|
The above identified efforts have certainly had a positive impact
on the city. For example,
several agencies report the city’s willing compliance with fair
housing laws and the Americans with Disabilities Act.
In fact, Behavioral Connections, a local non-profit agency,
reports that it has never had an issue with getting the city to support
the establishment of dwellings for persons with disabilities.
In other communities, this has been a problem.
Complaint trends at the Fair Housing Center reveal relatively few
complaints filed by consumers.
During the 2000-2001 fiscal year,
the Center received 3 complaints of housing discrimination.
All three dealt with the rental market.
Two alleged discrimination based on race.
One alleged discrimination based on disability.
These complaints were resolved to the satisfaction of the
parties. During the
2001-2002 fiscal year, the Center received one complaint of housing
discrimination. This complaint alleged disability discrimination in the
rental context and is still pending.
During the 2002-2003 fiscal year, the Center received two
complaints of discrimination. Both
were based on familial status in the rental market.
These complaints are pending resolution.
Because of the small number of complaints filed,
it is difficult to identify many trends or patterns.
Complaints were filed based on three basis: race, familial status and disability. However, all of the complaints involved the rental market.
This suggests that there needs to be a continued focus on fair
housing training and education for rental housing professionals.
Back
to top
DEMOGRAPHIC
DATA
Bowling Green Ohio is a relatively small city with a population
29,636
in 2000. This notwithstanding it dominates most of Wood County. Bowling
Green is located almost exactly in the center of the county and contains
the county seat, sheriff’s office, hospital, courthouse, and other
county offices. Interstate I-75, which runs north and south, cuts the
county in half and goes straight through Bowling Green. The maps at the
end of this section show Bowling Green’s location in the state and in
the county.
Wood County is a rural county with many acres of farm land and
many farmers. The County is full of small villages and towns. Although
it has a modest population, Bowling Green is by far the largest city in
Wood County. Perrysburg in the northern part of the county is the second
largest city with a population of 16,945 in 2000. Perrysburg, because of
its proximity to Lucas County, is more often associated with Toledo than
with Bowling Green. In fact all of Wood County is part of the Toledo
Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). While Bowling Green is not a suburb
of Toledo, it is considered as a part of Toledo’s outer-ring. Bowling
Green is about 20 miles from downtown Toledo.
Bowling Green State
University is a major part of the City of Bowling Green. The campus
consumes much of the east side of the city with over one hundred
buildings and a large amount of off-campus housing. Bowling Green easily
fits into the category of a college town. The university is the largest
employer in the city. The students who study at the university are
counted in the U.S. census as residents of Bowling Green, because they
spend most of the year there. In 2001 there were 18,900
students enrolled in the fall semester. Because of Bowling Green State
University an unusually high number of African-Americans and Asians live
in Bowling Green. Although
the University also boasts a number of Latino students, information
gleaned from local sources and University data reveal that many of
Bowling Green’s Latino residents are not affiliated with the
University.
There are 23 civil
divisions or municipalities in Wood County. They are Bloom, Bowling
Green, Center, Fostoria, Freedom, Grand Rapids, Henry, Jackson, Lake,
Liberty, Middleton, Milton, Montgomery, Northwood, Perry, Perrysburg,
Plain, Portage, Rossford, Troy, Washington, Webster, and Weston.
(See Civil Division map at the end of this section.
Given Bowling Green’s
central location in Wood County and the easy access to major
transportation routes such as I-75, and State routes 25 and 6; Bowling
Green is the perfect choice for the county seat. In fact Bowling Green
is not only the county seat, but is also the home of all the county
office’s including County Auditor and County Sheriff.
Bowling Green is a growing
city, but it is growing slowly. The population has increased by 4,000
for the decades from 1980 through 2000, from 25,728 to 29,692. This
represents a 13% increase over 20 years.
The chart and graph below depict this growth trend.
As the charts depict, Wood
County is growing along with Bowling Green. In 1980 the county
population was 107,372. By
2000 the population had climbed to 121,065.
The state’s population has increased as well from 10,797,630 in
1980 to 11,353,140 in 2000. One
reason why Wood County has experienced this population growth is related
to the population decline Lucas County and the city of Toledo are
experiencing. People in the Toledo MSA are moving away from the city
into the periphery. They
are leaving the city center and moving into the suburbs and outer-ring
areas like Bowling Green.
With this kind of trend in
Northwest Ohio, Wood County and Bowling Green are the benefactors of
Lucas County and Toledo’s loss. With the added population in Bowling
Green taxes, revenues, and income for the city of Bowling Green
increases.
People within Wood County are moving to Bowling Green. Many of
the small rural communities such as Portage, Luckey and Wayne do not
have such amenities as gas
stations, grocery stores or banks.
Residents of these places must come to Bowling Green to or other
areas to conduct their shopping or take care of other business. Every
year families move from these communities to Bowling Green to be closer
to stores, schools, jobs,
or to take advantage of other services and amenities that Bowling Green
can provide.
Back
to top
RACIAL
CHARACTERISTICS
Bowling Green is not very
racially diverse as compared to the rest of the Country.
It is however more diverse than Wood County as a whole. In 2000
Bowling Green’s percentage of Caucasians was 3% lower than that of
Wood County, while the percentage of African-Americans was 1.5% higher
than in Wood County. Latino and Asian populations also had higher
percentages in Bowling Green than in Wood County in 2000. The charts at
the end of this section show the comparison in populations for Bowling
Green and Wood County. One can clearly see that Bowling Green is more
diverse than the county.
