1. Growth, Diversity and Change
Forty years of economic and demographic
trends in Washington and King County
Chandler Felt, Demographer
King County WA Office of Performance, Strategy and Budget
WA State Local Government Auditors, February 8, 2017
THANK YOU, let me take just a few moments to summarize what you’ve already observed about Washington state and Puget Sound demographics. I’ve tried to distill a lifetime of observing the region’s demographics into a few Big Trends and a couple of little trends, to share with you. This’ll be a mix of statewide, Puget Sound and KC observations: we’ll zoom in and out, depending on where the story is most interesting! Interactive ….
I have a lot of slides - if we could hold questions until the end, that would be great.

2. A note on sources Data for WA and 3-county Puget Sound area
Decennial Census: 1990, 2000, 2010
American Community Survey (ACS)
Most recent detailed data,
ACS is a small sample
High margins of error for small towns, census tracts
Provides annual data for trend analysis
Employment Security and other sources
It’s all Census data, but the decennial, such as 2010, has few questions – age, race, household type, tenure. For the rich data to report on, we must rely on ACS. Margins of error are important because of small sample size.
So what I’m providing is a series of blurry points…and I hope a picture emerges.
At the end, I’ll list some sources and websites that you can refer to in your own audit analyses.

3. Washington Population Growth, 2000 - 2015
WA now 13th largest state with 7 million people
Gained more than 1 million persons since 2000
10 Congressional districts
Population grew 20%, while job numbers remained almost flat … until recently
Data we’re reporting are from 2010 Census and American Community Survey
Washington is now the nation’s 13th largest state, up from 15th in 2000.
Ten-yr increase from is equivalent to Pierce Co’s current pop.
[King County alone is the nation’s 14th largest county and larger than 14 states.]
Unlike previous decades, the pop growth was not accompanied by much job gr –

4. Long range trend: steady growth
The state’s pop has doubled in 40 years. With fairly steady growth. NOW: let’s zoom in to Puget Sd region a moment,
and let’s go way back, before WA was an important state, before Seattle was a World City.
In the ‘60s, Seattle was a Boeing company town. (And the trouble with them is being too dependent on one industry.)

5. Economic Diversification
Big Trend # 1
Economic Diversification
Quickly !

6. The “good old days”?
In 1960s, Seattle / Puget Sound was a Boeing “company town”
Aerospace: 1 in 7 jobs; with suppliers, even more
Then, SST demise and 747 efficiency reduced jobs
Boeing Bust in 1971
devastated economy
I was beginning my career, lucky to find a job (Pierce County). I recall hearing about former Boeing employees walking away from their Bonney Lake and Auburn houses – people with money could buy a house for a fraction of its former value.

7. Five decades of employment change
In 1968, aerospace accounted for > 15% of PS region employment; with suppliers and multiplier, practically the whole economy.
Boeing went from over 100,000 emp to under 40,000 by 1972.
Since then, aerospace has recovered and slowed down again several times, but none as severe as In the big picture, aerospace continues to be vital to the Puget Sound economy, and Boeing is still the region’s largest employer, but is not dominant as it once was.
So the region needed to diversify. And it did, with a little help from:
- a couple kids working in a garage on computers, and coming home to Seattle
- other tech growth
- growth of service industries that were primary part of econ base, e.g. int’l banking
- a little local shoe store and a coffee shop that grew to be global.

8. Before 1970: a narrow economy
710,000 jobs in ‘68
Aerospace 106,000
15% of the Puget Sound economy
Goods-producing was 1/3 of economy.
Main points: 700,000 jobs in region, 1968; over 100,000 aerospace. Sea was a Boeing “company town”.

9. New companies diversify Puget Sound economy

10. Now, a much more diverse economy
2.1 million jobs
3X as many jobs
Aerospace: 78,000 – 4% of job total
Many more anchors
Prof / bsns services up 10X from 1968
Main points: now 2.1 million jobs, but less than 100,000 are aerospace.

11. Race and Ethnic Diversity And multiple languages
Big Trend # 2
Increasing
Race and Ethnic Diversity
And multiple languages
And age brackets
So, I dumped a lot of demographic variables into this Big Trend!

