Tulsa Population/Job Growth
TheArtist:
1. Wonder what others think is going to be the pattern for the next few years or so per our population and job growth trajectories.
2. What do you think have been some of the reasons for our declining growth?
3. What are some ideas to potentially turn things around? Or do we?
https://www.tulsaworld.com/news/local/census-tulsa-loses-population-as-area-suburbs-see-growth/article_2397d507-7387-5c1a-92e7-286b73b18385.html
Tulsa has now lost 3,513 residents since its population peaked in July 2016 at 404,182, according to the Census Bureau population estimates. The bureau estimated the city of Tulsa population between July 1, 2017, and July 1, 2018, declined by 1,450. In addition to Tulsa, Oklahoma cities that lost population included Sand Springs, Sapulpa and Catoosa. Meanwhile the rate of growth of other Tulsa suburbs has been in decline.
From the AP
"Tulsa is the second-largest city in the state after Oklahoma City. But census data show the city’s population declined 0.4 percent last year to fewer than 402,000 residents.
Tulsa joins Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore and Milwaukee among major cities that have seen population declines in the past year."
While OKC and some of its suburbs have continued to grow, the state over all has seen population decline.
https://www.newson6.com/story/40311393/new-report-shows-oklahomas-population-on-the-decline
Job Loss
https://www.tulsaworld.com/business/oklahoma-city-makes-gains-tulsa-and-rest-of-state-dips/article_124d8f0f-c101-57df-878d-2ff1c0b3b145.html
November 2018 to November 2019
Oklahoma City, however, gained 5,000 jobs and Lawton added 900. Tulsa lost 1,000, which means the rest of the state outside the three largest populations centers lost 4,900 jobs.
These trends have been in the works for years and years as we watched the "rate of growth" for Tulsa be quite low and then shuffle into ever slower growth until now its showing declines. Same thing with our suburbs which were faster growing than Tulsa, but their rates too have been in decline. I would guess that BA will be the next suburb to show population decline if trends continue.
I am hopeful that our core (Downtown/Mid-Town) will continue to infill and grow. There are many examples of cities whose downtown core areas continue to grow while their over all population declines. But even this trend could be threatened if things continue as they have been. And woe be to our ability to attract businesses and people to Tulsa if that happens! If new downtown construction stops, buildings start to empty out again, with the over all city also losing jobs and population, having to cut its budget, etc.... not going to be good at all.
20 some odd years ago I was, like many others on here and elsewhere, railing about how we needed to change our zoning laws and do the things to attract the wave of people who were wanting to move to areas that offered lively, pedestrian/transit lifestyles. (The exceptions being cities like Dallas in Texas that had size and strong momentum) But it was those "desirable" pedestrian lifestyle cities that were seeing and were projected to see, strong growth, even outgrowing suburban type areas. But we dilly dallied around and STILL haven't made those changes and missed the boat on getting the traction we could have from those demographic trends. The winners and losers have pretty much established themselves and that opportunity to catch the buzz on that has passed.
So what's next?
My feeling in all honesty is that the cities movers and shakers will ignore all of this, focus on the positives (which do exist) but ignore the over all picture of our city and its competitive place compared to others, thinking things are fine... until the bad news gets to the point of being tragically unavoidable and we are in a big crisis mode. One exception is what Kaiser is doing, to try and turn things around. This includes TU. I know that there is a lot of controversy going on with respect to it, some of it correct. But I do think that the university would also be a big loser if Tulsa crashes, and that taking some dramatic actions and pivoting to a job centric, versus a liberal arts, position is actually one way to save their hide, and help the cities position, in the long run. Another highlight is that the city seems to finally be seeing the merit in Tourism, (soooo slow to get on that boat!) but that alone is not big enough to turn things around. (Unless I can build my big dream DECOPOLIS, to be like Disney is for Orlando lol)
But regardless of what the "movers and shakers" will or will not do, what are some of your ideas? Thoughts?
