View Full Version : New 2012 City Population Estimates



adaniel
05-26-2013, 12:41 AM
These were released on Thursday, and in light of recent events they didn't get much attention here. These new numbers actually has quite a bit of good news for OKC and surrounding communities.

As of July 2012, Oklahoma City has an estimated population of 599,199 (so we have likely broke the 600K mark). This represents a growth of 9,791, or 1.661% from July 2011. This now places us as the 29th largest city in the US, up from 31st just a few years ago.

In comparison to the top 50 cities in the US, OKC's growth rate ranks a respectable 14th. OKC is growing about 30% faster than the median growth rate for the top 50 cities.

Below is data for surrounding towns:
(City: 2012 population, increase from 2011, percent growth rate).

Norman: 115,562, +1,759, +1.546
Edmond: 84,885, +1,902, +2.292%
Moore: 57,810, +1,138, +2.008%
Midwest City: 56,080, +817, +1.478%
Yukon: 24,128, +615, +2.616%
Mustang: 18,543, +505, +2.800%

Tulsa: 393,987, +1535, +0.391%
Broken Arrow: 102,019, +1931, +1.929%
Owasso: 31,453, +423, +1.363%
Jenks: 18,059, +425, +2.410%
Bixby: 22,580, +1058, +4.916%

For anyone who wants to play around with other data, here is the link:

City & Towns Totals: Vintage 2012 - U.S Census Bureau (http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2012/index.html)

Plutonic Panda
05-26-2013, 01:16 AM
I wonder if the latest pop. projections are still accurate or if the city has grown faster than anticipated and needs to be redone?

ljbab728
05-26-2013, 02:05 AM
I wonder if the latest pop. projections are still accurate or if the city has grown faster than anticipated and needs to be redone?

Plupan, population projections are never accurate. They are only estimates base on available information. Redoing anything would serve no purpose.

Plutonic Panda
05-26-2013, 04:30 AM
Plupan, population projections are never accurate. They are only estimates base on available information. Redoing anything would serve no purpose.Well, I didn't mean accurate, as in "on the dot" or anything.

catch22
05-26-2013, 10:03 AM
That's why the census is every ten years, to recalibrate the numbers. The years between are just estimates.

adaniel
05-27-2013, 02:37 PM
I wonder if the latest pop. projections are still accurate or if the city has grown faster than anticipated and needs to be redone?

The Census Bureau's estimates last decade were way off when the final 2010 tally was released. Although Oklahoma's were more accurate, for the most part the Census did not detect major demographic shifts in this country that was slowing population growth. So their estimates were generally a lot higher than what it really was.

For example, the population of Atlanta was off about 110,000+ between the estimated population and the official 2010 number. Ironically they are still showing some ridiculous growth rate for Atlanta even though I personally know their economy is dismal right now.

So just take these numbers as a rough estimate.

dcsooner
05-31-2013, 07:38 PM
This recent spate of severe weather will I predict significantly slow the recent good gains in OKC metro area population. We were poised to surpass Louisville and close in on Memphis. I think we lose ground over the next 2-4 years primarily to some people unwillingness to move to an area with routine severe weather

bchris02
05-31-2013, 07:45 PM
This recent spate of severe weather will I predict significantly slow the recent good gains in OKC metro area population. We were poised to surpass Louisville and close in on Memphis. I think we lose ground over the next 2-4 years primarily to some people unwillingness to move to an area with routine severe weather

I agree. I wouldn't be surprise to see population losses the next few years. I moved to OKC last August and am seriously considering moving away due to this weather. I have not been hit by any of the tornadoes but having been effected by May 3, 1999 before I moved away last time, it has been traumatizing.

On top of that, OKC unlike South Florida, in my opinion, doesn't have enough draw to make living here worth the risk being that I don't have family in the metro area.

Please don't take offense by these comments as I mean nothing by them. The people of OKC are some of the best I've ever known. I just can't take constant tornadoes and destruction everywhere all the time.

Plutonic Panda
05-31-2013, 07:48 PM
This recent spate of severe weather will I predict significantly slow the recent good gains in OKC metro area population. We were poised to surpass Louisville and close in on Memphis. I think we lose ground over the next 2-4 years primarily to some people unwillingness to move to an area with routine severe weatherYeah, I highly doubt it will have any effect. We've been having severe weather for years lol

Jake
05-31-2013, 07:51 PM
This is a really bad year for tornadoes. Some years are bad, some years not so bad. People will still move here. And unless a Katrina-esque disaster were to happen, I doubt a mass exodus will happen anytime soon.

