HomeMy WebLinkAboutChapter 02 - PopulationChapter 2: Population
Final Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
1
CHAPTER 2: POPULATION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2.1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................2
2.2 HISTORICAL POPULATION GROWTH ........................................................................................................2
HISTORICAL TRENDS .................................................................................................................................................2
GROWTH: 1990 TO 2003............................................................................................................................................3
COMPONENTS OF GROWTH: STATEWIDE ...................................................................................................................4
COMPONENTS OF GROWTH: BUTTE COUNTY.............................................................................................................6
POPULATION DISTRIBUTION - CITY SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AND URBAN AREA ........................................................7
2.3 POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS.............................................................................................................11
AGE DISTRIBUTION..................................................................................................................................................11
RACE AND ETHNICITY .............................................................................................................................................12
HOUSEHOLD AND FAMILY COMPOSITION ................................................................................................................13
LENGTH OF TENURE ................................................................................................................................................14
2.4 POPULATION PROJECTIONS.......................................................................................................................15
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 2-1 HISTORICAL POPULATION GROWTH BUTTE COUNTY AND CALIFORNIA 1860-2000.....................................3
TABLE 2-2 POPULATION GROWTH SINCE 1990 BUTTE COUNTY AND CALIFORNIA ........................................................4
TABLE 2-3 COMPONENTS OF POPULATION GROWTH: 1990-2000 BUTTE COUNTY AND CALIFORNIA ............................6
TABLE 2-4 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION INCORPORATED CITIES AND THEIR SPHERES OF INFLUENCE BUTTE COUNTY
AND CALIFORNIA 1990-2000..............................................................................................................................10
TABLE 2-5 POPULATION GROWTH INCORPORATED CITIES AND CENSUS DESIGNATED PLACES (CDPS) BUTTE COUNTY
AND CALIFORNIA 1990-2000..............................................................................................................................11
TABLE 2-6 AGE DISTRIBUTION BUTTE COUNTY AND CALIFORNIA 2000 .....................................................................12
TABLE 2-7 RACE AND ETHNICITY BUTTE COUNTY AND CALIFORNIA 2000.................................................................13
TABLE 2-8 HOUSEHOLD COMPOSITION BUTTE COUNTY AND CALIFORNIA 2000.........................................................14
TABLE 2-9 RESIDENCE IN 1995 FOR THE POPULATION 5 YEARS AND OVER BUTTE COUNTY AND CALIFORNIA 2000 .15
TABLE 2-10 DOF POPULATION GROWTH PROJECTIONS BUTTE COUNTY 2000-2020 ..................................................16
TABLE 2-11 SHORT-TERM DOF POPULATION GROWTH PROJECTIONS COMPARED TO 2003 POPULATION BUTTE
COUNTY..............................................................................................................................................................17
TABLE 2-12A BCAG POPULATION GROWTH PROJECTIONS BUTTE COUNTY 2003-2030.............................................18
TABLE 2-12B RATES OF GROWTH FOR BCAG POPULATION GROWTH PROJECTIONS BUTTE COUNTY 2003-2030.......19
Chapter 2: Population
Final Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
2
2.1 INTRODUCTION
In order to effectively guide land use and development in the county and establish policies
relating to housing and public services and facilities, it is important to understand who lives in
the county, how the population has grown over time, and how it is projected to grow in the
future. This chapter reviews historical population trends, demographics as of 2003, and
population projections for Butte County. In addition to the countywide overview, population data
for the county’s five incorporated communities and the unincorporated area of the county are
included to provide insight into how demographics and growth characteristics vary within the
county. The population statistics have been taken from the 2000 U.S. Census and 2003
California Department of Finance (DOF) estimates.
2.2 HISTORICAL POPULATION GROWTH
Historical Trends
The first available population statistics for the Butte County area date back to 1848, when gold
was first discovered along the Feather River. At that time, the European, or non-native,
population of the Butte County area was only about 100 people. No accurate estimates exist of
the size of the native population at that point, but in 1850, when Butte County was formed as one
of the 27 original counties of the new state of California, gold miners and other recent
immigrants were still outnumbered by the Native American population. Since 1856, when the
county’s current boundaries were established, population growth has generally been slow and
somewhat irregular. As shown in Table 2-1, county population actually decreased during three
different decades prior to 1900. Since the first Census count in 1850, the county growth rate has
been slower than the state’s growth rate in all but four decades. Because county growth has
tended to be slower than state growth, the county’s share of California population has been in
fairly steady decline, although this share has remained at about the same level since 1930.
Chapter 2: Population
Final Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
3
TABLE 2-1
HISTORICAL POPULATION GROWTH
BUTTE COUNTY AND CALIFORNIA 1860-2000
Census
Year
Butte
County
Population
Butte County
Population
Growth
Butte
County
Population
Growth %
Butte County
Annual
Average
Growth Rate
(AAGR)
Butte
Population as
% of State
Population
California California
Population
Growth %
California
AAGR
1850 3,574 ---3.86%92,597 --
1860 12,106 8,532 238.7%13.0%3.19%379,994 310.4%15.2%
1870 11,403 -703 -5.8%-0.6%2.04%560,247 47.4%4.0%
1880 18,721 7,318 64.2%5.1%2.17%864,694 54.3%4.4%
1890 17,939 -782 -4.2%-0.4%1.48%1,213,398 40.3%3.4%
1900 17,117 -822 -4.6%-0.5%1.15%1,485,053 22.4%2.0%
1910 27,301 10,184 59.5%4.8%1.15%2,377,549 60.1%4.8%
1920 30,030 2,729 10.0%1.0%0.88%3,426,861 44.1%3.7%
1930 34,093 4,063 13.5%1.3%0.60%5,677,251 65.7%5.2%
1940 42,840 8,747 25.7%2.3%0.62%6,907,387 21.7%2.0%
1950 64,930 22,090 51.6%4.2%0.61%10,586,223 53.3%4.4%
1960 82,030 17,100 26.3%2.4%0.52%15,717,204 48.5%4.0%
1970 101,969 19,939 24.3%2.2%0.51%19,953,134 27.0%2.4%
1980 143,851 41,882 41.1%3.5%0.61%23,667,902 18.6%1.7%
1990 182,120 38,269 26.6%2.4%0.61%29,760,021 25.7%2.3%
2000 203,171 21,051 11.6%1.1%0.60%33,871,648 13.8%1.3%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau from DOF (Table CALHIST2a.xls: Historical Census Populations of California State, Counties, Cities, Places, and
Towns, 1850-2000).
