Warwick less populous than Cranston for first time since 1950

by ETHAN HARTLEY
Posted 5/29/18

By ETHAN HARTLEY -- Recently released data from the United States Census Bureau shows Warwick is officially no longer the second most populous city in Rhode Island, being officially surpassed by Cranston.

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

E-mail
Password
Log in

Warwick less populous than Cranston for first time since 1950

Posted

Recently released data from the United States Census Bureau shows Warwick is officially no longer the second most populous city in Rhode Island, being officially surpassed by Cranston.

The data reflects population estimates as of July 1, 2017 and shows Cranston is estimated to have 81,202 people, versus 80,871 in Warwick. Numbers show that Warwick’s population has dropped by 1,801 since 2010, while Cranston has increased 815 since the last official nationwide census.

Acting Mayor Joseph Solomon released a statement shortly after the numbers were revealed in which he indicated the historic change was a “direct result” of the expansion of T.F. Green airport since 2000 – which has necessitated the removal of 555 homes, including “the elimination of 130 rental units and 239 ownership units from Warwick’s housing stock since 2011 alone.”

Solomon’s statement includes his belief that continuing efforts to support transit-oriented development in Warwick’s City Centre project will drive high-density, multifamily developments that will attract young working individuals and families who want to live near the transportation options of the airport and train station, which connects with Boston’s MBTA and Amtrak rails.

“This is the type of housing that will attract Millennials, increase our population and allow us to reinvent the variety and depth of housing options offered in Warwick,” Solomon’s statement reads.

Solomon also proposes that the expansion of the airport, while taking away properties in the short term, will help expand Warwick’s visibility in the long term and that the population numbers will bounce back in time.

“As mayor, I will continue to promote multi-family residential development within City Centre Warwick, to support our Millennials looking for a transit-oriented community in which to live, work and play,” he said. “It won’t be long before Warwick regains the loss that this census data reflects.”

Cranston Mayor Allan Fung, meanwhile, heralded the data as an indicator of Cranston’s continuing growth.

“I’m so proud that Cranston’s population continues to grow because it’s a great place to live, work and play,” she said in a statement. “Along with strong economic development across the entire city, people are flocking to Cranston for our great schools, great restaurants, best-in-state shopping, robust parks and recreation offerings, nationally-accredited police department, nationally-recognized library system, convenient location and more…People want to start a business or live in a city where they can count on stable tax rates, good public services and a good government that spends their tax dollars wisely.”

According to Census records, this is the first time that Cranston has had more estimated residents than Warwick since 1950, when Cranston had an estimated population of 55,060 and Warwick had 43,028. Warwick surpassed Cranston as of the 1960 census with 68,504 residents to Cranston’s 66,766. Warwick’s drop from 82,672 in 2010 to 80,871 in 2017 represents a 2.1 percent population decrease in that span. Warwick previously dropped 3.7 percent from 2000 to 2010.

Statewide, the population increased by 3,213 from 2016 to 2017 to a total of 1,059,639.

Comments

8 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here

  • CrickeeRaven

    Before the make-believe mayor inevitably attempts to claim otherwise, here is the factual information about changes in the city's population: "Numbers show that Warwick’s population has dropped by 1,801 since 2010, while Cranston has increased 815 since the last official nationwide census." Not 5,800, as the make-believe mayor has repeatedly and falsely claimed -- 1,801.

    Also contrary to his false claims, it is not Warwick's tax structure that has resulted in a lower population. As acting Mayor Solomon correctly notes, the airport expansion and resulting removal of homes led directly to the reduction in the city's housing stock and number of residents.

    Honest, taxpaying voters will reject the make-believe mayor and his false claims at the earliest opportunity.

    Tuesday, May 29, 2018 Report this

  • richardcorrente

    I have stated for years that as taxes increased here in Warwick, population decreased. I have quoted the U.S. Census, verified by The Warwick Beacon, that 5,800 people left Warwick in the last ten years alone. I have given those records to The Warwick Beacon. Now, according to that same U.S. Census, Warwick is officially less populated than Cranston. Cranston cut taxes and people moved there increasing Cranstons' population and also increasing Cranstons' total tax revenue. Here is an idea that will work in Warwick to increase our total tax revenue. "Cut Taxes - Cur Spending"! Attract people INTO our city, not OUT OF it.

    I have a plan to INCREASE the NUMBER of taxpayers, not increase the taxes-per-taxpayer. What is Acting Mayor Joe Solomons' plan?

    Happy Summer everyone.

