Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Prepared by the Community Service Council Supported by the Metropolitan Human Services Commission December 19, 2013.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Prepared by the Community Service Council Supported by the Metropolitan Human Services Commission December 19, 2013."— Presentation transcript:

1 Prepared by the Community Service Council Supported by the Metropolitan Human Services Commission December 19, 2013

2 “You cannot improve what you do not understand” Thinking in the Future Tense, Jennifer James, American Cultural Anthropologist 2

3 … and we all must better understand the power of population and large numbers as we plan for the future 3

4 Starting a Possibly Difficult Conversation About Tulsa’s Future, Its Challenges and Opportunities… Then Aggressively Developing Strategies for Creating Our Preferred Future Out of All Possible Futures 4

5 Summary  Profound change…The Tulsa area, like most cities, counties, and metro areas in America, is experiencing profound demographic, economic, and social changes whose influence will be significantly felt for decades to come.  Roots of change…These changes largely are rooted in:  aging of the population  shifts in fertility rates  growing income inequality  greater racial and ethnic diversity, especially among the young  high level of unbalanced population distribution, especially children  insufficient skilled workforce  demands of universal education/training success  technology’s effect on employment  ongoing challenge of enough livable wage jobs for low skilled workers 5

6 All of these factors are influencing the future of the U.S. as well as the rest of the world.  Historic influence…The impact of these factors and changes will reshape everything about the Tulsa area, our culture, economy, politics, sense of community, social order, and overall well-being.  Lack of awareness…Most area residents, including civic and political leaders, largely are unaware of these changes and so, have little or no recognition of the profound and long-term nature of their influence.  Lack of attention and understanding huge risk…This broad based lack of attention and understanding is possibly the most serious challenge to the future, as we cannot prepare for, or improve what we ignore and do not understand.  Reality check on predicament and opportunities…Effectively gauging and assuring the health of our future requires a heightened awareness and understanding of the realities and possible opportunities ahead, founded first of all in neither optimism nor pessimism, but realism.  Serious conversation on not business as usual… A serious conversation is urgently needed that charts the area’s future not only on our past and current successes, but also our key threats or challenges to new opportunities ahead. Workforce and prospective job opportunities should be a focal point of the conversation. 6

7 Tulsa (the area) is…  Not growing as City, and as County, and metro area only slightly (less than 1% a year)…Hispanic growth, especially among children, the major factor affecting most all aspects of population change.  Moving towards a majority minority (race and ethnicity) status...under age 18 first and then total population. Under 5 population already majority minority for City and County, and metro area almost there.  Experiencing dramatic uneven population distribution…north and west portions of county losing while east, south, and far northeast growing.  Rapidly aging …by 2030 at least 20% of county over age 65, compared to current 13%, slightly ahead of U.S.  Separating through population concentrations by age, income and ethnicity…  many south Tulsa census tracts have 25-35% of people over 60 years old and live in very expensive houses  tens of thousands of low income Hispanic and other minority children in east and near north 7

8 Tulsa (the area) is… (cont’d)  Relying on public education system that has difficulty describing its progress…As is the case in many states and communities throughout the country, Tulsa area school districts have difficulty meaningfully describing their levels of success in graduating students from high school. Some improvement on definitions and tracking system is occurring, but much work is still needed.  Facing dramatically different workforce…smaller, older and much more racially and ethnically diverse, as shrinkage includes more workers over age 70 within next twenty years and 25% of workforce between ages to be Hispanic while only 8% of Hispanics over 25 years of age have four years of college.  Not innovating its way to a stronger future…Examining comparable state data on patents development indicates Oklahoma, including Tulsa, is not a national innovation leader.  Growing in high unequal income distribution…Oklahoma ranks 16 th nationally in the ratio average household income for the richest 20% of households to the poorest 20% of households, Tulsa County and especially City of Tulsa have ratios higher than both the state and the nation.  Increasing in poor/low income families and households…just over half of children under 6, and 26% of persons over 65 live in low income households in Tulsa County (under 185% of poverty) and this older group projected to grow significantly in next years. 8

