Do not know the issue you are raising, however, Calif Dept of Finance estimates are high on municipal populations of SF and LA... by a large margin... this is in comparison to the annual Census Bureau estimates (which may or may not be related to ACS).
For ACS 2005-2007 population and housing occupancy/vacancy estimates, are people finding discrepancies between ACS and other data sources, particularly in sub-county geographies? �ACS estimates are controlled at the county level and, like the ACS 1-year data, ACS 2005-2007 population estimates are showing disagreement with other data sources. �For example, the Oakland 3-year ACS estimate shows the population at 372,000, when CA Dept. of Finance estimates are over 400,000. �This runs counter to the on-the-ground anecdotal experience - ACS shows a loss of 30,000 people during a period that showed an increase of 10,000 housing units.
Will the decennial census correct this? � My understanding is that Census 2010 numbers will be used to control 2010 ACS characteristic data. �There will need to be some adjustment, however, given that the decennial census benchmarks population at April 1, and ACS uses a July 1 population number. � It's also my understanding that population estimates for 2001-2009 will be updated, though retroactive adjustments for ACS characteristics will not be done. �Does anyone else know something different about this?
Other thoughts about this?
Thanks,
Shimon
---------------------------------------------------------------
Shimon Israel
Associate Transportation Planner/Analyst
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
101 Eighth Street
Oakland, CA 94607-4700
(510) 817-5839 (office)
(510) 817-5848 (fax)
---------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
ctpp-news mailing list
ctpp-news@chrispy.net
http://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news