12. Components of the state’s growth
Components of Washington’s population growth:
Here are TWO OF THE THREE components: births and deaths. They are relatively stable over time.
Birth rates dropped from baby-boom highs in the ‘50s to baby-bust lows in the ‘70s. Then the numbers started climbing again – mainly due to sheer increase in total pop that these rates apply to. Death rates of course are on the negative side of the graph, subtracting from the population. Death rates have been steady. The difference – natural increase in blue here – follows the trend of births but has been pretty steady except for the ‘70s.

13. Migration drives WA’s annual population change up and down
Here’s the other component: migration from other states and from overseas: and that’s a lot more volatile. This shows a very long range trend from the 1971 Boeing bust on the left to now. The blue dots are annual in-migration to WA, the bars are overall pop change each year, combining natural increase and migration. Two kinds of migration: domestic, int’l.

14. Population by age group: Baby boom and Echo boom
Here are bar charts called “pop pyramids”, in 5-year brackets with pre-schoolers on the bottom and seniors over 85 on top. Males in blue, females in yellow. The bulge of baby-boomers is clearly visible in the middle, in the year 2000 on the left side. By 2010 on the right, the boomers have aged ten years, and the echo-boom of 20-somethings shows up as big as original boom.

15. Population by age in 2000
Here are the two decades in sequence. If I go back and forth btw 2000 and 2010, you can see everyone aging by 10 years. Males in blue on left. In 2010, you can see more women in older ages than men.

16. 2010: everyone’s a little older
One more thot I didn’t make a slide for: the # of working-age people, in the middle bars on this chart, have been stable numbers, but are going to start declining by 2020 as fewer working people support entitlements for old and young. Cheers!
That demographic issue may be important for those of you who audit local gov’t HR dep’ts. KC will lose a lot of senior, experienced staff to retirement in the next few years.

17. 20 years of Washington state growth: much of increase is persons of color
Let’s shift gears and look at Washington’s population in terms of race/ethnic diversity. Most of our growth in the last 20 years has consisted of persons of color. Especially Hispanic or Latino; Asian; and African-American.

18. Washington State More than one quarter are now persons of color
The state’s ethnic distribution is somewhat similar to the US, but with a smaller black pop than the nation’s 10% or so. 11% are Latino – similar to the nation. At 7% Asian, we have twice the % of Asians that the nation has. WA NHW: 72.%

19. Three groups account for most of 2000-2010 growth
This is statewide change over ten years – you can see three groups dominate the change. 38% Hisp, 27% NHW; 19% Asian.

20. Change in Hispanic/Latino Population, 1990 – 2010 Washington State
Let’s look at what’s driving this increase in PoC: statewide, it’s largely growth of the Hispanic / Latino pop. More than tripled in 20 years, from 200,000 to approaching 800,000, and from 4% to 11% /pop. Latinos accounted for more than 38% of the state’s total growth from 2000 – 2010.
NOTE: only 1/3 of Hispanic pop is foreign-born – most Latinos are born in the USA. However, 2/3 of our Asian pop is foreign-born.

21. Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue MSA: King, Pierce and Snohomish counties
Now I’d like to turn to the Puget Sound metro, where three large counties – King, Pierce, Snohomish – make up the Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue Metro area. I’ll refer to this as the MSA or Puget Sound.

22. Puget Sound Population Growth, 1970 - 2015
The three counties now have 3.9 million people.
Doubled since 1970; gained 600k since 2000.
Population grew 13%, while job numbers remained flat, between
Since 2010, both pop & job growth have jumped.
Data we’re reporting are from 2010 Census and American Community Survey
Like the state, the MSA has doubled its population since 1970, to almost 4 million people now.
[Gain just since 2000 is equivalent to current population of Seattle.
Job growth since about 2011 is driven by high-tech in Seattle.]

