and then this will taper off. we have the other bay area cities, and this is a change over the decade. this is by age group and by district. if we just look at the right most one, we see the horizontal axis that is there. the green as in the negative. that is the loss in those groups. we have the growth and this is the case, and we have the cohorts. and looking at this through the lens of the map, they have

distributed this on the outer rim of the city, with the highest proportion. on the western part, this has grown up and the seniors, conversely, with the highest being. district 3 with chinatown, and the high altitude in the southwest. whites are 48 $%, asians 33%, african-americans at 6%. the lowest i nthe city in some time. and we identify multiple races. this is a sizeable category.

let's go to the next one. the racial change, we have the world distribution. we have a big variation, and we can see that the second district is 80%. green is the largest share of asians. thank you. what is below the horizontal line, this is the net loss for a particular district. the color red is african- americans, with a loss of about 12,000 people in the last decade. concentrated in districts 5 and districts stand, where we have the asians growth. and district 6 and 10 and 11.

latinos, the consensus -- you can indicate if you are of any race. this shows if people indicated that they were latino. district 6 have the largest growth. the strychnine had a loss of their population, compensated -- district 9 had a loss of their population. they pretty much speak for themselves all the labels may not be readable. this was 48%, with the african- americans in the southeast. and also in the western addition, the number sides are dropping. asians in the western part, and

chinatown, and also increasingly in district 10. what is next? the latinos in these neighborhoods, i think the highest is in district 9 with 36%. >> good evening, commissioners. i will be talking about household education. if we could just start. there are 345,000 households in san francisco. this combines the family and the non family, and i will call your attention to the largest share, this stands at 38%.

families with children, 16%. this summarizes education for the city, at the city-wide level. we are very educated and just increasing all the time. and also, the high school is at 29%. this shows those people but have a high school diploma, they are located and concentrated primarily in the southwest of district 10 and district 11. 49% did not have a high school diploma or less. and this shows with a 51% have a college degree. it correlates 30 closely with the end, or you see 79% in

district 2. 34% of the residents are foreign-born. some districts are higher than others with district 11, this is 50%. district 4 is 47%. 44% of the residents do not speak english at home. this does not mean that they are not bilingual. it means that what they speak at home, they are concentrated in district 11. this indicates 26% of san franciscans to speak asian languages, and these are concentrated in chinatown, and also district 11. and also, district 4. 12% speak spanish at home,

concentrated in the eastern neighborhoods. the missionary and district 9. as i have said before, this does not mean that just because people speak english at home, that they do not speak english. this graph summarizes as people who do not speak english very well. 13%, representing 13% of all the households, this is among the asian households. next, i will briefly cover the transportation to work. i will draw your attention to the city, on the far right. 51% of people in san francisco -- they tend to pay the highest

wages. places like that and district 2, they are quite affluent and educated, over 60%, with other districts with 10 and 11, this is less than one-third. this shows how people get to work, and essentially, 32% of us take mass transit, & watt, which is very high. and this is concentrated in areas closer to downtown. 7% also work from home. possibly, some of that 7%, which is a large number may explain with i am showing you now.

this is 20% of all households to do not have a car. between 2000 and 2009, for example, the number of households increased with 42% of all of the households -- and the owners, they went to 9%. >> we will turn to unemployment. and we will turn -- >> unemployment for the city, this is the same one from 2005- 2009. the numbers are not that -- as relative today as they may have been when this was taken. the bigger story is that we have district data, and so, this is a

story of geographic variation. this was 12% in the lowest district, with three different, even if the numbers are not fresh they still show us the geographic ratio in the city. this is the first time that we have the fine level of the unemployment data. we used only get this statistical area. and we can get this updated, and find out what this moves -- what this means. the per-capita income for the city, this is in the middle. and this is ranked by district. this is 80,000, and there is quite a drop-off, with 49,000. and it follows down the line from there.

similarly lank properties are the highest at 21%. we have the 11% property rate, and the first are relatively high and then there is a drop- off and then may taper off from there. we talked about the district south of market, and mission bay, earlier. this is where we saw the housing growth. district 6 has 17,000 housing units, which is way more than half of the citywide total of growth. with dramatically fewer -- with the rest. >> lastly, i will say a few things about housing, this shows 10 years by the district,

38% own their own homes, and increase from 2000 when 35% were homeowners. this is the district variation again. 8% of the units are vacant, up from 5% in 2000. noticed that the seat -- units are concentrated in the northeast. not entirely surprising that this is where the rental housing stock is concentrated. the census also breaks down the vacancies, and i will not go into all of these bars, but on the far right, i will draw your attention to the substantial portion of the city. these are noted as other. these are the other units, more less the inverse of the first map, and this is a fairly large

proportion. unlike the prior map, we have the vacancy where the rental stock will be. this is where you would find the ownership households. so what is next, in terms of what we will do in the future. we will do additional focus reports. we are drilling down further into the characteristics of the new residents, those who are entering and leaving the city, and the additional profiles of the emerging neighborhoods. but we would also like to hear from you and what kind of analysis that you would like for us to do. i will close with that. >> and is there any public comment? public comment is close. commissioner miguel: the census

form was shortened and gave us less information. there is often a question in san francisco with the other metropolitan areas as to the actual accuracy, with the question of the undercount. is there any comments on this, in particular? >> i guess what will happen is the city has the ability to challenge the census, and there is a program that started last month in july which allowed us to look at how the census counted us, and where, looking

at this closely, and to present to them our challenge, with the numbers. and this will be done across the city. >> and this is part of a large minority population. one thing, i think, just looking at this quickly, there has been a lot of progress in counting the communities and their concern. the city launched a heroic effort to reach out to these communities, and the planning department was making certain that the census forms are sent out. they even have some of the addresses, but we will be looking at this closely and we will be presenting our findings with we believe the budget accounts could happen.