9 Tulsa (the area) is… (cont’d)  Facing continued growth in low income/low educated families…two thirds of births paid for by Medicaid; 21% of births to mothers with less than high school education and almost 60% to mothers with high school education or less.  Not linking important data together that will determine future population and workforce…census population and location, births, early reading and other education progress, high school and career tech graduates, first generation college/post secondary going student population, students not graduating high school, and post-secondary enrollment and completion.  Continuing to be affected by being Oklahoma… that is ranked nationally #2 in incarcerations, #2 in persons with mental illness, #13 in suicides, #15 in income inequality, and #3 in lowest dollars per pupil spent on elementary and secondary education, and more of the same.  Not alone in sharing these profound challenges…as many cities and counties face similar circumstances.  Not having a serious, deep and open conversation about its future…one that requires developing a meaningful, sustained response to the unrelenting and profound changes underway, and as time ebbs away. Primary sources of data include US Census, and Oklahoma Departments of Health, Education, Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services and Commerce. 9

10  Historically dynamic, innovative, and high quality of life  A community with enormous potential…  To be realized only through better understanding and engaging of change…  Willingness and ability to see and embrace new challenges and opportunities, and…  Greater wisdom, and humility for shaping and sustaining needed action. 10

11 The following information refers to the City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, or the MSA except when referring to data for the state of Oklahoma. 11

12  #1: City not growing, county only slightly, and the MSA just a bit better  #2: profound changes significantly shaping Tulsa area population and future  #3: population Spatial shifts and distinct concentrations powerful and growing  #4: Education and workforce dramatically impacted, by changes  #5: Poverty and low income, a huge and costly effect  #6: What ’ s ahead to 2030 ?  #7: Oh yes, and Don ’ t forget Tulsa is in Oklahoma that is ranked… 12

13  Between the City lost over 1,000 residents, County gained just over 40,000, almost all due to Hispanic population growth.  Increasingly uneven geographic distribution.  North and west continued long term trend of losing population.  Available housing, especially more rental, helping shape location of population.  Many vacant housing areas in parts of City and County.  Eastern areas rapidly growing due to Hispanic increases.  Young children concentrated primarily in few areas to the east ( east Tulsa and Broken Arrow ) and in Owasso. 13

14 Source: Oklahoma Department of Commerce, “2012 Demographic State of the State Report: Oklahoma State and County Population Projections through 2075;” US Census Bureau, 1990 Census of Population and Housing, “Population and Housing Unit Counts: United States;” US Census Bureau, 2000 and 2010 Censuses. 14

15 58.3% of Tulsa County ' s 175 census tracts lost population (102) between 2000 and 2010, while 65.9% of the City of Tulsa ' s 126 tracts declined in population (83) 15 Widespread loss…

16  25% (151,241) of the total population of Tulsa County plus the City of Tulsa part of Osage County live in 14% of the census tracts (24). 16 Imbalanced population… Sour Source: US Census Bureau, 2010 Census.

17  The Hispanic population has experienced dramatic growth in both the County and the City since 2000, with increases of 38,912 (+98%) in the MSA, 32,966 (+98%) in the County, and 27,155 (+97%) in the City  Tulsa MSA ’ s Hispanic population grew to 78,446 in Explosive growth to east and northeast… Sour Source: US Census Bureau, 2000 & 2010 Census.

18 Sour Source: US Census Bureau, 2000 & 2010 Censuses.  Tulsa lost 1,768 occupied housing units between 2000 and 2010, a loss of 1.1%, while Tulsa County and the MSA both gained - 14,845 and 29,876 units, respectively, for an increase of 6.5% and 8.9%, respectively. In the Tulsa MSA, there were 337,215 occupied housing units. In the Tulsa MSA, there were 367,091 occupied housing units.

19 19 Owner - occupied Renter - occupied Sour Source: US Census Bureau, 2000 & 2010 Censuses.  The owner - occupied housing units losses are concentrated within the city ( except far south and southeast ) and a few areas right outside the city. The gains in this category are found in southern and northeastern parts of county and far south and southeastern Tulsa.  Gains in renter - occupied units are found throughout the city and county, but primarily in far southern parts of the city and Owasso / Collinsville area.

20  The owner - occupied housing units loss affected all parts of the city.  Dramatic increases in renter - occupied housing units occurred in south and far west parts of the county and in Owasso / Collinsville area. Sour Source: US Census Bureau, 2000 & 2010 Censuses. Owner - occupied Renter - occupied

21  The greatest concentration areas of vacant housing fell within the City of Tulsa in both 2000 and  Number of vacant housing units increased by over 50% in both the city and the county between 2000 and In the MSA, vacant housing units grew 47% to a total of 42,729 in Source: US Census Bureau, 2000 & 2010 Censuses. Sour

22 22 Major concentrations of vacant parcels in north and west. New development largely in suburbs…  Vacant residential parcels shown in orange / clay.  Newly developed residential parcels shown in green.