23. 24 years of Puget Sound growth: increase is mostly persons of color
Even more than in WA state as a whole, the Puget Sound population growth is primarily P o C. Out of a 24-year increase of 1 million, only 20% of the growth was non-Hispanic white.
24-year gain of 1 million people: only 20% are non-Hispanic white. Pop of color grew from 15% to 33% of total population.

24. The region’s population is becoming increasingly diverse: 1990
1990,
The region’s population is becoming increasingly diverse: 1990
Here’s a series of slides from PSRC.
Purple dots denote city blocks with more than 40% persons of color. Blue dots are 30-40% persons of color.

25. The region’s population is becoming increasingly diverse: 2000
Flash quickly through these 3 slides, then again quickly.

26. The region’s population is becoming increasingly diverse: 2010
From 2010 Census. Go through this set of three slides again – 20 years of dramatic change.

27. 2000-2010 population change: Latino and Asian groups predominate
Just looking at the most recent 10-year change, the MSA’s growth was dominated by pop-of-color. Big increases in Asian and Latino pop. King Co actually lost NHW pop, but the other 2 counties gained a little.
[By county, with King in the middle, flanked by Snohomish and Pierce. King lost NHW pop while gaining more than 200,000 persons of color. ¾ of Pierce and Snohomish growth consisted of population of color.]

28. The result in 2010: three diverse counties
This is a 2010 snapshot. Population of color is now 33% of the whole MSA, and in the suburbs as much as central cities.

29. Children are more diverse: more than 40% of pop under 18 are kids-of-color
Pretty soon, half of the metro’s pop of kids under 18 will be kids-of-color. In King County, about half of kids are already kids-of-color.

30. Where is our growth coming from?
Only half of population growth is from natural increase – our own children
Before 1990, migration – e.g. California
Between , immigration –
- All parts of Asia
- Latin America
- Eastern Europe
- Africa
- Some from these regions, via US states.
Since 2010, more domestic migration again.
Quickly.
IMMIGRANTS – AND REFUGEES

31. Immigrants account for 40% of MSA growth
Now, natural increase is still half, but the other half of growth is primarily immigration.
In 24 years, the foreign-born population of the 3 counties tripled, while the native-born pop increased 25%.
[Immigration is a bigger factor of growth than domestic migration – in KC, domestic migration is negative. And more than half of KC growth is immigration.] In Pierce and Snohomish, most of migration is domestic migration, but the increase in foreign-born pop over those 24 years has still been very substantial: a quarter of Pierce-Sno growth 1990 – 2014 = foreign-born pop.]

32. Immigrants arrive from all over the world
Immigrants and refugees have come from all over the world, especially Latin America and Asia. Bright-blue bars are parts of Asia; dark blue represents Latin America.

33. Increasing numbers speak another language
And when they come, they bring their languages with them. Since 1990 the total pop of the MSA has increased about 40%, but the number speaking a language other than English has tripled.
Almost a quarter of the metro population speaks another language – that’s 700,000 people.
Nearly half of those who speak another language have difficulty speaking English – that # has also tripled.

34. Puget Sound residents speak 170+ different languages
Quick glance. Here is a sampling of the top dozen or so languages. OSPI = source of languages of LEP students.

35. Fully one-quarter of KC residents speak a language other than English at home. You can see foreign-language speakers are widely distributed across the entire county, and in many neighb’ds of the Eastside, S Sea and SKC, upwards of half the pop speaks another language. Highest cat: 46-70%.

36. Spanish speakers in King County by census tract
Highest category:
22% - 37%
speaking Spanish
Spanish speakers are
widely distributed
Let’s look at some specific languages. Among foreign languages, Spanish is by far the most prevalent. Widely dispersed throughout SKC and Eastside.
We have a series of maps depicting the locations of other languages – on the web. Spanish-speaking and ethnically Latino population is the county’s fastest-growing community. BTW, majority of Latino persons in KC are born-in-USA.