Growth: 1990 to 2003
Unlike the rapid growth experienced during the 1970s, when Butte County averaged 3.5 percent
growth annually, the county’s population growth rate during the 1980s returned to the more
moderate levels experienced during the 1950s and 1960s when the growth averaged less than 2.5
percent per year.
However, the growth rates that Butte County and the state of California experienced in the 1980s
did not continue into the 1990s and from 2000 to 2003. This is indicated by the county and state
population growth trends shown in Table 2-2. Butte County’s growth rate between 1990 and
2000 averaged 1.1 percent per year. Between 1990 and 2000, California grew only marginally
faster than Butte County with a 1.3 percent average growth per year.
From 2000 to 2003, Butte County experienced a similar slow growth rate as the 1990s. Butte
County’s annual average growth rate (AAGR) was 1.18 percent from 2000 to 2003. California
saw a more substantial increase in its growth rate, with an AAGR of 1.78 percent from 2000 to
2003 compared to 1.3 percent from 1990 to 2000.
Butte County’s population accounted for 0.61 percent of the total California population in 1990
and 0.59 percent of the total California population in 2003. Butte County grew at a slower rate
than the state as a whole from 1990 to 2000 and also from 2000 to 2003. Butte County’s
population growth accounted for only 0.51 percent of the state’s population growth from 1990 to
2000 and 0.40 percent of the state’s population growth from 2000 to 2003.
Chapter 2: Population
Final Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
4
TABLE 2-2
POPULATION GROWTH SINCE 1990
BUTTE COUNTY AND CALIFORNIA
Date of Estimate Butte
County
Population
Butte County
Population
Growth
California
Population
California
Population
Growth
Butte County
Population as a
% of California
Population
Butte County
Population Growth
as a % of California
Population Growth
Apr. 1, 1990 (Census)182,120 -29,758,213 -0.61%-
Jan. 1, 1991 185,400 1.80%30,143,000 1.29%0.62%0.85%
Jan. 1, 1992 189,100 2.00%30,723,000 1.92%0.62%0.64%
Jan. 1, 1993 191,800 1.43%31,150,000 1.39%0.62%0.63%
Jan. 1, 1994 194,100 1.20%31,418,000 0.86%0.62%0.86%
Jan. 1, 1995 196,400 1.18%31,617,000 0.63%0.62%1.16%
Jan. 1, 1996 197,600 0.61%31,837,000 0.70%0.62%0.55%
Jan. 1, 1997 198,700 0.56%32,207,000 1.16%0.62%0.30%
Jan. 1, 1998 200,000 0.65%32,657,000 1.40%0.61%0.29%
Jan. 1, 1999 201,000 0.50%33,140,000 1.48%0.61%0.21%
Jan. 1, 2000 203,100 1.04%33,753,000 1.85%0.60%0.34%
Apr. 1, 2000 (Census)203,171 -33,871,648 ---
Jan. 1, 2001 204,900 0.89%34,367,000 1.82%0.60%0.29%
Jan. 1, 2002 207,300 1.17%35,000,000 1.84%0.59%0.38%
Jan. 1, 2003 210,400 1.50%35,591,000 1.69%0.59%0.52%
Date of Estimate Butte
County
Population
Butte County
Population
AAGR
California
Population
California
Population
AAGR
Butte County
Population Growth
as a % of California
Population Growth
Growth: Apr. 1990 -
Apr. 2000
21,051 1.10%4,113,435 1.30%-0.51%
Growth Jan. 2000 - Jan.
2003
7,267 1.18%1,838,000 1.78%0.40%0.40%
Growth Apr. 1990 -
Jan. 2003
28,247 1.14%5,832,787 1.41%0.48%0.48%
Sources: California Department of Finance: Historical County and State Population Estimates, 1991-2000, with 1990 and 2000 Census
Counts; and Population Estimates for Cities, Counties and the State, 2001-2003, with 2000 DRU Benchmark
Note: totals are rounded by DOF
Components of Growth: Statewide
Population growth can be divided into three basic components: domestic in-migration, legal
foreign immigration and natural increase (births minus deaths). Statewide trends affect local
growth and because of this, it is useful to examine these trends in order to forecast local
population growth.
Domestic in-migration is generally defined as the movement of people into California from other
parts of the U.S. Much of California’s population growth has historically resulted from domestic
in-migration. A good example of this was during the era of the Forty-niner gold rush when most
newcomers to California were domestic migrants from Eastern cities. However, while certain
special ethnic groups and population minorities have been tracked, migration into California
from other parts of the U.S. has not been studied comprehensively. In 1995, the Research Bureau
of the State Library and DOF conducted a study (Migration Between California and Other
States: 1985-1994 (November 1995)) that found that the annual average number of domestic in-
migrants entering the state was about two percent of the state’s population. The annual average
Chapter 2: Population
Final Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
5
number of people leaving California for other states also represented only about two percent of
the state’s population. The net change in the state’s population due to domestic migration has not
amounted to more than one percent of the state’s population for any single year between 1985
and 1994. According to the study, between 1985 and 1994, most of the domestic in-migration
consisted of people from the Northeast and Midwest. California had a net out-migration of
people to other Western states. Due to the economic recession that began in 1991, domestic in-
migration decreased between 1992 and 1995. California lost a record 257,000 people between
1993 and 1994 through domestic out-migration. However, beginning in the mid-1990s,
California, because of its strengthening economy, had a net domestic migration gain.
California’s population also grew substantially as a result of legal foreign immigration.
California had 1,969,198 legal immigrants from other countries from 1990 through 1999,
according to DOF in its report entitled Legal Immigration to California by County: Federal
Fiscal Year (FFY) 1984-2001 (February 2003). This immigration represented 47.9 percent of the
total population increase during this period.
According to a study done by DOF entitled Legal Immigration to California in 2001 (March
2003), California was home to the largest number (282,794 or 27 percent) of the total immigrants
to the U.S. in 2001. For the past 30 years, California has been one of the top six destinations for
legal immigrants. In 2001, these six states (California, New York, Florida, Texas, New Jersey,
and Illinois) received about two-thirds of all immigrants to the U.S.
