collapse

* Recent Posts

Poll: Markus Howard Jersey Retirement by The Sultan of Semantics
[Today at 08:37:20 AM]


Sam Hauser #114 vs. Kon Knuepel #22... by MU82
[September 22, 2023, 04:28:25 PM]


Kon! by Juan Anderson's Mixtape
[September 22, 2023, 04:01:54 PM]


Todd Smith's Theme: Getting Past Hard by 4everwarriors
[September 22, 2023, 02:04:14 PM]


Recruiting as of 9/15/23 by TAMU, Knower of Ball
[September 22, 2023, 02:03:45 PM]

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address.  We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or register NOW!


Author Topic: The Future of Cities  (Read 17239 times)

Heisenberg v2.0

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1107
Re: The Future of Cities
« Reply #25 on: April 18, 2023, 08:21:34 PM »
Your OP is about how downtowns are shrinking, and you use year old data to prove your point. In reality, major city's downtowns have grown past pre-pandemic levels as folks rush back to city centers to be near to restaurants, the arts, and culture.

Milwaukee declining in population for decades and university average applications per year? Idk man. Just pointing out that your OP is incorrect because you're using old data, and your whole point is built off of that.

Old data? I used the latest data available.

I provided a story from March 2023 from both the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and NY Times(by Thomas Edsell) that says exactly the opposite of what you contend.

And if you want more data, the Univerity of Toronto has an entire project on this subject, with the most up-to-date data available. They even created downtown recovery indices and it is not a pretty picture.

https://downtownrecovery.com/index.html

So why don't you provide data that support your contention that big northern cities are not seeing an alarming population decline?

You asked if I was in the meth business or the money business.  Neither.  I'm in the empire business.

Heisenberg v2.0

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1107
Re: The Future of Cities
« Reply #26 on: April 18, 2023, 08:27:52 PM »

Stitch is in one of the wealthiest parts of the city. Again, their location had nothing to do with why they closed.

And again, I will ask a THIRD time. Where should MU move?

I think they are fine where they are now. And that location will serve them well into the future.

If the northern cities continue their alarming depopulation, should MU consider reacting to it, such as moving? And if it does, it is a decade-type of project. (that said, I think Depaul is much closer to this decision point than MU).

Washington University in St. Louis is in a town that has lost more than half its population (actually, by some measures, St Louis' population decline is equal to Detriot) and thrives in an area that is not. It did that because it is perceived as a "national university" that transcends St. Louis.

So, if you want to tell me MU is a national university that transcends the situation in Milwaukee, that would be a good argument.
You asked if I was in the meth business or the money business.  Neither.  I'm in the empire business.

ZiggysFryBoy

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5111
  • MEDITERRANEAN TACOS!
Re: The Future of Cities
« Reply #27 on: April 18, 2023, 08:30:43 PM »
ArchMan will be here soon to defend st louie.

dgies9156

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3857
Re: The Future of Cities
« Reply #28 on: April 18, 2023, 08:37:20 PM »
First of all, Marquette isn't moving. Ever.

Second, Marquette's mission is to Milwaukee, Wisconsin and the Midwest first. Marquette's commitment to the inner city is an essential part of the Jesuit mission of Men and Women for Others. The notion of Marquette on some leafy green campus in Mequon or Cudahy is theoretically appealing to suburbanites but not in keeping with who we are.

Third, if Marquette opens a campus in Nashville, I'll literally die! One of the appeals to Marquette way back when was they were NOT Nashville and that Milwaukee was a different world than Nashville. Besides, you really expect to compete for students in Nashville? A Jesuit Catholic university there is OUT OF ITS ELEMENT!!!!!
« Last Edit: April 18, 2023, 08:41:44 PM by dgies9156 »

Skatastrophy

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5389
  • ✅ Verified Member
Re: The Future of Cities
« Reply #29 on: April 18, 2023, 08:37:45 PM »
Old data? I used the latest data available.

I provided a story from March 2023 from both the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and NY Times(by Thomas Edsell) that says exactly the opposite of what you contend.