37. Chinese languages in King County
Highest categories:
10% - 31%
speaking Chinese.
Evenly split between
Cantonese, Mandarin
Also widely distributed,
Seattle and Eastside
Chinese languages are next most commonly spoken, by more than 50,000 KC residents. This lumps together speakers of Mandarin, Cantonese, and Taiwanese. In some specific parts of Sea & Eastside

38. African languages in King County
Highest category:
10% - 23%
speaking languages
including Amharic,
Tigrinya, Somali.
Clustered in Seattle
and SW King County
And Kenmore. Census Bureau doesn’t distinguish the many African languages that KC residents speak. In KC, mostly / East Africa. But an interesting point here is that: different cultures are geogr clustered somewhat in diff parts of KC. These language maps can be a resource to hint at where we might focus specific pgms.

39. Increasing Inequality and Suburbanization of Poverty
Big Trend # 3
Increasing Inequality
Income Inequality
and Suburbanization of Poverty

40. Population diversity: compare King County to the U.S.
When you compare King County to the whole nation on measures of diversity, we look pretty good: total persons of color, foreign-born pop, language diversity.

41. Appearance of Equity At a glance, King County outperforms the U. S
Appearance of Equity At a glance, King County outperforms the U.S. on socio-economic indicators
And the same thing on health and socio-economic measures, too.

42. Trend of median household income, U.S., WA and Puget Sound
And if we look at a long-range trend of median income comparing us to the nation, Puget Sound looks better and better with each decade.
These are median household incomes, expressed in current dollars. Note increasing spread between US / MSA.
Since at least the 1980 Census, WA median has been moderately higher than US, and Puget Sound med Y around 20% higher than US. Notice that the US median stalled out between w/ Great Recession, but WA and MSA didn’t seem to. That’s misleading – state and the three counties were deeply affected and still are in part.
Source: decennial Census ; ACS 3-year & 5-year data.

43. A Closer Look Income by Race & Place
But, when you look more closely, WITHIN the county: BY RACE –
BY PLACE - U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, Combined. Prepared by: Public Health-Seattle & King County; Assessment, Policy Development & Evaluation Unit; April 2013.

44. A Closer Look Graduation Rates by Race & Place
By RACE -4 year graduation rates school year, Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction
difference of 29.8%
84.8%
55.0%

45. Income distribution by $ bracket
But the median doesn’t tell us much about the whole income distribution, so let’s look at that.
Blue bars show 5 $ brackets of HH income in 2000 Census, from low (under 50%) to high (over 180%) of med. They were close to being quintiles in 2000.
Red bars show the same brackets in a recent ACS report. Where’s the growth in HH?

46. Where’s the household growth? Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue MSA
There’s the growth: at the top and bottom, not in the middle. Only 26% of the 13-yr growth of HH’s was middle-income.
Most of the growth since the 2000 Census has been at the top and the bottom; the three middle-income brackets together gained only a quarter of the 13-year growth of households. This is the kind of income inequality the whole nation has been discussing recently – it really shows up here.

47. Increasing income inequality – 13-year change in King County households
Here’s another way of looking at the worsening inequality: just the change over a 13-year period (King Co only).
The bifurcation of income growth is even more stark in King County alone, where Only 4% of the 13-year growth in HH is middle-income; low-income and high-income households each gained 48% of the HH growth.
Note: just since 2014, it looks like this extreme pattern may be softening: in 2015, more middle-income households.
[Another way of looking at this income inequality: Just the CHANGE between 2000 and Of the chg / HHs,
Of King County’s net change in number of households between 2000 and 2012 ( + 85,300 households):
41,600 or 49% of the growth were low-income households (below half of median, or $34,700 now)
40,500 or 47% of the growth were high-income households (above $125,000 now)
Only 3,200 or 4% of the growth were in the three middle brackets between $35k and $125k.]

48. Poverty Rates are higher in central cities, but are growing faster in suburbs
Back to the MSA: here on the left is the 20-year trend of poverty rates in 2 central cities: Se + Tac. In the middle is the trend in the rest of the Metro area, I’ve called “the suburbs.” Poverty rates remain stubbornly high in the central cities – but they are growing mostly in the suburbs.

49. Numbers of persons below poverty: growing rapidly in the suburbs
But the absolute numbers of persons below poverty are more revealing:
Absolute numbers show a very different story: suburbanization of poverty. The vast majority of persons below pov are now in the suburbs. And the largest share of that increase is among PoC, especially children under 18, and esp. Latino kids.