Seventy-two percent of the immigrants to California in 2001 came from ten countries. Thirty-
four percent were born in Mexico. The next most prominent countries of origin contributed
another 38 percent of the total immigrants in 2001 (Philippines, China, India, Vietnam, El
Salvador, Korea, Taiwan, Guatemala, and Nicaragua).
The most significant component of state population growth is natural increase (deaths subtracted
from births). From 1990 to 2000, 82.8 percent of the population growth in California has come
from the natural increase. The population segment with the highest natural increase has been
persons of Hispanic origin. From 1990 to 2000, 55.8 percent of the population growth in
California has come from the natural increase among people of Hispanic ethnicity.
Table 2-3 below shows the components of population growth in California and Butte County
from 1990 to 2000 broken down by ethnicity and race. This table does not have migration
information broken down into its domestic and foreign components.
During the 1990s, the race/ethnic distribution in California shifted, with the White Non-Hispanic
population’s share of the total decreasing, and the Hispanic and Asian & Pacific Islander Non-
Hispanic populations’ shares increasing. White Non-Hispanics were 57 percent of the population
in 1990 but only 47 percent of the population by 2000. The Hispanic population increased from
26 percent in 1990 to 32 percent of the population in 2000. The Asian & Pacific Islander Non-
Hispanic population grew from 9 to 12 percent of the total over the same period. The shares of
both the Black or African American Non-Hispanic and American Indian and Alaskan Native
Non-Hispanic populations remained constant, at seven percent and one percent, respectively.
Chapter 2: Population
Final Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
6
TABLE 2-3
COMPONENTS OF POPULATION GROWTH: 1990-2000
BUTTE COUNTY AND CALIFORNIA
Butte County Population Net Change
from 1990
Births Deaths Natural
Increase
Net
Migration(1)
Hispanic Total 21,297 7,691 3,680 387 3,293 4,398
White, Non-Hispanic 163,848 5,489 18,114 19,646 -1,532 7,021
Black or African American,
Non-Hispanic
3,667 1,423 449 202 247 1,176
American Indian & Alaska
Native, Non-Hispanic
5,989 3,042 462 116 346 2,696
Asian & Pacific Islander, Non-
Hispanic
8,370 3,406 1,888 174 1,714 1,692
Total 203,171 21,051 24,593 20,525 4,068 16,983
California
Hispanic Total 10,956,899 3,268,949 2,547,576 253,918 2,293,658 975,291
White, Non-Hispanic 16,069,467 -995,250 2,060,394 1,654,767 405,627 -1,400,877
Black or African American,
Non-Hispanic
2,331,614 228,369 404,107 177,955 226,152 2,217
American Indian & Alaska
Native, Non-Hispanic
386,650 202,108 26,288 6,908 19,380 182,728
Asian & Pacific Islander, Non-
Hispanic
4,127,018 1,407,451 571,917 118,749 453,168 954,283
Total 33,871,648 4,111,627 5,610,282 2,212,297 3,397,985 713,642
Source: DOF: Race/Ethnic Population Estimates: Components of Change for California Counties, April 1990 to April 2000 (March 2003).
Raw birth and death data are provided by the Vital Statistics Section, Center for Health Statistics, California Department of Health
Services. In this report those who marked more than one race on their 2000 Census forms have been allocated to a single race.
Allocations are to the smallest race group identified for their county.
(1) includes domestic and foreign migration
Components of Growth: Butte County
As with the state, population increases in Butte County are also attributed to three basic
components: legal immigration, natural increase, and domestic in-migration. The following
examines the population growth over the 10 year period between 1990 and 2000. According to
the 2000 Census, the net population increase during this period was 21,051.
From 1990 through 1999, 4,449 people legally immigrated to Butte County from other countries,
according to DOF. This immigration represents 21.1 percent of the total population increase in
Butte County from 1990 to 2000. By comparison, as stated above, legal immigrants to California
as a whole represented 47.9 percent of the total state population increase during this period.
During the 1990s, the race/ethnic distribution in Butte County shifted similarly to that of the state
as a whole, although not as dramatically, with the White Non-Hispanic population’s share of the
total decreasing, and all of other populations’ shares increasing. White Non-Hispanics were 87
percent of the population in 1990 but only 81 percent of the population by 2000. The Hispanic
population increased from 7 percent in 1990 to 10 percent of the population in 2000. The Asian
& Pacific Islander Non-Hispanic population grew from 2.7 to 4.1 percent of the total over the
same period. The Black or African American Non-Hispanic population grew from 1.2 to 1.8
Chapter 2: Population
Final Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
7
percent and the American Indian and Alaskan Native Non-Hispanic population grew from 1.6
percent to 2.9 percent.
Natural increase is a much smaller component of population growth in Butte County compared
to the state as a whole. According to DOF, from 1990 to 2000, natural increase accounted for
4,068 new Butte County residents, which is approximately 19 percent of the total population
increase. The Hispanic natural increase accounted for 80.9 percent of the total county natural
increase. As stated above, from 1990 to 2000, 82.8 percent of the population growth in
California has come from the natural increase.
In Butte County, 80.7 percent of the population increase from 1990 to 2000 was due to net
migration (both foreign and domestic). In California, net migration only accounted for 17.3
percent of the population increase. While Butte County accounted for just 0.6 percent of the total
state population in 2000, it accounted for 2.4 percent of the net migration to California in the
1990s.
Table 2-1 shows that population growth in Butte County and California is cyclical. Domestic in-
migration is tied to the state’s economic prosperity as individuals and families move to
California for employment opportunities. The same can be said for Butte County as well. For
example, the 1970s and 1980s were the two highest growth decades in the history of Butte
County in terms of overall population increase. This was also an era of great economic
opportunities. In-migration fluctuated again during the 1990s, slumping during the economic
recession of the early 1990s, then rising in the late 1990s as the economy strengthened.
Butte County will continue to be an attractive place for new migrants. The reasons for population
migration are as diverse as the population itself. Economic opportunities, housing affordability,
flight from urban problems, retirement amenities, environmental quality, and lifestyle choices are
among the motives most often associated with migration to the region. Much of the intrastate
migration has been from the urban, metropolitan areas to rural, less urbanized areas, particularly
the Sierra Foothills. In this regard, Butte County is not unique, and may experience significant
population increases in the future due to this phenomenon. Much of this growth will be
stimulated by retirees and others seeking a slower-paced, “rural lifestyle.” Also, higher housing
costs in the metropolitan areas of the state, combined with expanding employment opportunities
in the Central Valley, will contribute to increased in-migration. Butte County’s population has
three distinct, although often interrelated, groups of in-migrants: those attracted by employment
or other economic opportunities; retirees; and college students attending California State
University-Chico.