>> on that issue, we did challenge the numbers from 2000? >> we have the 2007 numbers. >> that was the estimate? >> the 2000 numbers, we were successful at that. and about 45,000 people. what we will do is look at the population distribution, and we will see if this makes sense. we do know where the community concerns are located and we will focus on those areas to see if the numbers make sense, and there is a process as to how we go about challenging us. >> my other question, was regarding the american community

survey, with the long form. i appreciate that this was every year, and i happen to receive one. >> you have filled this out? >> i have filled this out, and i got us a couple of more reminders. there is nothing wrong with this. you notice in your presentation, that you thought that this was rich. i am not a statistician. i thought that this was poor. i do not know if you have any comments about whether or not the information that was requested actually yields with the city in the department should know. >> i believe that this is 32

pages of questions. this is tipping over and we have the same questions about the members of the household. >> when you talk about the richness of this, this is relative to the short form. >> it adds to that -- this continues and this is what the long form used to be. and actually ask a few more questions that were not previously asked. we have previous information on health insurance, on the household types. we did not have anything on the same-sex partners. we have information on poverty as well.

and if we do have a greater ability to actually look at the variables, to do more cross tabulations and more information. we were not able to do this before. >> and there are no concerns about the accuracy? >> this is simply because -- this is about 3 million, nationwide. >> 1% of the population. >> i think as the population grows, this will be about 3 million. and people move and and the reach of this is a little bit more limited.

people are concerned that this may not be represented. i think that the bureau is making all the efforts to compensate for that, with what they sample. >> commissioner? >> this is a very interesting report. >> i was wanting tab that because the census has the sample size relative, there are issues with margins of error. there are so many people who are 25 years old, 25 years old and older who completed high school. and we have a larger range of uncertainty with the estimate. for all of the estimates, this is good in terms of the

education and that sort of thing, but this has to do with the other questions, like how many families with seven children take a bike to work. the margin of error, this shows how big the uncertainty has. the margin of error is greater than the urgency itself. they are created equal and some estimates are great. and we know which ones that these are. and we can just ignore this like we tallied, and the residents of san francisco who work in city planning. the sample was 15. so we can produce this but we know the margin of error is through the roof. we have a good idea of where to be aware of this stuff. >> thank-you. >> we have also included this in

the report, or the margin of error is great, and we want to emphasize that these are the estimates, and we try not to get too wrapped up in the absolute numbers. we look at this as a trend. >> this was very well done and i was surprised when i saw that the third number, this was district 11. there is a fairly significant development, on geneva. this is enough to create new units. that will probably explain this. the census data -- we always have these discussions about the new residence, and where they are working, if they are

working out of san francisco. this is a moving target. sometimes they're working in san francisco. >> the presentation today -- >> we will have more information, as far as the richness is concerned. we do have the ability to check to see where people are working, and what kind of transportation mode that they take, and we should be able to see this. >> we will get that the next time, for certain. >> i would like to have specific reports. >> i know that this is in there, with commuter statistics.

about 50%, it is important to identify this and finally, the population numbers seems low, relative to what we have seen with these projections. you did show a lot of vacancies, and smaller families than we had before, which may offset all of the new construction. and it seems like there must be more people, but maybe not as many as we think. >> there was an estimate of 850 at one time. and then this went down, and this will send us to 2010 that has come out. this is adjusted, with these projections. this estimates, that this is

about 809, instead of 805. these are the numbers that we actually use, and we use this to assess how much is there for the 200010 census. >> we have this with the finding, and this is very important to address this. commissioner moore: the transportation first policy seems to be manifesting itself, and we see a move towards the increased transit and i think that those dynamics are really almost exponential, as we talk.

this is very encouraging to me, and it seems, with these policies with car parking, and the alternatives for this car, and car share. i am very comfortable with this. they do a very good job in visualizing this. you can turn this into something that is much easier to understand than just the numbers. i have a hard time keeping my attention on this. when you move from one to the other and later the information has described, this is very smart. i want to be very honest, and i hope that some of the visualization -- i will be very

happy to take this out. >> one of the future projects is the population, this is the map that you saw. and we would probably do it again, at this district level. and the neighborhood level. i think that people who are more visually inclined will have an easier time understanding what this will say. >> it really speaks of a powerful role of policy, where we have the benefit of shaping the demographics of the city. >> one thing that we would like to emphasize is that we have prepared what we call the profiles at a glance, with the

socioeconomic profile. and the cities, by the neighborhood. this is about 38 neighborhoods that we have chosen. the board of supervisors' districts, we will be preparing similar profiles for the better neighbors and eastern neighborhoods, and we're able to do this more or less quickly. >> thank you. this is the second time i have seen this, and this is fascinating and i am sure he draws a lot of questions. for the sake of time, what is most concerning to me is the lack of children who remain in san francisco. we have the purview of the planning department.

and more on how this could help the school system. if this goes beyond a generation -- >> we have our own planning department and we are working with the zone. we have this, we have what the language positions have been, and so, we are working with this very minimally, we would hopefully be able to do this with the other departments. they have the old planning sections. >> and we would stop families from leaving san francisco. >> commissioner? >> this was my next question. within the city, are we doing most of the census data analysis,