Census: Mitchell grows slightly

Talk about it

U.S. Census Bureau estimates released recently show that Mitchell’s population increased by 22 residents, or 0.15 percent, from 2008 to 2009.

According to the annual estimate, released in late June, Mitchell had 14,725 residents in 2008 and 14,747 in 2009. Over the longer term, Mitchell posted a net gain of 189 residents in the nine years since the last official census, moving from 14,558 residents in 2000 to 14,747 in July 2009 — a 1.3 percent increase.

Mitchell took its biggest hit in the 2008 annual report, when it lost an estimated 66 residents in one year.

The numbers were disappointing to Mitchell Mayor Lou Sebert, but he took solace in the fact that the report is based on estimates and not an actual count.

Sebert blamed the 2008 numbers on lost jobs in Mitchell’s manufacturing sector, and he remains hopeful the recent positive numbers signal a change for the better.

“I’m confident the numbers will turn around, and that people who lost jobs will be back,” he said.

The estimates, released annually by the Census Bureau, use various reporting sources to construct data. The figures compile annual data collected from the year 2000, the date of the last census, up to July 1, 2009. This year’s estimate will be the final report before actual Census figures are disclosed in April 2011.

The new numbers cited in the census estimates are below Mitchell’s peak 2006 reporting period, when the city registered 14,863 residents — an increase of 305 from the 2000 Census numbers.

“Census numbers govern the distribution of more than $400 billion in federal funds each year and serve as the baseline for future post-Census population estimates,” Census Bureau Director Robert Groves said in a news release. “Local governments use Census data to plan new roads, schools and emergency services. Businesses use the data to develop new economic opportunities.”

There were no surprises for South Dakota, where the state’s major urban centers continue to swell, while most rural towns continued a slow downward population spiral.

Sebert said that an improving economy bodes well for the final Census report. “When people don’t have work they go elsewhere, he said, “but I see in the paper that they’re already advertising for welders.”

But Sebert did not discount the importance of the Census numbers.

More population not only means more school aid and city income, but “more representation in the state House of Representatives,” said Sebert, a former member of the House. If population fell, the number of representatives could remain the same, but district boundaries would become larger, he explained.

Looking longer term, the vast majority of area towns lost population in the last nine years, say the population estimates.

In Davison County, Mount Vernon’s population went from 477 in 2000 to 465 in 2009, a loss of 12 residents or negative 2.51 percent. In that same period, Ethan’s numbers went from 330 to 311, a loss of 19, or minus 5.75 percent. Each town, however, lost only one resident between 2008 and 2009.

“This decline has been going on for some time, and there’s no easy solution” said David Lambert, regional director for the Dakota Heartland Development Association, which promotes development in Sanborn, Davison, Hanson, Hutchinson, Douglas and Aurora counties.

“This isn’t just a population loss in our communities, it’s a regional population decline,” Lambert said, adding that reversing that trend has been, and will continue to be, a challenge.

Lambert said he and others have been working toward creating jobs that will stabilize communities and stop the loss of skilled workers.

Bryan Hisel, executive director of the Mitchell Area Development Corporation, said that jobs are the key.

“Population losses in the region are the reason for economic development being a key priority for Mitchell and area towns,” Hisel said. “Without more private industry that exports goods and services and creates local jobs, there will continue to be losses in population.”

It’s a Catch-22 situation.

“Employers want to know what skilled employees you have for an available workforce,” Lambert said, but once skilled workers are lost, it’s sometimes tough to get them back. Many have moved on, opted for retirement or have made other plans. Some are also wary of re-committing to a job and the possibility of getting laid off a second time, he said.

Mitchell’s relatively small population increase, coupled with higher population losses in surrounding counties and communities, suggests that departing residents made no intermediate stops but simply moved directly to larger urban centers in search of work, Lambert said.

New technology has brought new industries like ethanol into South Dakota and created jobs where none previously existed, and technology and communications will be crucial to any new job development.

“The question is, will technology be enough to stave off the losses to our communities?” Lambert asked.

Tags: news, local, census