Population Distribution - City Sphere of Influence and Urban Area
Table 2-4 below shows the relationship of the population distribution between incorporated cities
and the unincorporated areas of Butte County. The table shows the population within the
incorporated area of each city based on Census counts, and the population within the Sphere of
Influence (SOI) for each city based on aggregating Census data at the block level in a GIS
system to correspond with SOI boundaries as of 2002. The Census data for the cities is based on
the jurisdictional boundaries at the time of the count. This means that an increase in the
Chapter 2: Population
Final Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
8
population of an incorporated area could be due to annexation of populated areas, annexation of
areas that were subsequently developed, actual population increases in already incorporated
areas, or a combination of all three.
Table 2-4 shows that since 1990, population has significantly declined in the unincorporated area
of the county. The population in the unincorporated county fell from 98,461 in 1990 to 96,068 in
2000. This decrease is due to annexation of unincorporated land containing existing housing
units. Building permit activity records indicate that a substantial amount of housing was
permitted and built in unincorporated Butte County during this period. Given the magnitude of
the decrease in total housing units from 1990 to 2000, and the fact that most new units in
County-approved subdivisions remained under County jurisdiction after being built, many more
units were located in areas annexed by cities than were built in the unincorporated county area.
All of these annexed units would have been located within the SOIs of the cities.
The relatively high growth rates of cities within Butte County and low growth or negative
growth within the unincorporated county can be attributable, in part, to annexations of populated
unincorporated county areas to Butte County cities. For example, the total population in the
unincorporated portion of Butte County declined by approximately 2 percent between 1990 and
2000, while the overall county population grew by 12 percent during the same period. This
difference in growth rates is explained by the annexation of developed unincorporated areas by
Butte County cities during this time.
Examining growth rates for the cities from 1990 and 2000 can be deceiving since a considerable
amount of annexation occurred during this decade. For example, the population of Chico grew at
a 4.2 percent annual rate from 1990 to 2000, but since much of this growth was due to
annexations (or new development on annexed land), the annual average growth rate (AAGR)
within the entire Chico SOI (using the 2002 boundary) was 1.6 percent. Still, Chico had the
highest growth rate of any jurisdiction in the county.
As shown in the table, the population within the Chico SOI only (outside of city limits) declined
from by over 7,000 persons from 1990 to 2000 because of annexation. In 2000, 28.9 percent of
residents of the entire Chico SOI area (including the incorporated areas) lived in the
unincorporated portion of the SOI.
In Oroville, the entire SOI (including the incorporated areas) had an estimated population of
35,223 in 2000, of which almost two-thirds (63.1%) resided in the unincorporated portion of the
SOI. Together, the unincorporated areas within the SOIs of Chico, Oroville and Paradise had an
estimated population of 58,004 in 2000, compared to a total population of 99,928 in the
incorporated areas of the three cities.
The total population of these three cities and their SOIs (157,932) represented 77.7 percent of the
total countywide population in 2000. Individually, the Chico area (including its SOI) represented
41.9 percent of the county’s population in 2000; the Paradise area (including its SOI) represented
18.5 percent; and the Oroville area (including its SOI) represented 17.3 percent.
Chapter 2: Population
Final Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
9
As shown in Table 2-4, the areas of Gridley and Biggs (including their SOIs) had estimated
populations of 6,220 and 1,795, respectively, in 2000. The combined population of the two cities
represented approximately four percent of the countywide population in 2000.
Less than half (47.3%) of the population in Butte County resided outside of the incorporated
boundaries of cities in 2000. Almost two-thirds (61.3%) of these people live within the
unincorporated SOIs of the cities. Altogether, 81.7 percent of the county population lives within
the SOI (included incorporated land) of the incorporated cities in 2000. A vast majority of all
housing and affordable housing built within unincorporated Butte County will occur within the
SOIs of the cities within Butte County. In addition, development of multifamily housing is
unlikely to take place without first being annexed by a city or special district for the extension of
appropriate urban services. This will have a future influence on the population distribution and
growth rates of Butte County and its cities.
Chapter 2: Population
Final Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
10
TABLE 2-4
POPULATION DISTRIBUTION
INCORPORATED CITIES AND THEIR SPHERES OF INFLUENCE
BUTTE COUNTY AND CALIFORNIA
1990-2000
1990 2000 Growth: 1990-2000
Population Population Population Change
#% of
County
Total
#% of
County
Total
#% of
County
total
AAGR %
Biggs Total - SOI and
Incorporated
1,595 0.88%1,795 0.88%200 0.95%1.19%
incorporated 1,581 0.87%1,793 0.88%212 1.01%1.27%
SOI only 14 0.01%2 0.00%-12 -0.06%-17.68%
Chico - SOI and Incorporated 72,647 39.89%85,134 41.90%12,487 59.32%1.60%
Incorporated (1)40,079 22.01%60,516 29.79%19,875 94.41%4.21%
SOI only 32,568 17.88%24,618 12.12%-7,388 -35.10%-2.76%
Gridley - SOI and Incorporated 5,448 2.99%6,220 3.06%772 3.67%1.33%
incorporated 4,631 2.54%5,382 2.65%751 3.57%1.51%
SOI only 817 0.45%838 0.41%21 0.10%0.25%
Oroville - SOI and Incorporated 33,095 18.17%35,223 17.34%2,128 10.11%0.63%
incorporated 11,960 6.57%13,004 6.40%1,044 4.96%0.84%
SOI only 21,135 11.60%22,219 10.94%1,084 5.15%0.50%
Paradise - SOI and Incorporated 34,590 18.99%37,575 18.49%2,985 14.18%0.83%
incorporated 25,408 13.95%26,408 13.00%1,000 4.75%0.39%
SOI only 9,182 5.04%11,167 5.50%1,985 9.43%1.98%
Unincorporated County outside
of SOIs only
34,745 19.08%37,224 18.32%2,479 11.78%0.69%
Unincorporated County total (1)98,461 54.06%96,068 47.28%-1,831 -8.70%-0.25%
Unincorporated County inside
SOIs
63,716 34.99%58,844 28.96%-4,310 -20.47%-0.79%
Total Butte County 182,120 100.00%203,171 100.00%21,051 100.00%1.10%
Total SOIs and Incorporated 147,375 80.92%165,947 81.68%18,572 88.22%1.19%
Total Incorporated 83,659 45.94%107,103 52.72%22,882 108.70%2.50%
Total SOIs only 63,716 34.99%58,844 28.96%-4,310 -20.47%-0.79%
Sources: 1990 & 2000 U.S. Census; Mintier & Associates estimates.
