Neighborhoods & Community Development in Franklin County: Understanding Our Past & Preparing for Our Future January 2012 Jason Reece, Christy Rogers, Matt Martin, Liz Colombo & Dwight Holley, Melissa Lindsjo The Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race & Ethnicity Moritz College of Law The Ohio State University www.kirwaninstitute.org Research Commissioned by: The Community Development Collaborative of Greater Columbus The following research was commissioned and released as part of the 2012 Community Development Neighborhood Summit. Key Findings The City Expands: Growth and Urban Decentralization Like most urban areas in the United States, Franklin County has experienced a pattern of urban decentralization over the past fifty years. People, housing, jobs and infrastructure have moved outward from the city, producing population loss in most of the city’s core urban communities. Franklin County and the City of Columbus have experienced overall population growth since 1970 (a 40% increase for Franklin County and 46% increase for the City of Columbus); a substantial portion of Columbus’ growth was a result of annexation, which expanded the city’s geographical area within Franklin County. At the same time, many core neighborhoods lost population. In short, distant neighborhoods have captured much of the region’s growth.1 Over one-third of the county’s census tracts -- mostly in the suburbs -- doubled the number of housing units from 1970 to 2005/2009. However, most tracts within the I-270 loop experienced stagnant housing unit growth (or loss), and saw increases in vacant properties during this time period. From 2000 to 2005/2009, census tracts in which at least 15% of the housing units were vacant quadrupled, from 9% to 36%. Reversal of Fortune: The Recession and the Housing Crisis Hit Home Unemployment rates soared across the county as adjusted median household income declined. Franklin County households overall experienced a loss of income from 1970 to 2005/2009: 83% of all tracts lost income. The decline was gradual (in each decade census tracts across the county experienced decreases in income), yet the 2000s saw the worst decline in median household income. Housing cost, as a proportion of income paid for housing, particularly for renters, has increased throughout the County since 1970. In 1970 and 1980, most of the census tracts that had high rates of residents paying more than 35% of their income on rent were in the central city. But from 1990 to 2009, housing cost burden spread to more suburban areas. Between 2000 and 2005/2009 the poverty rate across Franklin County increased. Eighty-four percent of census tracts experienced an increase in poverty and 29% of census tracts experienced over a 100% increase in poverty. In 2009, at least a quarter of the population in 32% of census tracts were in poverty -- and one tract had a 100% poverty rate. In the 1990s, public assistance was drastically reduced across Franklin County. In many neighborhoods in Franklin County, this reversal of fortune has literally stopped revitalization in its tracks. As one respondent described: “Vacancies…have stymied past progress and we’ve had to reorient our focus on stabilizing neighborhood housing markets rather than...on…economic development, infrastructure, and preserving affordable housing.” Changing Demographics In 1970 and 1980, the Latino population was less than 2% of the overall population in nearly all census tracts (i.e. in 1970 only three tracts had more than 3% Latino populations). However, by 2000, the Latino population had increased significantly in many census tracts. By 2005/2009, 9% of all census tracts had Latino populations greater than 10%. The Latino population is a small but growing presence in Franklin County. 1 | Page In 1970, few areas had significant numbers of foreign-born residents – only 2 census tracts had a foreign-born population that made up over 10% of the population – but by 2005/2009 there were significant populations of foreign-born residents throughout Franklin County, especially in northern Franklin County. This trend began in 1990 and by 2005/2009, 27% of census tracts had a foreign born population that made up 10% of the population or greater. Overall, 40% of the county’s census tracts experienced a 300% increase or greater in foreign-born populations. Of the foreign-born populations, a significant number of residents are non-citizens. There was a substantial change in the population that does not speak English in Franklin County between 1980 and 2005/2009. In 1980, in 98% of census tracts, less than 2% of the population did not speak English. In 2005/2009, one-fourth of census tracts had more than 10% of their populations who did not speak English. The increase in the non-English speaking population was most noticeable in the 2000s, began in northwest portion of the county, and expanded to the rest of the county. Education Improves, but Segregation and Disparities Remain Franklin County and its neighborhoods have seen tremendous growth in educational attainment in the past fifty years (Figures 30 and 31). Overall, the proportion of the population that obtained a High School Degree or equivalent increased across Franklin County from 1970 to 2009. However, the rate varied: In 2009, 45.5% of census tracts had a 90% or greater high school degree achievement rate; 26.9% of tracts had more than 95% rate and 3 even had a 100% rate. On the other hand, four census tracts had less than a 50% high school graduation rate, illustrating clear achievement gaps. Similarly, the percentage of residents with a college degree increased substantially from 1970 to 2009, yet disparities remain: by 2000, most northern Franklin County census tracts had at least a 50% college degree rate, while many southern Franklin County tracts had a less than 30% college degree rate. Economic and racial residential segregation persisted throughout the decades in Franklin County, particularly for African Americans. Although less drastic in 2010 than in 1970, there remains a clear concentration of African Americans in the Near East side neighborhoods. Most census tracts in Franklin County were predominantly White in 1970. Between 1970 and 1980 some census tracts on the Near East side experienced a 65% loss or greater of the White population. Between 1980 and 2000, the White population changed very little throughout the county. However, central city neighborhoods experienced an increase in the White population between 2000 and 2005/2009 -- some experienced more than a 44% increase. Residential segregation patterns correlate with segregation into neighborhoods of varying socio- economic conditions. Vacancy rates, educational attainment and poverty rates are higher in African American and Latino neighborhoods, on average, than White and Asian neighborhoods in the Columbus region. Our “opportunity analysis” of neighborhood conditions reveals alarming disparities. While 1 in 2 Whites and 7 in 10 Asians live in areas of high opportunity, only 3 in 10 Hispanics or Latinos and less than 1 in 5 African Americans live in areas of high opportunity. Furthermore, an analysis of the county’s foreign-born population shows that while 60% or more of immigrants from North America, Asia, and Europe live in high opportunity neighborhoods, less than 25% of immigrants from Central America, Africa, and the Caribbean, a group that represents 46% of all immigrants, live in high opportunity neighborhoods. Segregation also has occurred by class, with Columbus following a national trend of more residents concentrated in very poor or very affluent neighborhoods, and a decline in the number of residents living in middle income neighborhoods. Columbus reflected a national trend of neighborhoods polarized 2 | Page into very high and very low income neighborhoods, with middle income neighborhoods declining.2 In 2005/2009, 5% of census tracts, predominantly in the suburbs, had median household incomes over $100,000, while 12% of census tracts, predominantly in the inner city, had median household incomes less than $25,000. In addition, Northern Franklin County, especially the northwest, had consistently lower rates of unemployment, while southern Franklin County had higher rates of unemployment. The central city generally had the highest rates of unemployment. From 1970 to 2009, urban tracts experienced much higher poverty rates than suburban ones. Survey of community development organizations: shared challenges, shared hope Our voluntary on-line survey illuminates the characteristics, activities and challenges of some the area’s community development organizations. In general, the survey respondents represented small, professionally staffed, well-established organizations (i.e. over 15 years of experience), focused most often on housing, employment, community organizing, and services. A very high level of partnership was reported: fully two-thirds of survey respondents indicated that they have 5 or more partnerships. Only one respondent had no active partnerships. The respondents partnered for resource sharing, service delivery, and strategy building. Respondents cited challenges posed by the larger economy, such as increased poverty, unemployment, and foreclosure/vacancy as the most significant regional challenges to neighborhoods in Central Ohio. When it came to neighborhood trends most impacting service areas, respondents most often cited foreclosure, then poverty and unemployment. Many respondents saw similar trends occurring nationally, with one respondent stating,