23  Fertility rates…non - Hispanic whites and blacks are not replacing themselves as compared to Hispanics  Aging…population age 65 and over soaring, projected to be just over 16% of population by 2030 as compared to 9% in ( Tulsa County )  Little growth among young, except Hispanic… non - Hispanic under age 18 decreased almost 8,000 or about 6% between ; Hispanic increase 14,200 or 116% 23

24 Source: Oklahoma State Department of Health (OK2SHARE). Total fertility rate (TFR) is the average number of children that would be born to a hypothetical cohort of 1,000 females if they all went through their childbearing years experiencing the same age-specific birth rates for a specified time period. Hispanic: NH White: NH Black: NH Asian/PI: Total: NH Amer. Ind.:

25 25 Sour Source: US Census Bureau, 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000 & 2010 Census; Oklahoma Department of Commerce, 2012 Demographic State of the State Report: Oklahoma State and County Population Projection 2075.

26 26 Note: County-level projections made prior to 2010 census. Source: US Census Bureau, 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000 & 2010 Census; Oklahoma Department of Commerce, 2012 Demographic State of the State Report: Oklahoma State and County Population Projection 2075.

27 27  Hispanic youth now number 31,555 in the MSA, 26,394 in Tulsa County, and 21,652 in the City.  Hispanics are the most populous minority group among the under 18 population in both the city and the county. Largest youth minority group… Sour Source: US Census Bureau 2010 Census.

28 28  Hispanic youth under age 5 now number 10,812 in the MSA, 9,231 in Tulsa County and 7,874 in the City.  Among the very young, Hispanics are now the most populous minority group in both Tulsa County and Tulsa Largest very young minority group… Sour Source: US Census Bureau 2010 Census.

29  Child population among all races and ethnicities highly concentrated in east and northeast part of city and county.  Concentrations of aging persons growing in the south and east —  Census Tract 87: North of Southern Hills Country Club population = 3,028 35% of residents are age 60 and over and 25% age 65 and over only 41 children under age 5 (1%)  Census Tract 76.13: West of St. Francis Hospital population = 3,218 32% of residents are age 60 and over and 22% age 65 and over only 126 children under age 5 (4%) 29

30 30  Tulsa County ’ s total of 44,711 children under 5 represent 7.4% of total county population.  Tulsa ’ s 29,479 children under 5 represent 7.5% of the total city population.  Tulsa MSA ’ s 66,320 young children make up 7.1% of the population. Both highest and lowest shares within City… Source: US Census Bureau 2010 Census.

31 31  City of Tulsa is home to 29,479 children under 5, 33% of whom (10,369) live in these 21 tracts (16%). Concentration of youth… Source: US Census Bureau 2010 Census.

32 32  population = 3,028  25% of the population of census tract 87 are 65 and older ; 7% are 85 and older  This compares to 12% 65 and older and 2% 85 and older in Tulsa County  Only 9% are under 18  The old - age dependency ratio is 38.4, which means there are 38 persons age 65+ for every 100 persons of working age, or 2.6 workers per person age 65+, compared to ratio of 19.4 in Tulsa County (5 workers per person 65+) Concentration of the aged… Source: US Census Bureau American Community Survey.

33 33  population = 3,218  22% of the population of census tract are 65 and older ; 2% are 85 and older  This compares to 12% 65 and older and 2% 85 and older in Tulsa County  Only 18% are under 18  The old - age dependency ratio is 36.5 which means there are 37 persons age 65+ for every 100 persons of working age, or 2.7 workers per person age 65+, compared to ratio of 19.4 in Tulsa County (5 workers per person 65+) Concentration of the aged… Source: US Census Bureau American Community Survey.

