Philadelphia’s Population Problem
Last week, the Census Bureau released its population estimates for the country’s top 25 cities. Philadelphia is still holding on to its spot as the 6th most populous city — but one has to wonder for how long. Out of the 25 largest cities, Philadelphia is one of only four cities — along with Detroit, Memphis and Baltimore — that has lost population since the 2000 census. In the past eight years, Philadelphia has lost more than 70,000 people, or roughly 4 percent of its population — a faster rate of population loss than any other American city.
.
View downtown from the Art Museum.
There are myriad excuses for why Philadelphia continues to lose people in this post-racial golden era for urbanity. You could say it’s an old city and all the growth in cities these days is in the sprawling Southwest. Tell that to New York City, which gained 53,000 people in one year. Or Boston, which has added 20,000 people in the past eight years.
You could complain that Philadelphia just happens to be in Pennsylvania which as a state has one of the highest proportions of elderly people, who happen to dying off. But what about the thousands of young people that graduate every year from the 92 colleges in the Philadelphia area?
A high crime rate, a beleaguered education system and unceasing fiscal crises provide other excuses for why so many people have left Philadelphia. To counter these problems, however, the city has provided little incentive for people to stay or move here.
While cities lose residents at roughly the same rates, their changes in population are largely related to their ability to attract new residents. Philadelphia has yet develop a comprehensive plan to keep its population levels stable; more astonishingly, it has few plans for growth. As the mayor has wisely created holistic offices, such as the Office of Sustainability, he needs to develop an office or affiliated non-profit focused on the city’s strategic growth.
This city was built for 2 million people, and it can replenish its population to that number if it believes that population growth is the top priority for the city. And it should be: when Philadelphia has more people, it will have the tax base it needs to fix its schools and keep its libraries open; when Philadelphia grows its population, our vacant lots and abandoned buildings won’t be breeding grounds for crime; as a larger city, Philadelphia’s infrastructure, from transit to trash, will run more efficiently at a greater scale.
An organization dedicated to the city’s intentional growth must encourage a diverse new population with as diverse set of tools. First and foremost, Philadelphia must retain many more of the students that reside here for four years — and then leave. The percentage of Philadelphians with college degrees is shockingly only 21 percent. The city has done a miserable job of retaining the more than 100,000 students living in the city. Most universities offer programs that postpone interest accrual on loans while students are enrolled in school; the city should develop a program so that students can postpone interest accrual if they live in Philadelphia for at least three years. A program like this not only builds these young people’s wealth, but will allow them to build larger bonds with the city, will make Philadelphia schools more attractive to students, and encourage them to stay here after those three post-graduate years.
The business community has been focused on attracting large corporations to move headquarters here — an unlikely scenario as Philadelphia is sandwiched between D.C. and New York. Instead, small businesses must be encouraged to grow by hiring the best talent possible. Small grants for relocation assistance will allow local Philadelphia companies to gather new talent here and compete with larger corporations in larger cities.
The city must next capitalize on its strong immigrant communities as many cities depend upon immigrants to boost their population numbers. Our local philanthropic community and the Mayor’s Commission on African and Caribbean Immigrant affairs is deeply interested in ways of engaging new immigrants and they should work together to provide these immigrants with the services they need — language and microfinance programs — so that they can encourage family members and friends to help build their community.
There are other exciting ways to encourage growth, but the most essential one is to coordinate all the city’s agencies and top partners to jointly gear their activities toward attracting more people. Rather than rely upon the tired methods of attracting growth, such as tax abatements or corporate incentives, offices as disparate as Fairmount Park and the Transportation Department need to re-examine how their work can create a better, more attractive quality of life in Philadelphia. By redirecting their energies toward building a quality of life that will attract more people to live here, these government entities will be thinking not just of short-term goals, but of the future. That kind of forward thinking is the only way this city will regain the density and prosperity of its past.
Photos by Tony the Misfit.
Diana Lind is editor in chief of Next American City magazine.
Philly’s Number One! But Not in a Good Way…
Philadelphia Mayor Answers Questions From The Public On NPR
Matt in Philadelphia on Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 2:09pm
Another MAJOR factor not mentioned here is taxation.
Why would it be unlikely that Philadelphia would land a major new corporation by being between New York and Philadelphia? I disagree, and believe that should be seen as an asset. When a “Keystone Opportunity Zone” was (inappropriately) set up around 30th Street Station, more than a few businesses with high wage earners moved in. Why? Most appreciated the opportunity to be in Philadelphia while getting a tax break.
As for the population number as a whole: what is wrong with shrinking? Bigger is not always better. The argument that less-population-equals-less-revenue for things like transit is not as true if the city is losing thousands of low tax contributors and gaining a slightly-smaller amount of higher tax contributors. I’m not saying that is socially “just,” but it is another factor to consider in a city still working through the de-industrialization process.
Matt in Philadelphia on Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 2:58pm
Oops, I meant “half way between New York and Washington DC” should be looked at as an asset and not a liability. Although I’m sure you knew I wasn’t talking about Trenton!
J. on Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 5:43pm
For one, I think creating incentives for students who attend Philadelphia universities to remain in the city after graduation is a fantastic idea. There was once a time when the students of the University of Pennsylvania were, well, interested in Pennsylvania. I’m not so sure this is the case anymore. Penn students are certainly not the only students in the city, and perhaps not even the most important contingent to keep in the city, as this problem can be seen even in the flight of the educated away from the city.