50. Children below poverty, King County: number has doubled since 1990
From the 1990 Census until now, number of children below poverty has doubled from 32,600 to 64,400. Most of the increase is in the suburbs, primarily South King County.
- In addition to 64,000 kids below poverty, another 42,000 youth age are below pov!
- In 2013, only a quarter of KC kids-below-poverty are in Seattle. ¾ in suburbs.
- (of the 42,000 youth age below poverty, half live in Seattle.)

51. King County kids below poverty by race: 2008 and 2013
“After” is in quotes because we are still feeling many of the effects of the Recession.
Research stemming from this slide is still underway as of 7/14/2015. Here are some emerging observations:
- Just between 2008 and 2013, a huge increase in number of Latino kids below poverty: from 10,000 to 21,000.
- Number of African-Amer kids below poverty grew to 14,500. More troubling, that means 46% of all black kids in KC are below the poverty level, 7 times the rate of white kids and higher than the US percentage in pov
- Also substantial increases in numbers of Asian and multi-race kids below poverty.
Before and “after” the Great Recession. Note largest increases were among Latino and multi-race children.

52. This map shows the low-income population – those below twice the poverty level, still very poor. Concentration in SKC & parts of Sea; but also substantial poverty in suburbs like Shoreline, Kenmore, Kirkland.

53. Household Characteristics
Big Trend # 4
Changing
Household Characteristics

54. Distribution of household types has changed little since 2000
Our distribution of HH types has not changed appreciably in 10 years, but…. [ NEXT ]
I’m including this because it’s one of the ways we differ from most other US metros. We need to know the kinds of families and individuals that we’re serving. Two things strike me: how similar the shares btw 2000 / 2010; & that the largest HH type is single persons. Fewer fam’s with kids than you might think. Single parents are a small segment. Single persons are 40% of Seattle households, and about 30% of suburban households. Many of those are apt dwellers, but some live alone in SF house. Married couples with children are less than a quarter of all HH.
Many immigrants have larger households, but that increase in HH size is made up for with smaller HH’s among the people already here (native born).

55. The bigger difference in household types is between central cities and suburbs
There IS a substantial diff between the central cities and the suburbs. Single person HH’s dominate the distribution in Sea and Tac, but in the suburbs the big categories are married couple HH’s.
Seattle and Tacoma, the two historical central cities, have a quarter of the MSA population, but more than 40% of the metro’s single-person HH. Seattle has been “singles city” for a long time. Meanwhile, outside of those two cities, married-with-kids and married-no-kids (DINKs) are the largest shares of HH types. Do the city and county departments that you audit have a different focus of services depending on household type?

56. Long-range labor force participation rates
Here’s the striking trend about household statistics! One of the Big Trends over the last half-century is the increasing labor force participation of women: from the 40% range in 1970 to around 62% today, only 12 points shy of men’s rate. Meanwhile men’s LF participation rates have drifted down a little bit over that period.

57. Women drive the long-term increase in employment
As a result, the increasing participation of women has driven the increase in employment over the 40 or 50 years. Emp has grown faster than population, and this is the main mechanism for that: households are sending more members to work than they did in the 60s and 70s. This is resident civilian emp; the number of jobs grew even faster with some commuting into the MSA from the rest of Puget Sound.

58. Educational attainment varies by place of birth
Another social measure is educational attainment; this issue is so critical to the current legislative session! You saw the “place and race” disparity in KC earlier; here’s a different kind of ‘place’ measure: place of birth.
20% of our immigrants / refugees have not finished high school (or equivalent). But in terms of finishing college, it’s WA – born residents who have the lowest college completion rate. We’re not doing very well educating our own children; rather, we’re importing talent and skills. Is that the best use of our resources?

59. Educational Attainment Varies by Location
This reports the educational attainment for the adult population (over 25). There are sizeable disparities – esp. in college graduation – by geography … something the legislature is grappling with right now.
Another household characteristic that I don’t have gfx for is HH size: declining, except for blips due to immigrant families, and families doubling up during the Recession.