(1) The City of Chico’s population was revised upward to 60,516 from the original Census count of 59,954 as a result of the Census Count
Question Resolution (CQR) Program. The original count had mis-allocated 562 students residing in dormitories (group quarters) at
CSU-Chico to the unincorporated county. The total population estimate for the unincorporated county was correspondingly reduced
from 96,630 to 96,068.
Table 2-5 below shows 1990 and 2000 Census counts and growth rates from 1990 to 2000 for all
of the incorporated cities in the county, along with Census Designated Places (CDPs). Again, it
should be emphasized that growth rates for these areas can be deceiving since boundary
definitions changed from 1990 to 2000 in response to annexations (in the case of the cities), and
other factors (in the case of the CDPs).
Chapter 2: Population
Final Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
11
TABLE 2-5
POPULATION GROWTH
INCORPORATED CITIES AND CENSUS DESIGNATED PLACES (CDPS)
BUTTE COUNTY AND CALIFORNIA
1990-2000
1990 2000 Population Growth: 1990-2000
Total Population Total Population #AAGR %
Biggs city 1,581 1,793 212 1.27%
Chico city 40,079 60,516 20,437 4.21%
Concow CDP 1,392 1,095 -297 -2.37%
Durham CDP 4,784 5,220 436 0.88%
Gridley city 4,631 5,382 751 1.51%
Magalia CDP 8,987 10,569 1,582 1.63%
Oroville city 11,960 13,004 1,044 0.84%
Oroville East CDP 8,462 8,680 218 0.25%
Palermo CDP 5,260 5,720 460 0.84%
Paradise town 25,408 26,408 1,000 0.39%
South Oroville CDP 7,463 7,695 232 0.31%
Thermalito CDP 5,646 6,045 399 0.69%
remainder of county 56,467 51,044 -5,423 -1.00%
Butte County Total 182,120 203,171 21,051 1.10%
Source: 1990 & 2000 U.S. Census
2.3 POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS
Age Distribution
Age structure is a particularly important planning consideration because people of different ages
require different kinds of services. For instance, a younger population is more likely to demand
more active recreational facilities and schools, whereas an older population is likely to be more
interested in passive recreational opportunities and adult-oriented community facilities. Housing
demand is also directly related to the age composition of the population. A proportionally
younger population will typically generate a demand for more start-up housing for first-time
buyers and larger units to accommodate families with children. Table 2-6 shows the age profiles
of Butte County and its cities in 2000.
Table 2-6 indicates that the county is well-balanced in terms of age distribution. However, the
table also reveals differences in the age composition of the five cities. The most distinctive
differences occur in the Chico and Paradise communities. Chico, because of the presence of the
university, has over half of its population in the 0-19 and 20-34 age groups. On the other hand,
Paradise, with its large retirement community, has a quarter of its population over the age of 65
and almost two-thirds of its population over 35. The unincorporated county has a higher share of
35 to 64-year olds and a lower share of 20 to 34-year olds compared to the county as a whole.
Chapter 2: Population
Final Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
12
TABLE 2-6
AGE DISTRIBUTION
BUTTE COUNTY AND CALIFORNIA
2000
0-19 20-34 35-64 65+Total
#%#%#%#%#
Biggs 676 37.7%333 18.6%596 33.2%188 10.5%1,793
Chico 16,663 27.8%21,222 35.4%16,137 26.9%5,932 9.9%59,954
Gridley 1,804 33.5%1,011 18.8%1,710 31.8%857 15.9%5,382
Oroville 4,309 33.1%2,544 19.6%4,243 32.6%1,908 14.7%13,004
Paradise 5,955 22.5%3,066 11.6%10,212 38.7%7,175 27.2%26,408
Unincorp-
orated
County
27,444 28.4%14,559 15.1%38,631 40.0%15,996 16.6%96,630
Total 56,851 28.0%42,735 21.0%71,529 35.2%32,056 15.8%203,171
California 10,234,571 30.2%7,610,350 22.5%12,431,069 36.7%3,595,658 10.6%33,871,648
Source: 2000 U.S. Census
Compared to age distribution statewide, Butte County has a greater proportion of the population
in the 65 year-and-above category (15.8 percent compared to 10.6 percent for the state). The
unprecedented mobility of today’s retirement age population has contributed to this trend. The
economic growth of the last three decades, combined with modern pension plans, Social
Security, and substantial gains in housing equity, have allowed retirees to relocate more easily
and live in locations of their choosing. Drawn by the generally uncrowded conditions, relatively
inexpensive housing and environmental amenities, older citizens have been relocating to the
Sierra Foothills, primarily in the snow-free belt below 3,000 feet. Paradise represents the largest
concentration of retirement age population, but other communities such as Concow, Forest
Ranch, Berry Creek, Bald Rock, Kelly Ridge and other areas around Oroville have also attracted
many persons in this age group. The percentage of retirement age individuals has grown steadily.
In 1970, individuals over 64 years of age comprised 14 percent of the county population. In 2000
the percentage has increased to 15.8 percent.
Race and Ethnicity
Table 2-7 shows the breakdown of race and ethnicity in Butte County and California. As the
table shows, the county population is predominantly white, accounting for 84.5 percent of the
countywide population. It is important to note that the Census does not include persons of
Hispanic origin as a racial group in its analysis. Instead, people of Hispanic origin are counted as
an ethnic group of diverse racial composition. The 2000 Census estimates that 10.5 percent of
the Butte County population is comprised of people of Hispanic origin. This compares with 7.5
percent of the county population at the time of the 1990 Census. It is also important to note that
2000 was the first year that the Census began counting combined multiple racial categories. This
makes it problematic to compare results from previous counts.
Several of the communities within the county, particularly Biggs, Gridley and Oroville, vary
somewhat from the ethnic composition of the county as a whole. Currently, 6.3 percent of
Oroville’s population is identified as “Asian alone” This gives Oroville the largest concentration
Chapter 2: Population
Final Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
13
of persons of Asian descent in the county. Hispanics form a major portion of the populations of
the cities of Gridley and Biggs. In Gridley, the Hispanic population comprises nearly 40 percent
of the population, and in Biggs the Hispanic population comprises 28 percent of the population.
