RE: [CTPP] Census Vacant Structure Determination

My experience over three censuses reflects Patty's experience. I, too, have the impression from a partial review of the redistricting data that more apparently uninhabitable units are being left on, but that is better than the last census in which we had a least one case in which a clearly occupied unit was listed as nonresidential. Hastily trained temporary Census workers have authority to make the decisions for Census purposes and all the documentation that a local professional may have on hand will not alter the record in my experience. I have even had an entire section of an important, and quite visible, boundary creek removed from Census maps by Census field workers for two censuses running. Such things give me no confidence in the precision of their records but the census is still the most official data and as good as any other source as far as I can tell. Robert R. Allen, AICP Abilene MPO 400 Oak St., #102 Abilene, TX, 79602 Ph. (325) 676-6243 On Behalf Of Patty Becker Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2011 11:00 AM The problem is that vacancy status is determined, in the end game, by the enumerator who goes out there and looks at the building/unit. Some units that are really occupied will be declared vacant because the occupants, who may be squatters or illegal immigrants, are hiding from the census. Sometimes there's a fine line between a vacant unit and one which should be taken out of the stock as unlivable. I have the general impression that in 2010 the tendency here was toward vacant, whereas in 2000 and 1990 the tendency was toward removing it from the stock. I doubt that there's any way to prove this one way or the other. Adam - does your ordinance also cover vacant apartments in multi-unit buildings? Bottom line - the census is not clearly definitive on this point. Its mission is to count people, not vacant units. Patty Becker