60. Impact of the WA state Growth Management Act
Big Trend # 5
Impact of the WA state
Growth Management Act
I realize this subject probably doesn’t intersect with your work very directly. But I spend much of my time with the GMA, so I can’t resist talking about it!

61. WA state GMA: shifting locations of growth
Washington’s Growth Mgmt Act
Requires counties, cities to plan
Protect farm and forest land
Designate Urban Growth Area
In Puget Sound region:
PSRC and Vision 2040
Typology of urban and rural geogs
Each type with “growth target”
Focusing growth into big centers
Holding the UGA line
Two more quick trends!
The 1990 GMA, inspired in part by Oregon’s 1978 SB 100, requires counties / cities to plan and calls for distinguishing Urban from Rural-Resource areas. Focusing most growth into vibrant city centers while protecting farms and forest resources.
Light orange, pink and white are Urban; light and dark green are Rural-Resource.

62. 20+ years of housing permits by city type Growth in city and unincorporated areas
This shows 22 years of residential bldg permits in the CPSR. If you look carefully, it demonstrates success in implementing the GMA, combined with market forces, shifting the impetus of growth from the outer edge (before 1990) to focus in the biggest cities, especially Seattle and Bellevue. But the canyon formed by the Great Recession fall-off of construction makes it harder to see the fundamental shift of locations.

63. 20+ years of GMA success: redirecting growth from rural and fringe into center
Percentage-of-growth slide with labels to show key shifts:
Success in implementing the GMA has combined with market forces to shift the impetus of growth from the outer edge (before 1990) to focus in the biggest cities, especially Seattle and Bellevue.
Over this 22 years, the Rural % has dwindled from 28% down to 4 to 5% of annual new-housing construction. At the same time, housing growth in the big central cities has increased from 17% in 1991 to 48% now. In that last few years, we’ve seen a similar “back to the city” movement nationally, but the trend is really pronounced here, and magnified by market forces.

64. Jurisdictional Shift: dwindling unincorporated population
Big Trend # 6
Jurisdictional Shift:
dwindling unincorporated population
This topic, government jurisdictions in WA and KC, may involve you more directly! This is a profound trend I’ve been watching for a long time.

65. Population growth shifts from unincorporated areas to cities
This shows pop growth in the 3-county Puget Sound region by 3 kinds of jurisdictions. Over 45 years. Seattle turned around and began growing in the mid-’80s. Unincorporated areas have grown, then declined again. Most of the region’s growth since 1990 has been in cities outside Seattle. If we look just within King County, the shift is more dramatic.

66. Unincorporated King County: dwindling share of population
Unincorporated King County: dwindling share of population . Change in Jurisdictions, 1980 – 2016 (Population in thousands)
I have to go back in history to when UKC was the big share.
From old AGR – but it shows the dramatic shift of population from uninc into cities
In the 1970s and 1980s, Seattle was losing people, and most of King County’s development activity and pop growth was outside cities, largely in big SF subdivisions on the urban fringe. (AGR)
In 1989, unincorporated KC had a population of nearly 600,000. Largest jurisdiction in the state, larger than Seattle.
Then in 1990 came the first two of ten new cities incorporated in KC, the first since 1961 (LFP). And annexations.
Now uninc urban has less than 6% of the whole county’s pop, and Rural about 6%. And now, since 2016, Seattle is among the state’s fastest-growing cities.
This trend is related to the previous GMA trend, but it has a revenue angle that makes it different.

67. In King County, new cities and annexation have changed picture
White area is cities in 1990, before GMA.
Lavender: 10 new cities.
Purple: annexations
Cities now cover most of UGA.
Majority of jobs / economy of pre-GMA unincorporated has been absorbed / cities.
This map portrays the geographic extent of the change in jurisdiction. The white area shows the 29 cities as they were in The lavender is the 10 new cities during the ‘90s, and the dark purple shows annexations since You can see there’s not much left of unincorporated territory within the UGA – just the pink PAAs.
Incorporations and annexations removed 80% of the job base that was in UKC (using current 2014 jobs, thx PSRC): read: revenue. Most of the loss was in the bit cities incorporated in the early 1990s. That’s the nub of KC’s general-fund revenue shortfall right now, and the pattern was set mostly 20 years ago.