The unincorporated county’s racial/ethnic makeup is very close to that of t the county as a whole.
TABLE 2-7
RACE AND ETHNICITY
BUTTE COUNTY AND CALIFORNIA
2000
Biggs Chico Gridley Oroville Paradise Unincorp-
orated
County
County
Total
California
#1,336 49,377 3,583 10,043 24,751 82,638 171,728 20,170,059White alone %74.5%82.4%66.6%77.2%93.7%85.5%84.5%59.5%
#8 1,215 17 524 51 1,001 2,816 2,263,882Black or African
American alone %0.4%2.0%0.3%4.0%0.2%1.0%1.4%6.7%
#33 782 83 511 283 2,174 3,866 333,346American Indian and
Alaska Native alone %1.8%1.3%1.5%3.9%1.1%2.2%1.9%1.0%
#15 2,524 187 825 275 2,926 6,752 3,697,513Asian alone %0.8%4.2%3.5%6.3%1.0%3.0%3.3%10.9%
#0 115 1 34 31 115 296 116,961Native Hawaiian and
Other Pacific Islander
alone
%0.0%0.2%0.0%0.3%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.3%
#332 3,390 1,295 362 320 4,091 9,790 5,682,241Some other race alone %18.5%5.7%24.1%2.8%1.2%4.2%4.8%16.8%
#69 2,551 216 705 697 3,685 7,923 1,607,646Two or more races %3.8%4.3%4.0%5.4%2.6%3.8%3.9%4.7%
#1,793 59,954 5,382 13,004 26,408 96,630 203,171 33,871,648Total%100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%
#494 7,351 2,079 1,073 1,127 9,215 21,339 10,966,556Hispanic%27.6%12.3%38.6%8.3%4.3%9.5%10.5%32.4%
Source: 2000 US Census
Household and Family Composition
Table 2-8 shows the composition of households in Butte County and California according to
figures from the 1990 Census. As shown in the table, Biggs and Gridley have the highest
percentages of married families with children, with 33.6 percent and 24.2 percent respectively.
As might be expected, given the presence of the state university, Chico has a low proportion of
married families with children (16.9 percent) and the highest proportion of non-family
households (21.1 percent) (. according to the Census, non-family households are those in which
two or more unrelated individuals live together). Similarly, Paradise, with its high number of
retirees, has the lowest proportion of married families with children (14.8 percent) and a high
proportion of married families without children (33.9 percent). Oroville has the highest
proportion of single-person households with 33.2 percent. The unincorporated county has the
highest proportion of married families without children at 34.0 percent.
Compared to statewide figures for household composition, Butte County has a lower proportion
of married families with children (18.8 percent compared to 26 percent for the state), and higher
proportions of married families without children (27.9 percent compared to 25.1 percent for the
Chapter 2: Population
Final Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
14
state), non-family households (10.7 percent compared to 7.6 percent for the state), and one-
person households (27.2 percent compared to 23.5 percent for the state). County figures relating
to single-parent households are comparable with statewide statistics.
TABLE 2-8
HOUSEHOLD COMPOSITION
BUTTE COUNTY AND CALIFORNIA
2000
Biggs Chico Gridley Oroville Paradise
Unincorp
-orated
County
County
Total
California
#98 6,874 488 1,622 3,709 8,845 21,636 2,708,3081-Person Household:%17.2%29.3%26.5%33.2%32.0%23.8%27.2%23.5%
#192 3,974 446 834 1,720 7,763 14,929 2,989,974Married Couple with
Children %33.6%16.9%24.2%17.1%14.8%20.9%18.8%26.0%
#154 4,105 437 944 3,924 12,637 22,201 2,887,110Married Couple without
Children %27.0%17.5%23.7%19.3%33.9%34.0%27.9%25.1%
#21 536 62 172 246 986 2,023 292,346Single Male with
Children %3.7%2.3%3.4%3.5%2.1%2.7%2.5%2.5%
#7 382 40 74 156 695 1,354 302,109Single Male without
Children %1.2%1.6%2.2%1.5%1.3%1.9%1.7%2.6%
#41 1,855 168 649 695 2,211 5,619 834,716Single Female with
Children %7.2%7.9%9.1%13.3%6.0%5.9%7.1%7.3%
#35 789 113 273 503 1,547 3,260 613,794Single Female without
Children %6.1%3.4%6.1%5.6%4.3%4.2%4.1%5.3%
#23 4,961 87 313 638 2,522 8,544 874,513Nonfamily Household %4.0%21.1%4.7%6.4%5.5%6.8%10.7%7.6%
Total #571 23,476 1,841 4,881 11,591 37,206 79,566 11,502,870
Source: 2000 US Census
Length of Tenure
The length of people’s tenure within Butte County and their individual residences provides a
picture of the stability of the population and its ties to the county. Table 2-9 below information
shows that the Butte County population was similar in mobility to the populations statewide.
About 48 percent of the county population had lived in the same house from 1995 to 2000,
compared to just over half of the population in California as a whole. Another 27.9 percent of the
population in 2000 lived in a different house in Butte County in 1995, for a total percentage of
75.8 of the population that lived in Butte County in 1995. An additional 17.9 percent of the
population lived in another county in California in 1995, another 8,131 (4.2%) had lived in
another state in 1995, and 3,687 (1.9%) had lived in another country in 1995.
Chapter 2: Population
Final Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
15
TABLE 2-9
RESIDENCE IN 1995 FOR THE POPULATION 5 YEARS AND OVER
BUTTE COUNTY AND CALIFORNIA
2000
Butte County California
#%#%
Same house in 1995 91,819 47.9%15,757,539 50.2%
Different house in 1995:99,685 52.1%15,659,090 49.8%
In United States in 1995 95,962 50.1%14,251,432 45.4%
Same county 53,508 27.9%9,714,481 30.9%
Different county 42,454 22.2%4,536,951 14.4%
Same state 34,323 17.9%3,087,987 9.8%
Different state:8,131 4.2%1,448,964 4.6%
Elsewhere in 1995 3,687 1.9%1,402,696 4.5%
Total 191,504 100.0%31,416,629 100.0%
Source: 2000 US Census
2.4 POPULATION PROJECTIONS
Population projections provide the basis for most planning, yet projecting future growth is far
from an exact science given the complex set of variables that can affect the rate of growth.