Plutonic Panda
05-31-2013, 07:56 PM
I agree. I wouldn't be surprise to see population losses the next few years. I moved to OKC last August and am seriously considering moving away due to this weather. I have not been hit by any of the tornadoes but having been effected by May 3, 1999 before I moved away last time, it has been traumatizing.

On top of that, OKC unlike South Florida, in my opinion, doesn't have enough draw to make living here worth the risk being that I don't have family in the metro area.

Please don't take offense by these comments as I mean nothing by them. The people of OKC are some of the best I've ever known. I just can't take constant tornadoes and destruction everywhere all the time.I mean this as no insult what so ever, but if you're really that terrified of tornados and severe weather, than Oklahoma is not for you. You should seek a counselor or consult a psychologist, if you're financially dependent on living here. However, there are plenty of places that have disasters that are much worse than tornados. As a previous poster pointed out, droughts, floods, and other natural disasters kill many more people a year than tornados.

Pete
05-31-2013, 08:21 PM
Thanks for all this great information.

I'd really like to see OKC and the metro area break through the 20% decade growth level, which would put us in the pure boom-town category.

We've been running more in the 14-16% range which is a good, but not great.

bchris02
05-31-2013, 08:28 PM
I mean this as no insult what so ever, but if you're really that terrified of tornados and severe weather, than Oklahoma is not for you. You should seek a counselor or consult a psychologist, if you're financially dependent on living here. However, there are plenty of places that have disasters that are much worse than tornados. As a previous poster pointed out, droughts, floods, and other natural disasters kill many more people a year than tornados.

It's the frequency and the suddenness of tornadoes that make them so scary. Hurricanes and earthquakes do far more damage but they aren't near as frequent. Earthquakes are sudden but major ones don't happen very often. Tornado season should be ending going into June so we'll have almost a year before we have to do this again.

Plutonic Panda
05-31-2013, 08:30 PM
Thanks for all this great information.

I'd really like to see OKC and the metro area break through the 20% decade growth level, which would put us in the pure boom-town category.

We've been running more in the 14-16% range which is a good, but not great.I have a gut feeling that when this phase of development is over and we get our MAPS3 projects finished, Downtown revitalized, P180 finished, Boulevard complete. . . OKC's population will really start to boom!

Plutonic Panda
05-31-2013, 08:32 PM
It's the frequency and the suddenness of tornadoes that make them so scary. Hurricanes and earthquakes do far more damage but they aren't near as frequent. Earthquakes are sudden but major ones don't happen very often. Tornado season should be ending going into June so we'll have almost a year before we have to do this again.I completely understand. My grandmother is absolutely frightened of these storms. I just think maybe you should seek some sort of counseling and find out what you could do to help you get through these storms without the stress.

bchris02
05-31-2013, 08:40 PM
Wow....please tell me you aren't a native Oklahoman. Sorry to be so blunt, but this sounds like pure wuss talk to me. Constant tornadoes and destruction everywhere all the time? That's just a ridiculous statement. There's nothing constant about them and in no way is there destruction everywhere all the time. As someone who has lived through the tornadoes and who has family impacted by the May 3 and May 20 tornadoes, I say please, just leave. Your ridiculous hyperbole might be appreciate in South Florida.

Admin: you can delete this post if you like. I just had to briefly voice how embarrassed I feel for this guy.

I am not a native Oklahoman, and I can understand how being afraid of these storms can seem like wuss-talk to people who are accustomed to it. When you are used to living in places with placid weather though, it can be quite a shock.

At least according to most people, the 2013 severe weather season has been significantly worse for OKC than most years and its not likely we will see this, at least this significant, in coming years.

Plutonic Panda
05-31-2013, 08:46 PM
I am not a native Oklahoman, and I can understand how being afraid of these storms can seem like wuss-talk to people who are accustomed to it. When you are used to living in places with placid weather though, it can be quite a shock.