Bowling Green’s
diversity is somewhat credited to Bowling Green State University. In
2000 61% of Bowling Green’s population was B.G.S.U. students, thus the
student population influences the city’s population a great deal. The
University attracts students from all over Ohio and other states. There
are also many international students. In 2000, there were over 100
students from China alone. The
University boasts students from over 100 different nations including
India, Bosnia, Cyprus, Ghana, India, Malaysia, and Romania.
Three percent of the student population are international
students. The countries
traditionally representing the largest number of international students are China, Canada,
France, India, Japan, and Russia. Because
B.G.S.U. has so many international students, these students affect the
diversity of population in the city. Were it not for the presence of the diverse student body,
Bowling Green’s population would more closely reflect that of Wood county. The
City’s diversity is also impacted by the University professors who
live in the City. The
diversity among University employees is certainly reflected in the
City’s population. The charts and graphs below illustrate the impact
of B.G.S.U. student population on the City and the impact of the student
population on the City’s diversity.
Percent of Bowling Green Population that are BGSU Students
|
Year
|
Student
Population
|
Total
Population
|
Percentage
|
|
1980
|
17,718
|
25,728
|
69%
|
|
1990
|
18,140
|
28,176
|
64%
|
|
2000
|
18,096
|
29,636
|
61%
|
|
Bowling
Green State University Campus Population Change
|
|
Year
|
Student
Population
|
|
1951
|
3442
|
|
1955
|
3817
|
|
1960
|
6400
|
|
1965
|
9901
|
|
1970
|
15335
|
|
1975
|
16422
|
|
1980
|
17718
|
|
1981
|
17125
|
|
1982
|
16380
|
|
1983
|
16897
|
|
1984
|
16762
|
|
1985
|
17222
|
|
1986
|
17339
|
|
1987
|
17402
|
|
1988
|
17964
|
|
1989
|
18142
|
|
1990
|
18140
|
|
1991
|
18050
|
|
1992
|
17584
|
|
1993
|
17324
|
|
1994
|
17006
|
|
1995
|
16976
|
|
1996
|
16791
|
|
1997
|
18083
|
|
1998
|
17751
|
|
1999
|
18064
|
|
2000
|
18096
|
|
2001
|
18739
|
|
2002
|
18773
|
|
2003
|
18534
|
The above chart and graph
depict some of the relationship between the University’s diversity and the city’s diversity. There is a very close relationship between the University’s
African-American population and the city’s African-American
population. Using the
latest census data and University records for the year 2000 there were
837 African-Americans in the city of Bowling Green.
Of those 837, approximately 789 were students at the University.
University records also
help explain the city’s Native American population.
According to the 2000 census, there were 62 Native Americans in
the city. University
records reveal that there were 40 Native American students on campus in
2000.
University records do not
clearly depict a relationship between student and city population for
Hispanics and Asians however. According
to University records, a fairly large portion of students, 1,032 in
2000, did not report their ethnicity.
BGSU reports that in 2000, there were 409 Hispanic and 150 Asian
students. However, census
data reveals that during that time, there were 1,031 Hispanic and 543
Asian persons living in the city. If one assumes that a portion
of the students who did not reveal their ethnicity were Hispanic and
Asian, this would explain some of the variance between the counts.
However, it does not explain all of the variance.
While the city’s
African-American, Hispanic, Asian and Native American population are not
all students at the University, clearly, a large percentage are.
Bowling Green owes a great deal of its diversity to the
University. This also helps to explain why the city has greater racial
and ethnic diversity than the county.
The percentages of each ethnic group have remained rather stable
over the past 20 years. Caucasians or whites represented the majority of
the population in 1980 at 93.9%. By 2000 Caucasians were still the
majority. The Caucasian population increased from 24,159 in 1980 to 27,219 in 2000. However, the percentage of Caucasians as compared to the
overall population dropped slightly from 93.9% in 1980 to 91.8% in 2000.
The African-American population has decreased slightly and its
percentage of the population has declined as well. In 1980, 900 or 3.5%
of the residents of Bowling Green were African-Americans. In 2000, 837
or 2.8% of Bowling
Green’s residents were African-American.
On the other hand, the
Latino and Asian populations have grown significantly in proportion to
their population sizes. The
Latino population has grown from 463 in 1980 to 1,031 in 2000.
This represents a growth of 123% in the Latino population from
1980 to 2000. As can be
expected with the amount of growth in the population, the Latino
percentage of overall population has grown as well.
In 1980 1.8% of Bowling Green’s population was Latino. In 2000
Latinos represented 3.5% of the population, passing the number of
African-Americans to become the largest minority group in the city. The
Asian population has grown from 257 in 1980 to 533 in 2000.
The percentage of Asian population grew from 1.0% to 1.8%
between 1980 and 2000. The Native-Americans in Bowling Green
represent a very small portion of the population. Their numbers did
double however from 1980 to 2000, from 28 total to 62, or 0.1% to 0.2%.
The following charts and graphs depict the Bowling Green
population by ethnicity between 1980 and 2000.

|
Wood
County Population Change Percentages
|
|
Year
|
Caucasian
|
African-American
|
Latino
|
Asian
|
Native-American
|
Total
Population
|
|
1980
|
96.9%
|
1.2%
|
2.2%
|
0.5%
|
0.1%
|
100%
|
|
1990
|
96.5%
|
1.0%
|
2.5%
|
0.9%
|
0.2%
|
100%
|
|
2000
|
94.8%
|
1.3%
|
3.3%
|
1.0%
|
0.2%
|
100%
|
|
|
| |