Want more on Virginia’s population trends? We’ve collected all our demographic coverage in one place.
When we asked candidates for local office across Southwest and Southside this summer to identify the most pressing challenge facing their community, many had the same answer: housing. (You can see their answers in our Voter Guide.)
The need for more housing (particularly affordable housing) is a theme that seems to unite many candidates. In Montgomery County, both Republican Todd King and Democratic Guian Kiran (who are running unopposed in separate districts) cited housing as a top concern.
What to do about it, though, is not always so unifying. Housing-related decisions in both Lynchburg and Salem have also been, or are on their way, to court. In Roanoke, the city council — the new members, anyway — are still talking about what the city should do with the last big undeveloped tract of land in the city. Specifically, how much, if any, of it should be developed and how. The most famous housing controversy is on the other side of the state: A decision by Arlington County Supervisors to end single-family home zoning, in a bid to increase housing options, is tied up in court.
All these communities are different, and the decisions they’ve made might be different, but there’s one thing consistently driving all of them: the state’s changing demography.
The most recent batch of census statistics, which I wrote about in Monday’s column, shows how the prime working-age population (25-44) is now growing in many rural areas and small cities, while it’s gone flat, or has actually declined, in much of Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads.
Those demographic trends aren’t just numbers on a spreadsheet; they are forcing policy choices — and, in some cases, stirring political controversy — across Virginia. People may not realize that demography is what’s responsible for certain issues that are popping up in their communities, but it is. Let’s take a look.
1. Communities that are losing population are also facing housing crises.
This seems nonsensical. How can a place that’s losing population not have enough houses? These new stats help explain why. Most rural counties across Southwest and Southside (plus along the Chesapeake Bay) are losing population — but they’re losing population primarily through death as an older population “ages out.” Many have more people moving in than moving out. That’s something we knew from previous stats; these new ones show how the growth in many communities is coming from people 25-44. Just because people are dying doesn’t necessarily mean houses are becoming available; a surviving spouse may still be living there. Also, the house that a young family wants, or can afford, may not be the type of house that an older resident is vacating.
The map above shows where the 25-44 population is growing fastest; you’ll see that many of those places are in rural areas that are also losing population. Those new residents all need somewhere to live.
2. Demography is reshaping the economy. Or maybe it’s the other way around.
In a previous economy, jobs flowed to where the natural resources were — mines, ports, rivers and such. People followed because that’s where the jobs were and they couldn’t be moved.
In today’s economy, jobs tend to flow to where the people are — and people are mobile. That’s why we see such emphasis on quality-of-life issues, as communities seek to attract or retain a talented labor pool. Since the pandemic, the strongest job growth in Virginia has come not in major metros, but smaller ones. (I’ll have more on those statistics in a future column.) This is somewhat of a chicken-and-egg situation — which came first, the people or the jobs? Or a combination of both? Whatever the answer, we know that the strongest growth of the 25-44 population has also been in those smaller metros and rural areas. All these communities that are growing their 25-44 populations are making themselves more attractive, economically speaking. They might be losing population overall, which is bad for the economy (fewer people to pay taxes and patronize local businesses), but they’re gaining in the prime working-age cohort, which is good for the economy. This is much like one of the relationship statuses Facebook offers: “It’s complicated.”
3. Northern Virginia has a potential labor problem coming.
Most of us have grown up with the idea that Northern Virginia is a center of never-ending population and economic growth. We need to rethink that. Population growth in Northern Virginia is slowing down, and these statistics help us understand why. Fewer people 25-44 are moving to (or staying in) Northern Virginia. Hamilton Lombard, a demographer with the Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service at the University of Virginia, attributes this to high housing prices that are making Northern Virginia unaffordable for many young adults. Also a factor: A slowdown in home construction since the Great Recession hit in 2008.
Over the past four years, the Richmond metro added more people 25-44 than Northern Virginia.
Even the part of Virginia outside the urban crescent of Northern Virginia, Richmond and Hampton Roads added more people 24-44 than Northern Virginia.