At least according to most people, the 2013 severe weather season has been significantly worse for OKC than most years and its not likely we will see this, at least this significant, in coming years.I actually think the weather in general, has been pretty weird the last few years.

Bunty
05-31-2013, 08:47 PM
This recent spate of severe weather will I predict significantly slow the recent good gains in OKC metro area population. We were poised to surpass Louisville and close in on Memphis. I think we lose ground over the next 2-4 years primarily to some people unwillingness to move to an area with routine severe weather
Please explain why people didn't quit moving into the OKC area after the 1999 and 2003 Moore tornadoes. If anything, the population increase accelerated. Also while less destructive, Edmond has had some tornadoes since 2000.

I've survived driving through a tornado while a passenger in a car. Then years later, I heard the frightening roar of a tornado as it passed over my house while I was under a mattress in the hall. Fortunately, only quite minor damage to the house. After that, instead of moving out of Oklahoma I made sure when I had a new house built that it had a safe room. Most places in this country are gonna be subject to some news making disaster sooner or later, anyway.

Bunty
05-31-2013, 08:48 PM
I actually think the weather in general, has been pretty weird the last few years.

Yeah, ever since 2007 when we had the opposite of a drought, and it rained around a record breaking 60 inches for the year.

king183
05-31-2013, 08:50 PM
I am not a native Oklahoman, and I can understand how being afraid of these storms can seem like wuss-talk to people who are accustomed to it. When you are used to living in places with placid weather though, it can be quite a shock.

At least according to most people, the 2013 severe weather season has been significantly worse for OKC than most years and its not likely we will see this, at least this significant, in coming years.

Okay, sorry--I was too harsh in that post. I just don't like the panic and hyperbole we've seen in the last few weeks. I've heard repeatedly on the national news how this type of stuff (EF5 tornadoes, death, and destruction) happens all the time in Oklahoma--and that's just not true. It gives people outside of Oklahoma--and those within it who don't know better-- a completely false and damaging impression of what it's like to live here. I understand people being frightened. That's natural and proper. But I can't stand the panic and hyperbole, which can be more dangerous than the actual weather.

I'm hoping this doesn't negatively impact OKC's image and our population trend, but I have a bad feeling it will.

RadicalModerate
05-31-2013, 09:02 PM
Perhaps some of this has something to do with why folks who have stuck around here for awhile are generally thought of as friendlier than most.

(still fightin' against that danged ol' expatiate' Steinbeckian stereotype i reckon . . . =)

Don't move somewhere and try to turn it into a copy of what you were running away from.
(40 yr. old sign outside of Lyons, Colorado: Visit But Don't Unpack)
(40 yr. old bumpersticker all over the place, just down the road: Don't Californicate Colorado)

dcsooner
06-01-2013, 06:47 AM
Please explain why people didn't quit moving into the OKC area after the 1999 and 2003 Moore tornadoes. If anything, the population increase accelerated. Also while less destructive, Edmond has had some tornadoes since 2000.

I've survived driving through a tornado while a passenger in a car. Then years later, I heard the frightening roar of a tornado as it passed over my house while I was under a mattress in the hall. Fortunately, only quite minor damage to the house. After that, instead of moving out of Oklahoma I made sure when I had a new house built that it had a safe room. Most places in this country are gonna be subject to some news making disaster sooner or later, anyway.

Great response Bunty. I am hoping people can/ will put these storms into the proper perspective. Oklahoma and Oklahoma City really are great areas to live, but, people not from the middle of the country tend to overreact and make move decisions based on what little they see. My family is in the State and they aren't moving:)

Teo9969
06-01-2013, 08:06 AM
This, like every other major tragedy, will fade from the minds of those individuals and communities affected.

For people who right now are really on the edge between coming here or not, these storms may be a sort of tipping point. But anyone who was seriously considering OKC and certainly future prospects, this will be on the list of negatives that are outweighed by many positives.

What you're DEFINITELY not going see is population LOSSES. That is just absurd. Very minimal numbers of people will leave. They'll just grow smarter.

OKCRT
06-01-2013, 08:20 AM
This, like every other major tragedy, will fade from the minds of those individuals and communities affected.

For people who right now are really on the edge between coming here or not, these storms may be a sort of tipping point. But anyone who was seriously considering OKC and certainly future prospects, this will be on the list of negatives that are outweighed by many positives.