68. What future trends can we expect?
Continuing population growth in Puget Sound.
Continuing increase in diversity of cultures.
Perhaps increasing disparity between communities.
Growth in Seattle and the suburban cities less growth on the fringe.
Continuing shift from unincorporated into cities
These are the sketchy points by way of forecasting that I usually tack on to my presentations. But Brooke asked me to dive deeper. [next slide]
Increasing diversity brings need to be sensitive to other cultures.
Suburbs: refer to Brookings work on suburbanizn of poverty.
Generational issues: Sea Foundation sponsored a recent conference on generational conflict as well as recognition of increasing diversity. Boomers and Gen X-Y need to acknowledge each others’ values.

69. really What future trends can we expect?
Continuing population growth in Puget Sound.
Continuing increase in diversity of cultures…??
Perhaps Probably increasing disparity between communities.
Growth in Seattle and the suburban cities less growth on the fringe.
Housing price increase: slowing soon?
Continuing shift from unincorporated into cities – or not
Brooke asked me to dive deeper. But I can’t remember a time of more uncertainty. Pop growth? Yes, but probably slowing and returning to “normal” historic rates soon. Job growth ditto … we’re overdue for a recession or at least a slowdown.
Immigration? Impossible to predict. Push in opposite directions of national politics and local sanctuary movement.
Increasing diversity brings need to be sensitive to other cultures.
Suburbs: refer to Brookings work on suburbanizn of poverty.
Generational issues: Sea Foundation sponsored a recent conference on generational conflict as well as recognition of increasing diversity. Boomers and Gen X-Y need to acknowledge each others’ values. “Peak Millennials”…?

70. The Near-Term Future: the end of our decade growth cycles?
For decades, King County population has grown about 1% per year, with 10-yr boom/bust cycle.
Since 2012, growth at 2% per year.
In three years, + 120,000 people, + 120,000 jobs
Will rapid growth continue? Indefinitely?
Expert observers have differing views!
And so much of our growth is based on immigration, pulling in talent from all over the world, and refugees from all over, too. What will happen to that pattern? It could go either way:
- the flow of int’l migration could be slowed dramatically as Trump admin puts the screws on immigration;
- or that slowdown could apply nationally and re-direct migration toward sanctuary areas like Puget Sound.
- we live in interesting times!

71. The next few years? Age of uncertainty….
Continuing Puget Sound growth, especially in Seattle and Eastside
Job growth: we’re a World City now
Diversity? Much depends on immigration
Housing inflation? We’re #1 in US now
Inequality? Perhaps a little respite
When I’m asked for forecasts, I like to say my crystal ball is cloudy. Boy, it’s really cloudy now! Things seem really intense now, with rapid growth especially in Seattle, and a lot of uncertainty in the national gov’t transition. Here are a few timid thoughts.
Just heard from two real estate forecasters: likely 2 or 3 more years of rapid growth driven by tech firms in Seattle. They also think we’ve grown beyond our company-town decade cycles of boom/bust based on Boeing. We’re a World City now, with ongoing growth based on innovation and investment. That means continuing rental and house-price inflation too. But longer term? Depends a lot on what happens with immigration, since the tech firms depend on talent from overseas.
The state financial people who do official forecasts are cautious, reminding me that KC always returns to long-term historical growth of 1% per year (2% now).
The most recent Census data (US and here) suggest that incomes are going up for most HH’s. Maybe minimum wage increases are starting to take effect. We can be hopeful about new efforts like BSK improving opportunities for all families. But I think our region will continue to struggle with inequality because we’ve become so attractive to highly-talented people who can outbid the rest of us for housing.

72. Demographic Data Sources
US Census and American Community Survey
click on “American FactFinder” at page bottom
Washington state Office of Fin. Mgmt (OFM)
click on “population…”
WA state Employment Security Dept (ESD)
look for “data and reports”
Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC)
various data including forecasts
Forecasts:
click on
click on
look for names of contact persons on those pages.