And if you want more data, the Univerity of Toronto has an entire project on this subject, with the most up-to-date data available. They even created downtown recovery indices and it is not a pretty picture.

https://downtownrecovery.com/index.html

So why don't you provide data that support your contention that big northern cities are not seeing an alarming population decline?



Like I said before, the NYT article is an editorial. That's not valuable

Downtown Recovery is data from 2022 at the most recent. Like I said, old data.

The JSOnline article about Milwaukee has nothing to do with major downtown population recovery nationwide.

I linked an article above from 2023, which you responded to already. Here it is again, with a couple more:

Chicago - more people downtown than prepandemic - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-02-24/chicago-s-downtown-now-has-more-residents-than-before-pandemic
Chicago Loop fastest growing neighborhood in the US - https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/chicagos-loop-is-fastest-growing-downtown/
Downtown MSP - Continuing to grow every year - https://www.minnpost.com/twin-cities-business/2023/02/downtown-minneapolis-population-growth-slowed-in-2022/

Your data is old, just sayin. There's a reason that apartment supply is so low and prices are so high in major metros.

I think you're extrapolating a Milwaukee problem into a nationwide problem.

ZiggysFryBoy

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5111
  • MEDITERRANEAN TACOS!
Re: The Future of Cities
« Reply #30 on: April 18, 2023, 08:41:36 PM »
Like I said before, the NYT article is an editorial. That's not valuable

Downtown Recovery is data from 2022 at the most recent. Like I said, old data.

The JSOnline article about Milwaukee has nothing to do with major downtown population recovery nationwide.

I linked an article above from 2023, which you responded to already. Here it is again, with a couple more:

Chicago - more people downtown than prepandemic - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-02-24/chicago-s-downtown-now-has-more-residents-than-before-pandemic
Chicago Loop fastest growing neighborhood in the US - https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/chicagos-loop-is-fastest-growing-downtown/
Downtown MSP - Continuing to grow every year - https://www.minnpost.com/twin-cities-business/2023/02/downtown-minneapolis-population-growth-slowed-in-2022/

Your data is old, just sayin. There's a reason that apartment supply is so low and prices are so high in major metros.

I think you're extrapolating a Milwaukee problem into a nationwide problem.

2022 data is old? It's April 2023.

I get it. Everyone has to pile on heisey, bit this line is just arguing to argue.  Don't become the Archman of Chicago.

Heisenberg v2.0

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1107
Re: The Future of Cities
« Reply #31 on: April 18, 2023, 08:51:07 PM »
Like I said before, the NYT article is an editorial. That's not valuable

Downtown Recovery is data from 2022 at the most recent. Like I said, old data.

The JSOnline article about Milwaukee has nothing to do with major downtown population recovery nationwide.

I linked an article above from 2023, which you responded to already. Here it is again, with a couple more:

Chicago - more people downtown than prepandemic - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-02-24/chicago-s-downtown-now-has-more-residents-than-before-pandemic
Chicago Loop fastest growing neighborhood in the US - https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/chicagos-loop-is-fastest-growing-downtown/
Downtown MSP - Continuing to grow every year - https://www.minnpost.com/twin-cities-business/2023/02/downtown-minneapolis-population-growth-slowed-in-2022/

Your data is old, just sayin. There's a reason that apartment supply is so low and prices are so high in major metros.

I think you're extrapolating a Milwaukee problem into a nationwide problem.

Chicago is 2.4 million. The Loop has a residential population of 46,000, or 1.9% of Chicago's total population. It is up 4,000 since 2020, making it a fast-growing neighborhood. And hardly any of these new 4,000 households have high school-aged kids considering a university.


MSP, the downtown core, has a population of 56,748, in a city of 425,000, or 13% of the total MSP population. It increased by 1.2% in the last year .... or a whole 681 people.

These are not serious rebuttals.
You asked if I was in the meth business or the money business.  Neither.  I'm in the empire business.

Heisenberg v2.0

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1107
Re: The Future of Cities
« Reply #32 on: April 18, 2023, 08:52:39 PM »
2022 data is old? It's April 2023.