What you're DEFINITELY not going see is population LOSSES. That is just absurd. Very minimal numbers of people will leave. They'll just grow smarter.

I myself think these storms are exciting. Not that I want to see homes and properties destroyed or people getting injured.

bchris02
06-01-2013, 11:06 AM
This, like every other major tragedy, will fade from the minds of those individuals and communities affected.

For people who right now are really on the edge between coming here or not, these storms may be a sort of tipping point. But anyone who was seriously considering OKC and certainly future prospects, this will be on the list of negatives that are outweighed by many positives.

What you're DEFINITELY not going see is population LOSSES. That is just absurd. Very minimal numbers of people will leave. They'll just grow smarter.

What about Moore residents that decide not to rebuild? OKC proper may not see any losses from this, but I am sure Moore will, unfortunately.

venture
06-01-2013, 03:02 PM
At least according to most people, the 2013 severe weather season has been significantly worse for OKC than most years and its not likely we will see this, at least this significant, in coming years.

And the people that make that claim are called...UNEDUCATED.

Monthly/Annual statistics for Tornadoes in Oklahoma (1950-Present) (http://www.srh.noaa.gov/oun/?n=tornadodata-ok-monthlyannual)

I brought this up before. Just tornadoes here..
January Average is 0.3...we had 2. Feb's Average is 0.8...we had 0. March's Average is 2...we had 2. April's Average is 11.7...we had 12. May's Average is 21.4...before yesterday we had 21.

So up until yesterday you can argue, very easily, that this year has been a COMPLETELY AVERAGE year. There was NOTHING significant about the level of activity this year. The problem is people focus on the one or two big tornadoes of the year and think that armageddon is on the way. We could go the entire year with nothing but one EF5 and people would say it was a horrible year, even though statistically speaking it would have been an almost completely quiet year. Granted if we go an entire year with just 1 tornado I would then think armageddon was on the way.

So for the whole year we average 55.1, based on data since 1950. Yesterday has the potential to be our highest total day of the year just from all the small spin ups everywhere. We sit at 37 right now...so we are 18 away being right on the nose and a completely average year. We'll probably go above that if we consider maybe say 12 or 13 yesterday (maybe more if Tulsa finds a ton of small spin ups out there) and the average for the rest of the season sitting at 17.

So even if we get into the mid 70s for totals, if May comes in around 40 total and the rest of the year is average, that is still only going to come in 6th since 1999 (our all time high) and won't top 2011 or 2012.

venture
06-01-2013, 03:03 PM
What about Moore residents that decide not to rebuild? OKC proper may not see any losses from this, but I am sure Moore will, unfortunately.

Do you realize how many times Moore has been hit and they keep growing? Vast majority of people DON'T CARE. It is an inherent risk living here, like earthquakes in California or Hurricanes along the Gulf.

bchris02
06-01-2013, 03:56 PM
And the people that make that claim are called...UNEDUCATED.

Monthly/Annual statistics for Tornadoes in Oklahoma (1950-Present) (http://www.srh.noaa.gov/oun/?n=tornadodata-ok-monthlyannual)

I brought this up before. Just tornadoes here..
January Average is 0.3...we had 2. Feb's Average is 0.8...we had 0. March's Average is 2...we had 2. April's Average is 11.7...we had 12. May's Average is 21.4...before yesterday we had 21.

So up until yesterday you can argue, very easily, that this year has been a COMPLETELY AVERAGE year. There was NOTHING significant about the level of activity this year. The problem is people focus on the one or two big tornadoes of the year and think that armageddon is on the way. We could go the entire year with nothing but one EF5 and people would say it was a horrible year, even though statistically speaking it would have been an almost completely quiet year. Granted if we go an entire year with just 1 tornado I would then think armageddon was on the way.

So for the whole year we average 55.1, based on data since 1950. Yesterday has the potential to be our highest total day of the year just from all the small spin ups everywhere. We sit at 37 right now...so we are 18 away being right on the nose and a completely average year. We'll probably go above that if we consider maybe say 12 or 13 yesterday (maybe more if Tulsa finds a ton of small spin ups out there) and the average for the rest of the season sitting at 17.

So even if we get into the mid 70s for totals, if May comes in around 40 total and the rest of the year is average, that is still only going to come in 6th since 1999 (our all time high) and won't top 2011 or 2012.