Arlington saw its 25-44 population decline; that’s one reason supervisors want to make that zoning change — as a way to make the county more affordable to young adults. Alexandria also saw its 25-44 population decline. Loudoun County saw a net gain of just 58 people in that age group over four years.
Some residents may welcome an end to what seemed like go-go growth, but the way the population growth is slowing portends some economic challenges. Think of it this way: The age cohort in Northern Virginia growing fastest is 65 and over — a net gain of 66,213. Those are generally people leaving the workforce. It saw a net gain of 15,059 in the 25-44 age group, so Northern Virginia isn’t really replacing those retiring workers. No place is, but the imbalance in Northern Virginia is higher than most. In Northern Virginia, the growth of the 65-and-up cohort is 4.39 times higher than the growth of the 25-44 cohort. We think of the Roanoke Valley as an older area, and it is, but in the Roanoke Valley, the 65-and-up cohort grew just 2.7 times faster than the 25-44 cohort. In the Lynchburg metro, the older age group grew just 1.48 times faster than the younger one.
Bottom line: Northern Virginia is starting to age faster than other places, and that’s going to have implications (negatives ones) for its labor pool.
4. Hampton Roads has bigger demographic challenges than Northern Virginia
We focus so much on Northern Virginia because, well, it’s Northern Virginia. If nothing else, it supplies 42% of the state’s tax revenue, so it’s in the interest of the whole state to keep our economic engine running well. That focus on Northern Virginia overshadows what’s happening in Hampton Roads. In Hampton Roads, the 65-and-up age cohort has grown faster than its 25-44 age cohort. That’s primarily because there’s so little growth in that younger age group. Hampton Roads added just 4,347 people in that age group; the much smaller Lynchburg metro added almost as many as that — 3,312.
Our next governor needs to worry about the economic health of all Virginia, but she needs to give some particular attention to our two biggest metros.
5. The Lynchburg metro is attracting almost twice as many young adults as the Roanoke metro.
Ten years ago, Roanoke lost the Commonwealth Games to Lynchburg. That was a symbolic blow because the games had been born in Roanoke. The Hill City’s vice mayor at the time, Ceasor Johnson, crowed: “You got Lynchburged.” That phrase still rings around Roanoke.
The two metros aren’t necessarily in competition — the real economic competition for both places isn’t an hour down U.S. 460, it’s on the other side of the world — but the Lynchburg and Roanoke metros are close enough that some comparisons seem natural.
Demographically speaking, Lynchburg is winning. It’s growing younger (slightly) while Roanoke is growing older (slightly). Lynchburg has the advantage of a lot of colleges; we don’t usually think of it as a college town, but in many ways, it is. However you think of things, here are the numbers from the past four years:
The Lynchburg metro added 3,312 people ages 25-44; the Roanoke metro added just 1,849.
Lynchburg’s growth was within range of much larger Hampton Roads (4,347). The Roanoke metro growth wasn’t that much different from the much smaller Staunton metro (1,806). Maybe Staunton did exceptionally well, but whatever the reason, the Roanoke metro is adding fewer young adults than Lynchburg.
You’d think the New River Valley metro would be doing well with that age cohort, since it has Virginia Tech and Radford University, but it’s not. New River added just 78 people in the 25-44 age cohort. That seems inconceivable to me, but that’s what the numbers say.
Why is the Lynchburg metro doing so well, demographically, compared to the Roanoke metro (and New River, for that matter)? Here’s one big difference between the two: In the Lynchburg metro, the central city — Lynchburg — is attracting young adults. It added 853, nearly twice as many as it added in the 65-and-up category. In the Roanoke Valley, the central city — Roanoke — is losing young adults. Roanoke lost 365 young adults while adding 897 older ones. Why is Roanoke losing young adults while Botetourt County, Roanoke County and Salem are gaining them? Roanoke is losing young adults while many smaller cities in the western part of the state are gaining them. The city council might want to talk about that. It might even want to ask Lynchburg for some advice.