34 34  Tulsa County is home to 72,856 persons age 65+, 16% of whom (11,586) live in these 16 tracts (9%) in which at least 20% of the population is age 65+  All but one of these high concentration census tracts lie within the City of Tulsa  Tulsa is home to 48,839 persons age 65+, 22% of whom (10,825) live in these 15 tracts ( 12%)  12% of both Tulsa ’ s and Tulsa County ’ s populations are age 65 and older  13% of the MSA ’ s population is 65 or older Source: US Census Bureau 2010 US Census. Concentration of the elderly…

35  Almost 30% of TPS students are Hispanic, and 25% of Union. Education workforce doesn ’ t match…not even close. Major cultural and language challenges, as well with other ethnic groups.  Similar racial / ethnic trends in other area school districts.  Slightly less than 9% of Hispanics over age 25 have a four - year degree : by 2030, 20-25% of workforce projected to be Hispanic.  Human development workforce projected to shrink due mainly to aging and retirements.  Nationally, 50% of teacher workforce projected to retire by  Overall workforce will be shrinking, especially among teens and young adults, but have more older workers and persons with some disabilities. 35

36 36 Source: Oklahoma State Department of Education.

37 Prepared by the Community Service Council with support from the Metropolitan Human Services Commission. Source: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey. 37 Note: Values shown are midpoint estimates within a 90% confidence range.

38  15% of County and MSA, and 19% of City population lives in poverty  35% of children under age 6 and 10% of persons age 65 and older in the City live in poverty  Growing poverty among the increasing elderly population  Children in low income households spreading in large numbers beyond the city  Poverty strong correlate to poor early reading 38

39 39  Number in poverty :  Tulsa County : 88,355  Tulsa : 74,217  Tulsa MSA : 131,759  Percent in poverty :  Tulsa County : 15.1%  Tulsa : 19.4%  Tulsa MSA : 14.4% Concentrated poverty… Source: US Census Bureau American Community Survey.

40 40 Source: US Census Bureau American Community Survey.  Number in poverty :  Tulsa County : 14,132  Tulsa : 12,121  Tulsa MSA : 19,911  Percent in poverty :  Tulsa County : 27.0%  Tulsa : 35.2%  Tulsa MSA : 25.6% Concentrated poverty among youth…

41 41 Source: US Census Bureau American Community Survey.  Number in poverty :  Tulsa County : 5,696  Tulsa : 4,574  Tulsa MSA : 9,553  Percent in poverty :  Tulsa County : 8.2%  Tulsa : 9.6%  Tulsa MSA : 8.3% Concentrated poverty among elderly…

42 42 Source: US Census Bureau American Community Survey.  Number in poverty :  Tulsa Co.: 189,803  Tulsa : 151,146  Tulsa MSA : 289,755  Percent in poverty :  Tulsa County : 32.4%  Tulsa : 39.6%  Tulsa MSA : 31.8% Concentrated low income areas…

43 43 Source: US Census Bureau American Community Survey.  Number in poverty :  Tulsa Co.: 26,237  Tulsa : 21,435  Tulsa MSA : 37,939  Percent in poverty :  Tulsa County : 50.1%  Tulsa : 62.3%  Tulsa MSA : 48.8% Concentrated low income areas among youth…

44 44  Number in poverty :  Tulsa Co.: 18,334  Tulsa : 13,651  Tulsa MSA : 32,322  Percent in poverty :  Tulsa County : 26.4%  Tulsa : 28.7%  Tulsa MSA : 28.2% Concentrated low income areas among elderly… Source: US Census Bureau American Community Survey.

45 45 Total TPS free lunch participation = 30,871 (76.8%) Total TPS reduced lunch participation = 3,961 (9.9%)

46 46 Total non - TPS free lunch participation = 27,303 (36.1%) Total non - TPS reduced lunch participation = 7,119 (9.4%)

47 47 Total non - TPS free lunch participation = 27,303 (36.1%) Total non - TPS reduced lunch participation = 7,119 (9.4%)

48 48

49  Fertility rates… not anticipated to change, possibly slightly lower among Hispanics.  Births to teens… down but cumulatively still a big number over time with almost 1,000 year in recent years ( prelim ) in Tulsa County.  Births to unmarried couples… close to 45%.  Maternal education levels… 60% of infants are born to mothers with high school education or less ; 23% with less than a high school education.  Multiple births… Many women of most all races and ethnicities with these low education levels have multiple births.  Continued growth of racial / ethnic minorities… Especially Asians and Hispanics. 49