No, I agree with you that statewide it has been an average or slightly above year. The difference is most of it has been focused on Central OK this year and that isn't the case every year. For the OKC metro area, it has been a bad year. Statewide, it has been about average.

venture
06-01-2013, 04:44 PM
No, I agree with you that statewide it has been an average or slightly above year. The difference is most of it has been focused on Central OK this year and that isn't the case every year. For the OKC metro area, it has been a bad year. Statewide, it has been about average.

So let me ask you this. What is the average number of Tornado for the OKC metro area per year? Before you answer...define the boundaries of the OKC metro area you are going to be including in your data.

When you have that answer report back. Hint - I already know.

jn1780
06-01-2013, 05:11 PM
What about Moore residents that decide not to rebuild? OKC proper may not see any losses from this, but I am sure Moore will, unfortunately.

Moore will not see any loses in population. It will actually see an economic boom and an actual increase in population. This is an easy prediction for me to make because it happens after every natural disaster. The people that leave will be replaced by others that would love to live in the area.

jn1780
06-01-2013, 05:18 PM
Okay, sorry--I was too harsh in that post. I just don't like the panic and hyperbole we've seen in the last few weeks. I've heard repeatedly on the national news how this type of stuff (EF5 tornadoes, death, and destruction) happens all the time in Oklahoma--and that's just not true. It gives people outside of Oklahoma--and those within it who don't know better-- a completely false and damaging impression of what it's like to live here. I understand people being frightened. That's natural and proper. But I can't stand the panic and hyperbole, which can be more dangerous than the actual weather.

I'm hoping this doesn't negatively impact OKC's image and our population trend, but I have a bad feeling it will.

Media over heightens the risk factors in every state and city. If people believed everything they would just kill themselves because there is nowhere safe to live.

Bunty
06-01-2013, 06:32 PM
What about Moore residents that decide not to rebuild? OKC proper may not see any losses from this, but I am sure Moore will, unfortunately.

All together since the year 2000, Moore has been adding on to its population at a much faster rate than Edmond. The tornadoes in Edmond have been less newsworthy and less destructive since 2000. To listen to you, it should be Edmond not Moore that should be growing faster.

Bunty
06-01-2013, 06:42 PM
For anyone who wants to play around with other data, here is the link:

City & Towns Totals: Vintage 2012 - U.S Census Bureau (http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2012/index.html)

If Enid and Stillwater grow fast enough Oklahoma will have two new metros in 2012.

G.Walker
06-01-2013, 07:45 PM
Moore's population grew 34% from 2000-2010 after May 3rd, the forgotten tornado of 2003 and more, I think Moore will be alright, in a couple years the events of May 20th will be just a memory on Wikipedia, Moore will still rise.

Praedura
06-05-2013, 01:32 PM
I wasn't aware of Should-Know.com, so I'm thinking it's new (maybe not). They have an interesting page for OKC:

Oklahoma City | Cities | Should-Know.com (http://www.should-know.com/oklahoma-city)

Seems like it's a wikipedia kind of thing, only with very brief 'Cliff Notes' kind of info. At least they use some good recent photos of Oklahoma City, which is nice.

Also the population stats seem pretty up-to-date:

City: 596,742
Urban: 861,505
Metro: 1,308,123

Now, the City and Metro numbers I'm familiar with. But the Urban number is new to me. Anyone know what precisely that refers to?

ljbab728
06-05-2013, 09:37 PM
I wasn't aware of Should-Know.com, so I'm thinking it's new (maybe not). They have an interesting page for OKC:

Oklahoma City | Cities | Should-Know.com (http://www.should-know.com/oklahoma-city)

Seems like it's a wikipedia kind of thing, only with very brief 'Cliff Notes' kind of info. At least they use some good recent photos of Oklahoma City, which is nice.

Also the population stats seem pretty up-to-date:

City: 596,742
Urban: 861,505
Metro: 1,308,123

Now, the City and Metro numbers I'm familiar with. But the Urban number is new to me. Anyone know what precisely that refers to?

This is a fairly good definition.