Typically, projections are developed by taking past patterns and combining them with
assumptions regarding the future to obtain an estimate of future growth rates. In uncertain
economic times, such as those evident in the early 1990s, growth projections are particularly
difficult. Obviously, countywide planning can only be as effective as the ability of County and
State officials to anticipate population growth.
The California Department of Finance (DOF) provides both the official State population
projections and the official State population estimates. The Demographic Research Unit (DRU)
of the California Department of Finance is designated as the single official source of
demographic data for State planning and budgeting. The DRU makes periodic projections of
growth in the state on a county-by-county basis.
The most recent long-term population projections were made by DOF in June 2001 and projected
population for California by county from 2000 to 2020 in five-year increments. The June 2001
Interim County Projections was an update to DOF’s County Projections published in 1998. The
June 2001 document adjusted the projections to account for 2000 Census data. However, DOF
also adjusted the 2000 Census population figure to account for the estimated Census undercount,
using figures based on the estimated national undercount, since more detailed undercount
information was not available1. In the case of Butte County, the April 1, 2000 population was
adjusted up to 205,118 from the April 1, 2000 Census count of 203,171, an increase of 1,947.
DOF then brought the adjusted April 1, 2000 figure up to July 2000, and this figure of 205,400
was used as the base for the population projections for Butte County. It is problematic to
compare these adjusted projections to DOF’s yearly estimates of population, because the
1 The nationwide net undercount for the 2000 Census was estimated by the Census Bureau at 1.18 percent for
population. The net estimated undercount in California in 1990 was 2.7 percent compared to the national figure
of 1.6%.
Chapter 2: Population
Final Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
16
estimates made since the 2000 Census use the 2000 Census as a baseline, but do not make an
adjustment for the estimated Census undercount.
Table 2-10 below shows the DOF population projections for Butte County for 2005, 2010, and
2020. It also shows the calculated average annual growth rates (AAGRs) for these projections
using the adjusted 2000 population count as a base. As shown in the table, DOF projected a
steadily declining growth rate for Butte County after 2005. The AAGR for 2000 to 2005 was
projected at 2.73 percent, while the AAGR for the entire 2000 to 2020 period was projected at
2.06 percent.
TABLE 2-10
DOF POPULATION GROWTH PROJECTIONS
BUTTE COUNTY
2000-2020
2000 total
population
(DOF - July
2000)
July 2005
DOF
Projection
July 2010
DOF
Projection
July 2020
DOF
Projection
projected
AAGR: July
2000 - July
2005
projected
AAGR: July
2005 - July
2010
projected
AAGR: July
2010 - July
2020
projected
AAGR: July
2000 - July
2010
projected
AAGR: July
2000 - July
2020
205,400 235,000 259,800 308,900 2.73%2.03%1.75%2.38%2.06%
Source: DOF, Interim County Projections (June 2001)
Compared to the historic growth rates in Butte County shown in Tables 2-1, the DOF-projected
AAGR for 2000 to 2005 (2.73%) was higher than the AAGR in both the 1990s (1.1%) and the
1980s (2.4%). The DOF-projected annual growth rate for 2000 to 2010 (2.38%) is equivalent to
the annual growth rate experienced by Butte County in the 1980s, but is more than twice the
actual growth rate in the 1990s. Even though DOF’s projected annual growth rate declined to
1.75 percent for the 2010 to 2020 period, it is still significantly higher than Butte County’s
growth rate in the 1990s.
Based on Census figures, Butte County grew by 38,269 persons from 1980 to 1990 and 21,051
persons from 1990 to 2000, for a total population growth of 59,320 persons from 1980 to 2000.
The DOF 2010 population projection represents a growth of 56,629 from the 2000 Census
population, a number that is almost equivalent to the actual total population growth in the last
twenty years. This projected growth of 56,629 is larger by 14,747 persons than the population
growth in the largest growth decade in Butte County’s history – the 1970s– when the county
grew by 41,882 persons.
The previous round of projections for Butte County by DOF were similarly high. DOF’s Interim
Population Projections (April 1991), projected the 1995 population of Butte County at 205,900
and the 2000 population at 226,700. Therefore, the actual 2000 population of Butte County was
less than the DOF projection for 1995. Actual growth rates in Butte County for 1990 to 2000
were less than half of DOF’s projections. It should also be noted that overall housing vacancy
rates increased from 1990 to 2000 (5.85% in 1990 compared to 6.97% in 2000), indicating
excess housing capacity for the population growth that did occur.
Table 2-11 below shows DOF’s population projections for Butte County for 2005 and 2010
compared to the DOF-estimated population in 2003. As noted above, the population estimate for
Chapter 2: Population
Final Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
17
2003 uses the 2000 Census as a baseline, but does not make an adjustment for the estimated
Census undercount, while the projections do make an adjustment for the Census undercount. The
actual Census count for 2000 (203,171) is shown in the table for comparison purposes to DOF’s
2000 population base of 205,400 for the projections shown in Table 2-10 above.
When comparing the July 2005 DOF projection to the January 2003 DOF-estimated population,
the 2005 population projection of 235,000 represents an AAGR of 4.53 percent from the 2003
population of 210,367. This growth rate is almost four times the AAGR for the population in
Butte County from April 1990 (182,120) to January 2003 (210,367) of 1.14 percent shown above
in Table 2-2. In order to meet DOF’s population projections by 2005, Butte would need to add a
population of 24,633 in the 2.5 years from January, 2003 to July, 2005. In comparison, Butte
County had a population growth of 7,196 in the 2.75 years from April, 2000 to January 2003.
TABLE 2-11
SHORT-TERM DOF POPULATION GROWTH PROJECTIONS COMPARED TO 2003 POPULATION
BUTTE COUNTY
2000 total
population
(Census - Apr.
