K‐6 enrollments begin to grow gradually after 2012‐13, but grades 7‐8 enrollments remain flat or decline until 2017‐18, begin to grow in between 2017‐18 and 2019‐20, and decline slightly in the last two years of the forecast horizon. High school enrollment changes very little throughout the 10 year forecast period. Close

• 24. [Article] Oregon City School District Enrollment Forecasts, 2012-13 to 2021-22

  The main body of this report presents Oregon City School District (OCSD) district‐wide and individual school forecasts prepared by the Portland State University Population Research Center (PRC) for the ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Oregon City School District Enrollment Forecasts, 2012-13 to 2021-22 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Rynerson, Charles, Siu, Vivian, Rancik, Kevin Year: 2012 The main body of this report presents Oregon City School District (OCSD) district‐wide and individual school forecasts prepared by the Portland State University Population Research Center (PRC) for the 2012‐13 to 2021‐22 school years. The forecasts were prepared in March, 2012, before the school board’s April 16 vote to close Mt. Pleasant and King Elementary Schools and move 6th grade to middle schools. Therefore, the school forecasts represent the status quo as of March, including forecasts for the closed schools and for middle schools consisting of 7th and 8th grade only. A complete report was not issued with the March forecasts, because PRC’s intention was to redistribute the district‐wide forecasts based on the new school boundaries upon receipt of digital boundary files reflecting the changes, and then base the report on the updated school forecasts. The OCSD school board approved new boundaries on May 14, 2012, but digital files in the ArcGIS shapefile format used by PRC were not available from Clackamas County GIS until October, 2012. Because the reconfiguration was complete by that time and the new school year had begun, it made no sense to redistribute the March forecasts that did not incorporate the latest district‐wide enrollment figures. Instead, an upcoming study will included district‐wide and individual school forecasts using Fall 2012 enrollments. Preliminary district‐wide forecasts based on Fall 2012 enrollments are included in this report. Title: Oregon City School District Enrollment Forecasts, 2012-13 to 2021-22 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Rynerson, Charles, Siu, Vivian, Rancik, Kevin Year: 2012 The main body of this report presents Oregon City School District (OCSD) district‐wide and individual school forecasts prepared by the Portland State University Population Research Center (PRC) for the 2012‐13 to 2021‐22 school years. The forecasts were prepared in March, 2012, before the school board’s April 16 vote to close Mt. Pleasant and King Elementary Schools and move 6th grade to middle schools. Therefore, the school forecasts represent the status quo as of March, including forecasts for the closed schools and for middle schools consisting of 7th and 8th grade only. A complete report was not issued with the March forecasts, because PRC’s intention was to redistribute the district‐wide forecasts based on the new school boundaries upon receipt of digital boundary files reflecting the changes, and then base the report on the updated school forecasts. The OCSD school board approved new boundaries on May 14, 2012, but digital files in the ArcGIS shapefile format used by PRC were not available from Clackamas County GIS until October, 2012. Because the reconfiguration was complete by that time and the new school year had begun, it made no sense to redistribute the March forecasts that did not incorporate the latest district‐wide enrollment figures. Instead, an upcoming study will included district‐wide and individual school forecasts using Fall 2012 enrollments. Preliminary district‐wide forecasts based on Fall 2012 enrollments are included in this report. Close

• 25. [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

• 26. [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

• 27. [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

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

  Baker County’s population declined between 2000 and 2010, losing on average of just over 60 people per year (Figure 1); however in recent years this pattern has changed and population increase has occurred. ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Baker 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 Baker County’s population declined between 2000 and 2010, losing on average of just over 60 people per year (Figure 1); however in recent years this pattern has changed and population increase has occurred. Between 2010 and 2015 the county added on average about 20 persons per year (Figure 2). Baker County’s population decline in the 2000s was the result of natural decrease and periods of substantial net out-migration. The larger number of deaths relative to births has led to 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 (2010-2015), contributing to population increase. Total population in Baker County is forecast to increase in the near-term (2016 to 2035), a trend that is driven by growth in the three sub-areas of Baker City, Richland, and Sumpter (Figure 1); however population decline is expected for the county over the last 31 years of the forecast period. This population decrease is the result of growing natural decrease, which is expected to surpass net in-migration between 2030 and 2035. Overall the county is forecast to see nearly no net change in population over the entire 50-year period, beginning the forecast at around 16,400 in 2016 and ending at about 16,400 in 2066. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Baker 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 Baker County’s population declined between 2000 and 2010, losing on average of just over 60 people per year (Figure 1); however in recent years this pattern has changed and population increase has occurred. Between 2010 and 2015 the county added on average about 20 persons per year (Figure 2). Baker County’s population decline in the 2000s was the result of natural decrease and periods of substantial net out-migration. The larger number of deaths relative to births has led to 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 (2010-2015), contributing to population increase. Total population in Baker County is forecast to increase in the near-term (2016 to 2035), a trend that is driven by growth in the three sub-areas of Baker City, Richland, and Sumpter (Figure 1); however population decline is expected for the county over the last 31 years of the forecast period. This population decrease is the result of growing natural decrease, which is expected to surpass net in-migration between 2030 and 2035. Overall the county is forecast to see nearly no net change in population over the entire 50-year period, beginning the forecast at around 16,400 in 2016 and ending at about 16,400 in 2066. Close

• 29. [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

• 30. [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