I get it. Everyone has to pile on heisey, bit this line is just arguing to argue.  Don't become the Archman of Chicago.

Thank you

I'm trying hard to have a serious argument, as it is a serious subject. Please try and do the same.
You asked if I was in the meth business or the money business.  Neither.  I'm in the empire business.

Uncle Rico

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 7220
Re: The Future of Cities
« Reply #33 on: April 18, 2023, 08:54:50 PM »
Chicago is 2.4 million. The Loop has a residential population of 46,000, or 1.9% of Chicago's total population. It is up 4,000 since 2020, making it a fast-growing neighborhood. And hardly any of these new 4,000 households have high school-aged kids considering a university.


MSP, the downtown core, has a population of 56,748, in a city of 425,000, or 13% of the total MSP population. It increased by 1.2% in the last year .... or a whole 681 people.

These are not serious rebuttals.

Marquette isn’t going anywhere
Tis a shame, 'tis a rotton shame, for if ye can enjoy the walkin’ ye can probably enjoy the other times in yer life when ve're in between. And that's most o' the time; wouldn't ye say?

Heisenberg v2.0

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1107
Re: The Future of Cities
« Reply #34 on: April 18, 2023, 08:58:39 PM »
First of all, Marquette isn't moving. Ever.

Second, Marquette's mission is to Milwaukee, Wisconsin and the Midwest first. Marquette's commitment to the inner city is an essential part of the Jesuit mission of Men and Women for Others. The notion of Marquette on some leafy green campus in Mequon or Cudahy is theoretically appealing to suburbanites but not in keeping with who we are.

Third, if Marquette opens a campus in Nashville, I'll literally die! One of the appeals to Marquette way back when was they were NOT Nashville and that Milwaukee was a different world than Nashville. Besides, you really expect to compete for students in Nashville? A Jesuit Catholic university there is OUT OF ITS ELEMENT!!!!!

Fair enough. I completely understand your point of view, and you are not wrong.

But what happens if the depopulation in Chicago/Milwaukee reaches the point that Depaul is now seeing?  Then MU has to start going backward. And once you start going backward, it becomes a "doom loop."

So, to revise the question for you. Do you fear that MU has to think about managing a long-term decline? Or can it transcend the population growth of its area (Chicago/Milwaukee)
You asked if I was in the meth business or the money business.  Neither.  I'm in the empire business.

Skatastrophy

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5389
  • ✅ Verified Member
Re: The Future of Cities
« Reply #35 on: April 18, 2023, 09:09:15 PM »
2022 data is old? It's April 2023.

I get it. Everyone has to pile on heisey, bit this line is just arguing to argue.  Don't become the Archman of Chicago.

Yes, data about pandemic recovery of downtowns from 6 months ago is old. There was a black swan event and, again, there's a reason that apartments are hard to find and historically expensive in major metro areas.

Chicago is 2.4 million. The Loop has a residential population of 46,000, or 1.9% of Chicago's total population. It is up 4,000 since 2020, making it a fast-growing neighborhood. And hardly any of these new 4,000 households have high school-aged kids considering a university.


MSP, the downtown core, has a population of 56,748, in a city of 425,000, or 13% of the total MSP population. It increased by 1.2% in the last year .... or a whole 681 people.

These are not serious rebuttals.

You're the one that said downtowns repeatedly. Would you like to move your goalposts?

Heisenberg v2.0

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1107
Re: The Future of Cities
« Reply #36 on: April 18, 2023, 09:19:24 PM »
Yes, data about pandemic recovery of downtowns from 6 months ago is old. There was a black swan event and, again, there's a reason that apartments are hard to find and historically expensive in major metro areas.

Rents in Chicago are down in the last year.

https://www.renthop.com/average-rent-in/chicago-il

Chicago is more than a handful of apartment buildings in Fulton Market.


You asked if I was in the meth business or the money business.  Neither.  I'm in the empire business.

🏀

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8439
Re: The Future of Cities
« Reply #37 on: April 18, 2023, 09:38:56 PM »
I just hope Marquette burns the buildings to the ground on the way out so the neighborhood can’t turn them into whore and trap houses.

