Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
A Report to the Houston City Council
on the 2010 Census Results
by
Jerry Wood
February 24, 2011
As the City Council is aware, Article V, Section 3 of the City Charter requires the City Council, based upon
the best available data, to determine in each year during which a City general election is to be held, (i)
the population of the City and of each Council district from which a district Council Member is to be
elected, and (ii) whether the population of the Council districts is materially unbalanced as to population.
The Council is also aware that the official April, 2010 U.S. Census for the City of Houston showed a
population of 2,099,451, or just shy of 2.1 million. A population of 2.1 million is significant because
Article V, Section 2 of the City Charter requires the City to create two additional Council Districts when
the city’s population is determined to be 2.1 million or more. The purpose of this report is to delineate
deficiencies in the reported census and identify clear evidence that the City’s population is, in fact,
greater than 2.1 million.
All estimates for the 2010 population of Houston, including those of the Census Bureau and the
Planning and Development Department, were higher than the Bureau’s enumerated population
by over 150,000 people. There are many ways in which these results may be analyzed to
understand the source of this undercount. Analysis of the Census results to identify errors is a
task performed by the Planning and Development Department after every Census. As a part of
that effort, I looked at one possible source for errors, simple mistakes in geography, which have
been common in past censuses. In the course of my examination, I identified Census Bureau
errors which excluded many Houstonians from our official count by mistakenly assigning them
to unincorporated Harris County. If these errors had not occurred, Houston’s official Census
population would have been over 2,100,000.
Once the Census bureau releases its results for Houston and the surrounding counties, the
Planning and Development Department examines the results at block level to look for
anomalies and errors. When Census enumerators collect their data, it is assigned to specific
blocks created by lines formed by physical features recognizable to the eye, such as roads and
streams, and by the boundary lines of major units of government, such as cities and counties.
The Census Bureau does not recognize property lines or utility district boundaries in
establishing the boundaries of their blocks. The city limit of the City of Houston is highly
complex, especially since the advent of limited purpose annexations in 2001. These limited
purpose annexations often follow utility district boundaries, subdivision boundaries, or
property lines, and can be difficult for the Census Bureau to replicate in its system. In
examining the census results at block level I found many instances in which the Census Bureau’s
version of the city limits did not conform to the actual city limits. Additionally, some of the
limited purpose annexations were not picked up by the Census Bureau, and many tracts were
not included within the area the Census Bureau recognized as being in the city. Most areas
annexed for limited purposes do not include residents at the time of annexation. However,
after annexation some commercial tracts have been developed with apartments and the
population within those limited purpose areas is eligible, under Texas law, to vote in City
elections. Examples of the exclusion of actual Houston residents from the Census Bureau
population count for the City follow.
In six cases, the excluded population could be easily identified because it was located in a block
formed by lines recognized by the Census Bureau. In these cases, entire Census blocks were
excluded from the City count and this excluded population is easily identified. In the Fall Creek
neighborhood on the North Belt East (Exhibit A), the Census Bureau failed to include all of the
limited purpose annexation in its definition of the City of Houston, and excluded an entire
apartment complex. Part of that complex was in a whole block that contains 206 Houstonians.
The other portions of that particular limited purpose annexation area were included in blocks
that held residents who are properly attributed to unincorporated Harris County. In the
Crosswinds Plaza development on the North Belt between John F Kennedy Boulevard and the
Eastex Freeway, the Census Bureau shifted a complicated City boundary, and excluded 174
Houston residents, while placing other Houston residents in blocks with County residents.
In four cases, the Bureau’s version of the city limit line was simply displaced a short distance
from, and parallel to, the actual location of the city limit line. In Eastex Oaks subdivision, for
instance, the Census Bureau’s error placed eleven Houston residents in a block formed by a
drainage ditch which was recognized as a geographical line, and by their erroneous version of
the city limit. The actual city limit and the drainage ditch are the same line, and the block the
Census Bureau attributed to unincorporated Harris County should have been included in
Houston’s total population. The same thing occurred along the southern boundary of the
Summerwood subdivision, in which 21 Houstonians were mistakenly excluded, and the western
boundary of the former Interstate MUD, where five were excluded. In the Lakeshore
subdivision around Lake Houston (Exhibit B), the Census Bureau displaced their version of the
city limit for a long distance and managed to exclude entire blocks. A total of 149 Houston
residents, along with additional homes, were excluded and are described below.
The additional exclusions of actual Houston residents in Lakeshore resulted in many homes
being included in blocks the population of which should not be counted in the City. As a result,
A Report to the Houston City Council on the 2010 Census Results Page 2 of 6
By Jerry Wood February 24, 2011
the only way to identify how many Houstonians were excluded is to make an estimate based on
the roof tops of the homes located in these blocks that are also in the City of Houston but
excluded by the Bureau, and assigning the blocks’ population proportionately. The result of this
calculation is an estimate showing another 109 Houstonians excluded in these blocks. The
same process, using HCAD information on the number of apartments in the apartment
complexes mistakenly placed in blocks including unincorporated Harris County population in
the Crosswinds Plaza development, yields an estimate of an additional 140 excluded
Houstonians. Again, and using the same HCAD information, I estimate that an additional 196
Houstonians in the excluded Fall Creek apartment complex were improperly assigned to
unincorporated Harris County. Finally, a displaced city limit line near West Oaks Mall excluded
patio homes containing an estimated 17 residents who should have been included in the City of
Houston population total.
Because it is easy to place population on the wrong side of a street, as has often happened
before, I also looked for examples of residences near the city limit line that might have been
accidentally coded to the other side of the street and out of the City. In checking a new
apartment complex on Pearland Parkway between the South Belt and Clear Creek (Exhibit C),
which is the City’s boundary in this area, I discovered that the block containing the apartment
complex was uninhabited according to the Bureau. Further, I checked the surrounding blocks
and could find no evidence that this population was located in any other block within the City of
Houston. It may have been placed in Brazoria County, or it may not have been counted at all.
This complex, which was occupied at the time of the Census count, has 292 units, according to
HCAD. Using a 15% vacancy rate yields an estimated population of this block of 658 uncounted
Houstonians.
Further effort will be necessary to prepare a thorough analysis of errors to submit to the Census
Bureau for correction after they begin accepting appeals after June 1, 2011. A search for
uncounted population will be made in locations not on the periphery of the city, but will require
a more complicated analysis involving identification of housing units and confirmation that the
apartments were occupied at the time of the census enumeration in April 2010. If the errors
already identified had not occurred, the population count for the City on April 1, 2010, would
certainly have been 566 residents higher, or 2,100,017, and, depending on the accuracy of the
estimates, may have been as high as 2,101,137.
A Report to the Houston City Council on the 2010 Census Results Page 3 of 6
By Jerry Wood February 24, 2011