No draconian, negative pressures are likely to prevent these educated escapees, but small incentives along with a more coherent plan for a positive future could perhaps create a seed of an idea to be planted in young people’s heads: Stay here! We are a community that WILL make positive change and create a fantastic community out of this wonderful place.
Also, people need to have the sense of community as part of their identity in order for a city to function. Common goals ought to help fertilize that sense of community. Instead of being concerned that the city is a ‘high tax’ area, and seeing these taxes as a net loss, we should be showing young people that taxes can help create a more vibrant communal lifestyle than that of the suburbs where alienation lives. This, of course, is both a great hope and a great duty. Not only must we show young people that taxes can be used to maintain a great community, replete with public transportation, green space, and wise urban planning that leads to the growth of industry and commerce, but those in charge of directing those taxes must show an increased level of competence and honesty so that these are not hollow words.
Terry on Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 12:45pm
Matt has the right idea. People will move to where there are jobs. Look at the fantastic growth that Houston is still experiencing. Until we end the business-hating attitude of Philadelphia which has spawned something as arrogantly named as the “Business Privilege Tax” we will continue to lose population. Stop trying to find more ways to spend our limited government resources and instead reduce this burden on employers.
And to J: the problem with the tax situation in Philadelphia is that the high taxes we do pay do not benefit anyone but the corrupt politicians and their buddies who maintain the status quo.
James in South Philly on Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 3:44pm
I think you missed a huge issue by not focusing on Philadelphia’s schools in this article. The fact is that the Philadelphia metropolitan region typically grows at a fairly healthy clip - it’s just that all of this growth is in the suburbs instead of in the City of Philadelphia. While taxation, crime, and a lack of basic services don’t help the city’s competitive position against its suburbs in competing for new residents, the lack of good public schools in Philly is the #1 reason many families (who can afford to) move to the suburbs when their children reach school age. These families are the middle-class taxpayers that Philadelphia needs to very much to keep within its boundaries, and fixing only one thing, the schools, would go a very long way towards doing so.
Keeping college grads in town for three years is step one, keeping them here after they get married and have kids is step two, and only after that is accomplished will Philly truly resume growth in population.
Terry on Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 3:52pm
James-
How do we improve school performance when the SDP only has $11,800 to spend per pupil as compared to the $23,000 per pupil that Lower Merion has?
James in South Philly on Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 6:05pm
That’s the billion dollar question for Philadelphia. It’s a chicken and egg situation because until we rebuild our tax base we don’t have the money to spend on things like better schools that will attract more taxpayers. It also doesn’t help that we’re starting from behind with a huge deficit. I’m hopefully that at some point the state and federal governments will take an interest in coming to the rescue to equalize school funding in cities.
However, on the bright side, funding is only half the battle. Philadelphia’s schools could be much better without spending more money if they had a bit more competently run and if more parents were incentivized to take an active role in education. I’ll get off my soapbox though ;)
Budapeste in Hungary on Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 6:28am
I love the colorful small houses. I looks just like the funny houses in Buenos Aires in Argentina. I don’t know why, but I immediately feel better when I see them. I wish I could paint my neighbors’ houses with exciting colors like these :)
J on Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 9:49am
James, you’ve got a good point about the federal/state gov’ts. Mid-1900s Federal subsidies aided development of the suburban sprawl mess that has been taking over the country. Why shouldn’t the Federal government be involved in cleaning up its own mess? I say this also as a step in planning towards the future. High volume car use is not going to be an option for much longer.
And Terry: any productive anything can only be done in a situation where people care about positive results. I alluded to this in my last paragraph. Citizens need to get more involved, as increasing citizen involvement is the only way to increase accountability by government actors.
Putting faith in moneyed interests whose only accountability is the dollar is not going to help Philadelphians. Yes, investment could help stalled growth, however the HOW of the growth is more important for the long-term success of the city than the fact THAT there is growth. If the housing bubble mess teaches us anything, it is that trusting moneyed speculators to fuel sustainable growth is a fool’s errand.
I know it’s an uphill effort. We all recognize that. But fighting the right battle is the only way to win the war.
Terry on Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 10:02am
J-
If rampant corruption, high crime rate and one of the highest tax rates in the country isn’t going to motivate Philadelphians to vote, what will? The vote last spring was an embarrassment, especially for positions as important as Comptroller and DA.
Good point re: Federal government cleaning up the mess they made through the FHA, I will have to remember that.
J on Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 3:58pm
Terry - These are all serious problems and require long-term solutions. There is clearly a disconnect between local pols and the voter base, a disconnect fostered by attitudes on both sides. I really don’t know what kind of institutional/structural changes should be championed, but I do know that on an individual level we can all affect the level of apathy by being gadflies in our communities.
Getting to effective governance is possible, but as with any difficult goal, it is probably going to have to be attacked on a number of fronts. Voter apathy is a national problem, and one that seems to be systemic and related to the governing parties, both Republican and Democrat, which have really entrenched themselves. Long-term, I hope we see an effort to subvert or bypass the big parties, but I’m no Nostradamus, and I can’t tell you the best way to do that. I just hope that I and others like me can influence people enough so that they can realize that there needs to be change and that there is hope for the future. Means will be found if the people want to find them.