73. Thank you ! Questions…? - Chandler Felt, Demographer
King County Office of Performance, Strategy and Budget
Seattle, WA 98104
(206) 263 – 9693
SO, there are the Big Trends I’m seeing in WA state and Puget Sound and King County. Thanks! //

74. Leftovers
Not in presentation, but available in case other issues come up in Q&A

75. King County age distribution in 2000
THREE SLIDES SHOW CHANGING AGE DISTRIBUTION OVER 20 YEARS, 2000  2020:
CHILDREN AT THE BOTTOM, ELDERLY AT THE TOP OF THE CHART. NOTE THE BULGE OF BOOMERS.

76. King County age distribution in 2020
THIS SHOWS AGE DISTRIBUTION PROJECTED FOR 2020: BOOMERS ARE OLDER; A NEW ECHO BABY BOOM // 30’s

77. 20-year change: boomers, young adults, pre-schoolers
RED SHOWS THE CHANGE: AGING BOOMERS; MORE VERY OLD; MORE KIDS.

78. Disparity in Household Wealth (national data)
Which brings us to disparities of wealth (assets) as opposed to each year’s income. I wish I had local data on wealth…. But nationwide, black and Hispanic households took a huge hit to their wealth during the Recession, worsening the disparity between whites and PoC. Before the Recession, whites had 10 times the wealth of blacks. By 2013, the ratio was almost 13 times, and black wealth had dropped far more precipitously.

79. Numbers of children are growing slowly; senior population was steady until 2010
When you graph the change in three broad age groups, it’s not very dramatic. Looking at 20 years of growth by age bracket,
the # / children is growing more slowly than the adult population. Children are now a smaller share (23.5%) than 20 years ago (26%) and seniors are the same (12%). Put another way, children are a declining share of the state pop, while seniors are a growing share – and now post-2010, are growing rapidly.
Find WA-age on D:\Exc2011

80. Housing Affordability
In many areas, half of households were paying 30% or more of their incomes for housing in
Housing Affordability
Note: ACS estimates contain margins of error and differences between neighborhoods shown in map may not be statistically significant.
One outgrowth of the income inequality that I don’t have time to talk about is worsening housing affordability. That’s been a long-term challenge in Puget Sound, and it’s becoming more acute with the recent explosion of high-wage jobs. This map shows that households all over King County – and in fact all over the metro area – were struggling with housing costs at the end of the Recession. Probably a bit better now.
[This is a countywide issue; affordability is an issue in all communities of KC. Overpaying.
The ACS reports household renter costs, and owner costs for both mortgaged and non-mortgaged housing units. 39% of Shoreline homeowners were overpaying (i.e. > 30% of income), compared to 35% countywide. Among renters, more than 48% of Shoreline renters were overpaying, compared to 46% countywide. Yes, incomes are higher here, but housing prices are correspondingly higher. Note that this covers the period, where housing prices have been way up and way down, so it’s hard to draw firm conclusions.]
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey

81. Percent Population Change 2000 - 2010
Washington’s fastest population growth:
- Tri-Cities
- Central WA counties
- Clark and Thurston
- NW counties
Let’s turn to the most recent decade.
This looks at the growth rates – the population growth was fastest in smaller and more rural counties.
Franklin County in eastern WA. Also rapid pace in central WA, as well as Clark, Thurston, Whatcom and Snohomish counties.

82. But the big numbers of growth are in Puget Sound King, Snohomish, Pierce, and Clark gained most
But if we look at the absolute numbers of growth, a diff picture emerges:
The three big Puget Sound counties dominate the amounts of pop growth, plus Clark. I’ll let Charles report on Clark, and I’m going to focus on those 3 PS counties = Sea-Tac-BV MSA. But first, a little more about WA:
KC + 194,000; Sno and Pierce + 100,000; Clark + 80,000; Spokane + 53,000; Thurston +40,000; Whatcom/Benton/Franklin all in the 30,000 range.