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