    Rick Corrente

    The taxpayers Mayor

    Tuesday, May 29, 2018 Report this

  • richardcorrente

    Dear CrickeeRaven,

    My population numbers for Warwick span a timeframe of ten years and have been verified by The Warwick Beacon. 5,800 taxpayers moved out of Warwick in that ten year span, according to the U.S. Census. Our school population also dropped accordingly causing massive teacher-layoffs and school closings.

    Your numbers, unverified by a person who is also "unverified" and therefore can't be held accountable, are for a time frame of SIX YEARS. (2010-2016) Six years are not the same as ten years. You anonymous idiot!

    Happy Summer everyone.

    Learn how to count CrickeeRaven.

    Rick Corrente

    The Taxpayers Mayor

    Tuesday, May 29, 2018 Report this

  • CrickeeRaven

    No matter how desperately he tries to ignore or change the facts, the make-believe mayor will not succeed in fooling honest, taxpaying voters who know how to read and understand data.

    Here is the link in question, to the U.S. Census "quick facts" page on Warwick: https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/warwickcityrhodeisland/PST045216

    The 2017 population is reported as 80,871, which, as the article correctly and factually states is a reduction of 1,801 from the 2010 number of 82,670.

    "I have quoted the U.S. Census, verified by The Warwick Beacon, that 5,800 people left Warwick in the last ten years alone."

    That number was never verified by the Warwick Beacon; it was reported as a claim by the make-believe mayor but never independently confirmed by the newspaper -- and, as the article above proves, the number of 5,800 is objectively false.

    "Cranston cut taxes..."

    False. Once again, here are the changes in the tax rate since Allan Fung was elected mayor, showing that taxes went up -- not down:

    FY2010: $19.11 http://www.municipalfinance.ri.gov/documents/data/taxrates/2009.pdf

    FY2011: $19.56 http://www.municipalfinance.ri.gov/documents/data/taxrates/2010.pdf

    FY2012: $20.26 http://www.municipalfinance.ri.gov/documents/data/taxrates/2011.pdf

    FY2013: $22.84 http://www.municipalfinance.ri.gov/documents/data/taxrates/2012.pdf

    FY2014: $22.84 http://www.municipalfinance.ri.gov/documents/data/taxrates/2013.pdf

    FY2015: $22.84 http://www.municipalfinance.ri.gov/documents/data/taxrates/2014-Tax-Rates-12-31-13-FINAL.pdf

    FY2016: $22.45 [due to revaluation] http://www.municipalfinance.ri.gov/documents/data/taxrates/2015-Tax-Rates-12-31-14-FINAL.pdf

    FY2017: $22.45 hhttp://www.municipalfinance.ri.gov/documents/data/taxrates/2016-Tax-Rates-12-31-15-FINAL.pdf

    FY2018: $22.94 http://www.municipalfinance.ri.gov/documents/data/taxrates/2017-Tax-Rates-12-31-16-FINAL.pdf

    Warwick voters are far more intelligent than the make-believe mayor thinks they are -- and they will prove it by rejecting his candidacy again.

    Tuesday, May 29, 2018 Report this

  • CrickeeRaven

    "Your numbers... are for a time frame of SIX YEARS. (2010-2016)."

    False. These numbers are directly from the U.S. Census for 2010-2017, which is seven years.

    The 2008 figure for Warwick's population was 84,756, according to the Census. This link provides the Census data at the top of a Google search: https://bit.ly/2slKIKd

    84,756 - 80,871 = 3,885, nowhere near the false 5,800 claim of the make-believe mayor.

    "Learn how to count." The make-believe mayor should take his own advice and learn how to count and do simple mathematics before repeating his lies about the city's population.

    Tuesday, May 29, 2018 Report this

  • CrickeeRaven

    That same link provided above gives a 2007 population figure of 85,085, or 4,215 more than the 2017 Census figure -- again, not 5,800 as the make-believe mayor claims.

    His name-calling and failure to read basic data are further defects in his character that honest, taxpaying voters already understand and will gladly reject at the earliest opportunity.

    Tuesday, May 29, 2018 Report this

  • allent

    Wow, Warwick's a mess. Scotty left just in time. Read the projo article. Seems bankruptcy might be the solution.

    Tuesday, May 29, 2018 Report this

  • planez

    2700 (+/-) incarcerated criminals in Cranston padding the numbers; not really a seismic shift, or even a shift at all.

    Voodoo demographics.

    Tuesday, May 29, 2018 Report this