A city is a legal definition that defines a physical geographic boundary. An urban area is more flexible in that it refers to a region of a certain population density. And a metropolitan area is the most nebulous term in that it comprises an urban area and the outlying region(s) that share utilities, industries, and various institutions.

rlewis
06-05-2013, 09:49 PM
More than likely that is the current estimated population of Oklahoma County. I saw the 2010 census numbers a while back and the county had over 800,000 people.

ljbab728
06-05-2013, 09:54 PM
More than likely that is the current estimated population of Oklahoma County. I saw the 2010 census numbers a while back and the county had over 800,000 people.

I don't think urban numbers are based on a county population. There are many cities that might span county lines in built up areas and many have large undeveloped areas in the same county. This is from the census bureau website.


A UA comprises one or more places ("central place") and the adjacent
densely settled surrounding territory ("urban fringe") that
together have a minimum of 50,000 persons. The urban fringegenerally consists of contiguous territory having a density of at
least 1,000 persons per square mile. The urban fringe also
includes outlying territory of such density if it was connected
to the core of the contiguous area by road and is within 1 1/2
road miles of that core, or within 5 road miles of the core but
separated by water or other undevelopable territory. Other
territory with a population density of fewer than 1,000 people
per square mile is included in the urban fringe if it eliminates
an enclave or closes an indentation in the boundary of the
urbanized area. The population density is determined by (1)
outside of a place, one or more contiguous census blocks with a
population density of at least 1,000 persons per square mile or
(2) inclusion of a place containing census blocks that have at
least 50 percent of the population of the place and a density of
at least 1,000 persons per square mile.

adaniel
08-27-2013, 10:55 AM
Just stumbled upon this interactive graph from Governing Magazine that details migrations in and out of states. It has been updated up to 2011, with 2012 info coming in a few months. Just my guess, but I imagine 2012 numbers are probably going to be pretty similar.

Workbook: state-to-state-migration (http://public.tableausoftware.com/shared/5SY2RRJFW?:display_count=yes)

Oklahoma actually has one of the stronger net inflows of people, at about +27,869 in 2011.

Among one of the most surprising things to see was Oklahoma experienced a net inmigration of about 12,300 just from Texas. There is a significant error margin (+/- 4,800) but that is still a lot of people.

Other states with strong inflow into OK include California (+3,120), Arkansas (+3,133), and Florida (+3,456).

Bellaboo
08-27-2013, 10:58 AM
Just stumbled upon this interactive graph from Governing Magazine that details migrations in and out of states. It has been updated up to 2011, with 2012 info coming in a few months. Just my guess, but I imagine 2012 numbers are probably going to be pretty similar.

Workbook: state-to-state-migration (http://public.tableausoftware.com/shared/5SY2RRJFW?:display_count=yes)

Oklahoma actually has one of the stronger net inflows of people, at about +27,869 in 2011.

Among one of the most surprising things to see was Oklahoma experienced a net inmigration of about 12,300 just from Texas. There is a significant error margin (+/- 4,800) but that is still a lot of people.

Other states with strong inflow into OK include California (+3,120), Arkansas (+3,133), and Florida (+3,456).

Everywhere I go I see Texas tags...

KayneMo
08-28-2013, 12:49 AM
Double post.

KayneMo
08-28-2013, 12:52 AM
More than likely that is the current estimated population of Oklahoma County. I saw the 2010 census numbers a while back and the county had over 800,000 people.

Oklahoma County had 718,633 at the 2010 Census, and just under 742,000 at the 2012 estimate.

Bunty
08-28-2013, 10:29 AM
Everywhere I go I see Texas tags...
Maybe they're fleeing from the high property taxes in Texas.

Laramie
08-28-2013, 03:10 PM
It's the frequency and the suddenness of tornadoes that make them so scary. Hurricanes and earthquakes do far more damage but they aren't near as frequent. Earthquakes are sudden but major ones don't happen very often. Tornado season should be ending going into June so we'll have almost a year before we have to do this again.

People who have lived in areas affected by frequent tonado activity (tornado season) like Kansas, Oklahoma & Texas; they are not phased by this weather and have built a tolerance so-to-speak.

When time comes for you to be called home; it's not going to matter where you are. Relax and enjoy Oklahoma and its wonderful people.

bchris02
08-28-2013, 05:38 PM
Everywhere I go I see Texas tags...

I've wondered why so many Texas tags in OKC.