Dickthedribbler

  • Team Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 439
Re: The Future of Cities
« Reply #38 on: April 18, 2023, 10:33:19 PM »
How 'bout da hell hole aka Chicago, hey?

What about Chicago?

forgetful

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4574
Re: The Future of Cities
« Reply #39 on: April 18, 2023, 10:36:12 PM »
I agree it is something that is not easy.
The most likely way to MU moving is by opening a second campus and slowly shifting resources to that campus.

That said, ChatGPT gives me some examples. Spot checks of some (but not all) on Wiki confirm

University that opened a second campus in the US and are shifting major resources to that campus.

ASU - Downtown Phoenix
Northeastern - Charlotte
Texas A&M - San Antonio
Virginia Tech - Northern Virginia
Cornell - NYC
Purdue - Indianapolis
Drexel - Sacramento


Schools moving their campus over the last 80 years,
University of Tulsa, Central Florida, Rice, Elon, SMU, Trinity, Seton Hall, and Colorado College
(Wiki doubling-checking many of these confirms it)

Schools struggling with enrollment because they are in areas of declining population
Depaul, Akron, Chicago State, Wayne State, Eastern Michigan, Louisana Monroe, Stevens Point, and Western and Southern Illinois.

Schools that have closed in recent years are all in areas with fast-declining populations
Stritch (coming), St Joe Indiana, Burlington College (VT), and College of New Rochelle.

--------

Again, this is not happening in at least a decade. But suppose Milwaukee goes the way of St. Louis, Detroit, or even the way Chicago is now going. How does the University thrive if the area around it and the biggest pool of students (Chicagoland) is effectively dying?

So, it comes down to how you answer the first question, what is the future of big cities in northern climates?

The above is why you should not use ChatGPT as a resource, and apparently, you can't wiki it either. Didn't check them all, but:

Drexel's satellite campus in Sacramento closed in 2015. It failed, because Drexel is known in Philly...not Sacramento.

Cornell always had a footprint in NYC, that is where their medical school is, and they didn't really create a satellite campus. They created Cornell "Tech" which was a way to leverage technology access in the city in conjunction with their medical school.

Also, Rice has always been in Houston. Elon has never moved. SMU has always been in Dallas, and Seton Hall moved to South Orange New Jersey shortly after its founding back in the 1800's.

So...most of your post is inaccurate.

Dickthedribbler

  • Team Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 439
Re: The Future of Cities
« Reply #40 on: April 18, 2023, 10:42:02 PM »
Cardinal Stritch closing has nothing to do with the fact they are in Milwaukee.

And again Heisey, where do they move?

One school that did move was Carthage College, which was originally in rural Carthage, IL. They moved to their present site in 1964 after nearly 100 years in operation.

Strich isn't in Milwaukee, even though they may utilize a Milwaukee mailing address.

MU82

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 21090
Re: The Future of Cities
« Reply #41 on: April 18, 2023, 10:49:16 PM »
Rents in Chicago are down in the last year.

https://www.renthop.com/average-rent-in/chicago-il

Chicago is more than a handful of apartment buildings in Fulton Market.

Again, the population of the Chicago metro area actually has been growing.
"Freedom of the press is not just important to democracy, it IS democracy." - Walter Cronkite

dgies9156

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3857
Re: The Future of Cities
« Reply #42 on: April 18, 2023, 10:56:31 PM »
Fair enough. I completely understand your point of view, and you are not wrong.

But what happens if the depopulation in Chicago/Milwaukee reaches the point that Depaul is now seeing?  Then MU has to start going backward. And once you start going backward, it becomes a "doom loop."

So, to revise the question for you. Do you fear that MU has to think about managing a long-term decline? Or can it transcend the population growth of its area (Chicago/Milwaukee)

We've had this discussion before about Marquette's student future. You have choices -- take a bigger slice of a smaller pie or find a bigger pie.

A Jesuit Catholic University will have trouble being successful in states of the south, where the population either is Protestant or not religious. Unless the basketball team suddenly becomes a 1970s Part 2, nobody outside the Midwest and East knows us.

