RE: School District Issues & Discussion

["Dale Courtney" <dmcourtn@moscow.com>]

Brian wrote:

> I suspect the general fecundity of the students has decreased 
> in the past decade.  There seem to be much fewer school-age 
> children of UI students, in student housing and elsewhere.
	<snip> 
> Is UI the dog wagging this tail?

There's no doubt that the fluxuation of the UI student population
affects Moscow's absolute numbers.

However, I would ask the following: 

A. Can UI wag the dog for the entire county? There are 34,935 people in
Latah county in the 2000 census. 

B. The numbers I quoted should have been relatively immune to UI flux. 

Why do I say that? Because it was based on the percentage of the total
people surveyed. 

> > 1.  The census bureau reports that Latah's total population has 
> > increased 14.1% in 10 years
> > (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/16/16057.html)
> >
> > 2.  The census bureau reports that Latah's 17-and-under 
> population has 
> > increased 20.3% in 10 years
> > (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/16/16057.html)
> > 3.  Moscow's total population increased from 18,519 in 1990 
> to 21,291 
> > in 2000 (13% in 10 years) 
> > 
> (http://www2.census.gov/census_>
2000/datasets/demographic_profile/Idaho
> > /2
> > kh16.pdf vs http://venus.census.gov/cdrom/lookup/1021654114)
> >
> > 4.  Moscow's school-aged children make up 11.2% of the total 
> > population 
> > 
> (http://www2.census.gov/census_2000/datasets/demographic_profi
>  le/Idaho/2kh16.pdf)

The percentages should remove the UI flux (since they are just that,
percentages). 

Dale