50  Workforce increasingly complex and critical… Everyone that is going to be hired for a job has already been born today ; more Hispanic and elderly.  Educating and training for all… at least 70% of labor force need some post high school degree, certificate, or award of skill, a huge challenge.  Success unusually difficult… population of young people who will be primarily lower income, poor, and first generation high school grads and beyond.  Aged dependency ratio growing… in 2010 there were almost 2 persons age for every person age 65 and over, and by 2030 that number is projected to shrink to 1.4. In 1970 it was 3 to 1. 50

51 51 Source: US Census Bureau, 2000 Census, 2010 Census; Minnesota Population Center. National Historical Geographic Information System: Version 2.0. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Oklahoma Department of Commerce, 2012 Demographic State of the State Report: Oklahoma State and County Population Projections through Dependency ratio = population age <18 & 65+ / population age x 100 Old-age dependency ratio = population age 65+ / population age x 100 Child dependency ratio = population age <18 / population age x 100

52 Source: US Census Bureau, 2000 Census, 2010 Census; Minnesota Population Center. National Historical Geographic Information System: Version 2.0. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Oklahoma Department of Commerce, 2012 Demographic State of the State Report: Oklahoma State and County Population Projections through

53  #2 in incarceration rates  #2 in persons with mental illness  #48 in per capita spending on mental health  #13 in suicides  #15 in income inequality  #48 in persons with 4 year college degree  #48 in per pupil expenditures on elementary and secondary education  #45 in persons (22%) who are uninsured and tied for #16 for persons under 19 (17%) 53

54 54

55  “The global fall in fertility, even if it does not continue to deepen and spread, is creating a world for which few individuals, and nations, are prepared. Simply stated, this is because population growth and the human capital it creates are part of the foundation upon which modern economies, as well as the modern welfare state, are built.” The Empty Cradle, Phillip Longman 55

56  “…once a city attracts some innovative workers and innovative companies, its economy changes in ways that make it even more attractive to other innovators. … this is what is causing the Great Divergence among American communities, as some cities experience an increased concentration of good jobs, talent, and investment and others are in free fall. It is a trend that is reshaping not just our economy but our entire society in profound ways. It implies that a growing part of inequality in America reflects not just a class divide but a geographical divide. “ New Geography of Jobs, Enrico Moretti 56

57  “As 78 million of us retire, there won’t be enough qualified workers behind us to fill the jobs and grow the economy that’s necessary to support all us new dependents…Communities and companies will fight each other for jobs and qualified workers. Some communities will win and prosper. Others will fail and will be a mess…”  “Managing our communities is a whole new game now… Most of us have no idea what’s in store. I want this book to change the way you think. If enough people understand the gravity of the situation, community dialogue will change. Only then will priorities change and solutions come.” When Boomers Bail, Mark Lautman 57

58 58

59  “Above all, we need to decide which America we want as our future – the America of ever- increasing educational levels, rising productivity, and pragmatic optimism, or the America of deteriorating skills, shrinking horizons, and paralyzing pessimism. We are at one of those major historical crossroads that determine the fate of nations for decades to come.” New Geography of Jobs, Moretti, p

60  “Population aging and decline need not lead to global depression, environmental strain, or war, but they may well. Nations that do not adapt to the new demographic realities of the twenty- first century – primarily by fostering more rewards to parents and other caregivers, investing heavily in the education of the next generation, and pursuing strategies to allow for more productive aging – stand in danger of being consumed by debt, of losing their ability to innovate, and ultimately of losing their identity.” The Empty Cradle, Longman, p

61  “Catastrophic full employment isn’t going to happen in every community, but it has the potential to constrain our national economy enough to make us poorer, weaker, more divided and meaner… But if the Boomers continue to bail, and the schools continue to fail, the majority of U.S. communities will be unable to keep their economies balanced with the service demands of their populations. For these losers, it will feel liked perpetual recession. My economic development colleagues and I have three choices: deny, despair, or innovate. For those who choose to innovate our way out, this will be the most exciting time… There are no silver-bullet solutions. But there are things we can do. Some of them are right in front of us, and we should be doing them anyway. “Believe!” When Boomers Bail, Lautman, p

62 62  Visionary  Apprehensive, but unafraid  Innovative  Well-educated  Connected  Predictive  Leaders-knowledge economy  Create value at a high rate

63  Find knowledge  Create knowledge  Package knowledge  Distribute knowledge  Apply knowledge 63

64  Leaders  National and  International 64


Download ppt "Prepared by the Community Service Council Supported by the Metropolitan Human Services Commission December 19, 2013."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google