So the answer is bigger slice of a smaller pie.

To those of you arguing about Chicago's miniscule growth rate -- do you really think that's going to continue with Brandon Johnson as Mayor? No chance!

You tossed Lori Lightfoot for ---- this?


TAMU, Knower of Ball

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 21434
  • Meat Eater certified
Re: The Future of Cities
« Reply #43 on: April 18, 2023, 11:02:59 PM »
The above is why you should not use ChatGPT as a resource, and apparently, you can't wiki it either. Didn't check them all, but:

Drexel's satellite campus in Sacramento closed in 2015. It failed, because Drexel is known in Philly...not Sacramento.

Cornell always had a footprint in NYC, that is where their medical school is, and they didn't really create a satellite campus. They created Cornell "Tech" which was a way to leverage technology access in the city in conjunction with their medical school.

Also, Rice has always been in Houston. Elon has never moved. SMU has always been in Dallas, and Seton Hall moved to South Orange New Jersey shortly after its founding back in the 1800's.

So...most of your post is inaccurate.

I'll add that TAMU doesn't have a second campus in San Antonio. TAMUSA is a separate institution that's part of the TAMU system. That would be like saying UW Madison has a second campus in Parkside
TAMU

I do know, Newsie is right on you knowing ball.


TAMU, Knower of Ball

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 21434
  • Meat Eater certified
Re: The Future of Cities
« Reply #44 on: April 18, 2023, 11:04:17 PM »
I'll go on record as saying that Marquette is never moving. They'd go fully online before they'd move their main campus
TAMU

I do know, Newsie is right on you knowing ball.


MU82

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 21090
Re: The Future of Cities
« Reply #45 on: April 18, 2023, 11:10:34 PM »

To those of you arguing about Chicago's miniscule growth rate -- do you really think that's going to continue with Brandon Johnson as Mayor? No chance!


I do not live in Chicago, have not lived there for 13 years, and am highly unlikely to move back. I didn't leave because of the mayor at the time, I have no opinion of the most recent mayor, and I have no opinion about the new mayor. I no longer follow Chicago politics. My son and his family live in Deerfield, so we do visit the northern burbs several times a year.

I am merely stating a fact. A couple of posters keep saying the Chicago metro area is losing population. All I'm doing is looking at the data, which reveals that the Chicago metro area actually has been growing.

Now, others might do what you're doing -- speculate that the population will decrease because of the city's new mayor or whatever factor one might choose to name. But the fact is that the metro area's population has been slowly increasing.
"Freedom of the press is not just important to democracy, it IS democracy." - Walter Cronkite

Heisenberg v2.0

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1107
Re: The Future of Cities
« Reply #46 on: April 18, 2023, 11:39:43 PM »
I do not live in Chicago, have not lived there for 13 years, and am highly unlikely to move back. I didn't leave because of the mayor at the time, I have no opinion of the most recent mayor, and I have no opinion about the new mayor. I no longer follow Chicago politics. My son and his family live in Deerfield, so we do visit the northern burbs several times a year.

I am merely stating a fact. A couple of posters keep saying the Chicago metro area is losing population. All I'm doing is looking at the data, which reveals that the Chicago metro area actually has been growing.

Now, others might do what you're doing -- speculate that the population will decrease because of the city's new mayor or whatever factor one might choose to name. But the fact is that the metro area's population has been slowly increasing.

Chicago Metro's population growth is less than the national average. So yes, more people, but losing ground yearly to the rest of the country.

And eventually, the appeal to living next to, but not in Chicago will diminish as the city itself becomes less and less attractive.

And .. there is this from three weeks ago

https://www.illinoispolicy.org/91-of-102-illinois-counties-lose-population-in-2022/

91 OF 102 ILLINOIS COUNTIES LOSE POPULATION IN 2022

Illinois’ population decline reached record-breaking levels in 2022 as the state’s population dropped by 104,437 residents from from July 2021-July 2022.

The losses were widespread, new data shows. There were 91 of Illinois’ 102 counties that lost population during that year, according to U.S. Census Bureau estimates released March 30.