Dspike:
Great questions. On population growth and related numbers, it is real important to be clear what we are talking about. City vs metro changes the picture. Tulsa within city limits has been stagnant for a long time with some small gains and small losses:
1980 360,919
1990 367,302
2000 393,049
2010 391.906
2018 est. 403,045
The metro has been growing steadily for the last few decades:
1980 711,652
1990 761,019
2000 859,532
2010 937,478
2018 est. 993,797
Circa 2020, Tulsa MSA should surpass 1 million.
Going deeper, population growth can be broken down into three buckets: (1) natural change (birth-death); (2) net immigration; and (3) net domestic migration. To assess the health of a city/metro/economy, I tend to focus on net domestic migration. Are more Americans moving to the city or metro or are move Americans leaving that city or metro.
In 2017-2018, Tulsa metro had domestic migration of -2,238, losing more Americans than it gained. Tulsa metro still grew because natural change and net immigration were larger than the domestic migration. Would love to see Tulsa MSA's domestic migration each year to see if we are losing regularly or if 2017-2018 was an off year due to oil/gas prices.
[Side bar: The newson6 article confuses me. In no year this decade did Oklahoma's population decline. See 2014-2019 numbers here: https://uspopulation2019.com/population-of-oklahoma-2019.html/. I suspect it means the domestic migration was negative, but (like Tulsa) the state's natural change and net immigration outweigh any domestic migration loss]
As to your actual questions, I would guess Tulsa MSA continues to grow slightly below national averages but enough to not have hollowing out like the 80s. That fate is still tied to oil/gas prices more than anyone would like. If those prices rise substantially, another boom cycle could hit. If they drop more, we could see stagnation or even population decline.
For Tulsa city, I do not foresee large increases. There is very little undeveloped land to add many new units. Increased density will push up the number (i.e. downtown apartments) but that is offset as more people age in place with 1-2 people in a family home that formerly had 3-4 including children. And we still only have 4,000 people living downtown. That would have to jump quickly to move the overall city population.
What could break the slow but positive growth trajectory? (1) Oil/gas boom. (2) 4-year residential university within the city that adds new students to the city (i.e. 10,000 students in dorms at OSU-Tulsa, for example).
Dspike:
Found a decent overview of domestic migration to and from Oklahoma in recent years from the Kansas City Federal Reserve branch. It has some breakdowns by county, but it is mostly focused on the whole state. Map 3 suggest Tulsa County had net negative domestic migration from 1990-2005 and then net positive domestic migration from 2005-2015. And Chart 5 suggests the Tulsa region (MSA? county?) had positive domestic migration from 2011-2016 that flipped negative in 2017. The article does not have 2018 or 2019 data.
https://www.kansascityfed.org/publications/research/oke/articles/2019/1q-net-domestic-migration-reversal
Tulsan:
It’s not rocket science. Tulsa’s economy went through a massive recession in 2015-2016 because of the shale oil bubble popping. Oil prices dropped from $100s to $30s. Not sure why this is not discussed much more on this forum.
heironymouspasparagus:
Quote from: Tulsan on January 25, 2020, 04:56:34 pm
It’s not rocket science. Tulsa’s economy went through a massive recession in 2015-2016 because of the shale oil bubble popping. Oil prices dropped from $100s to $30s. Not sure why this is not discussed much more on this forum.
I think we are getting immune to the vagaries of oil. Oil price volatility fatigue, maybe.? Plus the oil shale stuff just didn't work out like the hype was pushing. Giant 'meh' moment for the state. We have been $50's+ for a while now. I am kinda surprised there hasn't been more of a rebound. Maybe there isn't enough oil there to get the $50's plus people excited again. ?
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-oklahoma-energy/interest-dims-in-oklahoma-shale-play-as-drilling-results-disappoint-idUSKCN1TE1CE
As for the rest of the population growth thing - seems like we have beat that one around pretty good. We don't really have a big "boom town" thing going on anywhere in the state (like North Dakota oil fields) right now. Even OKC growth seems pretty modest given our size. And we keep on shooting ourselves in the foot nationally just about every chance we get. (This week we see James Lankford again being our public embarrassment of the month.)
No real pressing need or reason for people to come here if they aren't already here.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page