2000)
2003 total
population (DOF -
Jan. 2003)
July 2005 DOF
Projection
July 2010 DOF
Projection
projected AAGR:
Jan. 2003 - July
2005
projected AAGR:
July 2003 - July
2010
203,171 210,367 235,000 259,800 4.53%2.85%
Sources: U.S. Census; DOF, Interim County Projections (June 2001)
The discussion above demonstrates that the DOF population projections for Butte County are
extremely high compared to actual recent population growth. Therefore, there are problems in
relying on the DOF population projections for policy decisions. Given that the Interim County
Projections are based on projections initially made in 1998 at the height of economic boom, it is
perhaps not surprising that they are overly optimistic. However, for the vast majority of counties
in the state, the projections are proving to be excessive, with most counties growing at much
slower rates from 2000 to 2003 than would meet DOF’s projections for 2005. Like all
projections, the Interim County Projections are heavily reliant on their basic assumptions, DOF
appears to have relied on an overly optimistic migration rate, among other assumptions, for a
large majority of the counties in the state. Given that 80.7 percent of the population increase in
Butte County from 1990 to 2000 was due to net migration (both foreign and domestic), while in
California net migration only accounted for 17.3 percent of the population increase, over-
estimation of migration rates by DOF would have more significant effects on the population
projections for Butte County than the state as a whole.
These unrealistically high DOF projections point to the importance of looking at alternative
projections. Table 2-12A below shows population growth projections for 2010, 2020, and 2030
developed for the Butte County Association of Government’s (BCAG) update to the Regional
Travel Demand Model for the Butte County Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The table also
shows the previous population projections for 2010 and 2020 in the Butte County 2001 Regional
Transportation Plan for comparison. The projections in the 2001 RTP were made by aggregating
an analysis of the General Plan growth projections of all of the jurisdictions.
Chapter 2: Population
Final Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
18
In the Regional Travel Demand Model update, BCAG developed housing unit, population, and
employment projections for Butte County jurisdictions using building permit data from 1980 to
2000. BCAG used this data to reconstruct historic growth rates by jurisdiction, in order to
account solely for new construction and not the annexation of existing units. In order to calculate
the new projections, BCAG began with the housing unit stock in Butte County in 1980 as
recorded by the 1980 Census. To calculate a housing unit growth rate, BCAG then examined the
number of residential building permits issued for all jurisdictions within Butte County. It was
assumed that building permit statistics submitted by each jurisdiction accurately captured the
number of single and multifamily units constructed in each jurisdiction. Adding the 1980
housing unit data with 20 years of building permit data gave an estimated number of units for the
year 2000. The annual growth rate was then calculated. The average annual growth rates from
1980-2000 as calculated by BCAG were then applied to project future growth. Table 2-12A
shows the final projections for population. It should be noted that these projections are based on
incorporated boundaries for jurisdictions and are not intended to account for any annexations that
may occur. This is why the unincorporated county has a positive growth rate.
As shown in the table, BCAG’s updated population projections for 2010 and 2020 are lower than
those in the 2001 RTP, although they are close. This is somewhat surprising, given that the 2001
RTP projections were based on the General Plan growth assumptions, some which were very
out-of-date, for each of the individual jurisdictions.
TABLE 2-12A
BCAG POPULATION GROWTH PROJECTIONS
BUTTE COUNTY
2003-2030
1990 total
population
(Census -
Apr. 1990)
2000 total
population
(DOF -
Apr. 2000)
2003 total
population
(DOF -
Jan. 2003)
2010 Old
(2001) RTP
Projection
2020 Old
(2001) RTP
Projection
2010
Updated
BCAG
Projection
2020
Updated
BCAG
Projection
2030
Updated
BCAG
Projection
Biggs 1,581 1,793 1,809 2,170 2,625 1,940 2,100 2,280
Chico 40,079 60,516 68,589 75,879 96,035 80,570 108,280 145,530
Gridley 4,631 5,382 5,745 6,512 7,880 6,230 7,240 8,410
Oroville 11,960 13,004 13,271 15,735 19,039 15,850 19,340 23,560
Paradise 25,408 26,408 26,695 29,953 33,973 28,870 31,590 34,550
Unincorporated 98,461 96,068 94,258 113,755 133,916 106,730 117,890 130,240
Butte County Total 182,120 203,171 210,367 244,004 293,468 240,190 286,440 344,570
Sources: BCAG, EPS.
Table 2-12B shows the population projections in Table 2-12A above converted to AAGRs. As
shown in the table, BCAG’s updated population projections show an AAGR of 1.91 percent
from 2003 to 2010, 1.83 percent for 2003 to 2020, and 1.84 percent for 2003 to 2030 for Butte
County as a whole. Unincorporated Butte County is projected to have a slightly lower growth
rate than the county as a whole. It is presumed that the majority of growth in unincorporated
areas will occur within the SOIs of the cities.
Compared to DOF’s projections, BCAG’s population projections are substantially lower for the
year 2020 and are also significantly less “front-loaded.” As discussed above, DOF’s projections
are equivalent to a 2.85 percent AAGR for 2003 to 2010, while BCAG’s projections show a 1.83
Chapter 2: Population
Final Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
19
percent AAGR for 2003 to 2010. This projected growth rate is still significantly higher than the
actual AAGR for 1990 to 2003 of 1.14 percent, but is still more consistent with long-term
historical trends in Butte County than DOF’s projections.
TABLE 2-12B
RATES OF GROWTH FOR BCAG POPULATION GROWTH PROJECTIONS
BUTTE COUNTY
2003-2030
AAGR:
4/1990 -
4/2000
AAGR:
4/2000 -
1/2003
AAGR:
4/1990 -
1/2003
Projected
AAGR:
4/2000 to
Old (2001)
1/2010
RTP
Projection
Projected
AAGR:
4/2000 to
Old (2001)
1/2020
RTP
Projection
Projected
AAGR:
1/2003 to
Updated
1/2010
BCAG
Projection
Projected
AAGR:
1/2003 to
Updated
1/2020
BCAG
Projection
Projected
AAGR:
1/2003 to
Updated
1/2030
BCAG
Projection
Biggs 1.27%0.32%1.06%1.98%1.95%1.00%0.88%0.86%
Chico 4.21%4.66%4.30%2.35%2.37%2.33%2.72%2.83%
Gridley 1.51%2.40%1.71%1.97%1.95%1.16%1.37%1.42%
Oroville 0.84%0.74%0.82%1.97%1.95%2.57%2.24%2.15%
Paradise 0.39%0.39%0.39%1.30%1.28%1.13%1.00%0.96%
Unincorporated -0.25%-0.69%-0.34%1.75%1.70%1.79%1.32%1.20%
Butte County Total 1.10%1.27%1.14%1.90%1.88%1.91%1.83%1.84%
Sources: BCAG, EPS.