The largest decline in numeric terms came from the state’s most populous counties. Cook County lost 68,314, DuPage County lost 5,547, Lake County lost 3,010, St. Clair County lost 2,351 and Kane County lost 2,001. The decline in Cook County was the second-most in the nation, behind only Los Angeles County.

« Last Edit: April 19, 2023, 12:15:43 AM by Heisenberg v2.0 »
You asked if I was in the meth business or the money business.  Neither.  I'm in the empire business.

Heisenberg v2.0

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1107
Re: The Future of Cities
« Reply #47 on: April 18, 2023, 11:40:43 PM »
The above is why you should not use ChatGPT as a resource, and apparently, you can't wiki it either. Didn't check them all, but:

Drexel's satellite campus in Sacramento closed in 2015. It failed, because Drexel is known in Philly...not Sacramento.

Cornell always had a footprint in NYC, that is where their medical school is, and they didn't really create a satellite campus. They created Cornell "Tech" which was a way to leverage technology access in the city in conjunction with their medical school.

Also, Rice has always been in Houston. Elon has never moved. SMU has always been in Dallas, and Seton Hall moved to South Orange New Jersey shortly after its founding back in the 1800's.

So...most of your post is inaccurate.

Thanks for correcting
You asked if I was in the meth business or the money business.  Neither.  I'm in the empire business.

Heisenberg v2.0

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1107
Re: The Future of Cities
« Reply #48 on: April 18, 2023, 11:52:24 PM »
We've had this discussion before about Marquette's student future. You have choices -- take a bigger slice of a smaller pie or find a bigger pie.

A Jesuit Catholic University will have trouble being successful in states of the south, where the population either is Protestant or not religious. Unless the basketball team suddenly becomes a 1970s Part 2, nobody outside the Midwest and East knows us.

So the answer is bigger slice of a smaller pie.

To those of you arguing about Chicago's miniscule growth rate -- do you really think that's going to continue with Brandon Johnson as Mayor? No chance!

You tossed Lori Lightfoot for ---- this?

Good post

This is the heart of the issue for MU, like most universities in northern cities, will have to manage through a population base it depends on that is declining. 

If it mismanages it, it will go through painful budget cuts (see Depaul) and hard choices like closing programs or entire schools.

Contrast this to southern schools that can make many mistakes and get bailed out because of their growing populations. Northern schools have to be more or less perfect.

Regarding the religious angle. This is tricky. Yes, the country is becoming less religious. But the non-religious are having fewer kids.

1.6 per for non-religious women (less than the replacement rate of 2.1) versus 2.5 for religious women (above the replacement rate)

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2017/04/05/the-changing-global-religious-landscape/

So, in the long run, what does going secular get you? Remember, it is about getting kids to apply.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2023, 11:55:26 PM by Heisenberg v2.0 »
You asked if I was in the meth business or the money business.  Neither.  I'm in the empire business.

🏀

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8439
Re: The Future of Cities
« Reply #49 on: April 19, 2023, 05:57:45 AM »
Chicago Metro's population growth is less than the national average. So yes, more people, but losing ground yearly to the rest of the country.

And eventually, the appeal to living next to, but not in Chicago will diminish as the city itself becomes less and less attractive.

And .. there is this from three weeks ago

https://www.illinoispolicy.org/91-of-102-illinois-counties-lose-population-in-2022/

91 OF 102 ILLINOIS COUNTIES LOSE POPULATION IN 2022

Illinois’ population decline reached record-breaking levels in 2022 as the state’s population dropped by 104,437 residents from from July 2021-July 2022.

The losses were widespread, new data shows. There were 91 of Illinois’ 102 counties that lost population during that year, according to U.S. Census Bureau estimates released March 30.

The largest decline in numeric terms came from the state’s most populous counties. Cook County lost 68,314, DuPage County lost 5,547, Lake County lost 3,010, St. Clair County lost 2,351 and Kane County lost 2,001. The decline in Cook County was the second-most in the nation, behind only Los Angeles County.



Even if the data is correct, Illinois Policy is not cite worthy.

 

feedback