Census Finds San Leandro Bigger and More Diverse

San Leandro has grown nearly 7 percent in the last 10 years. Both Asians and Hispanics now outnumber whites in the city.

Groups that were once minorities are now clearly the majority in San Leandro, according to data released today from the 2010 Census.

Asians and Latinos each make up a greater percentage of the population in San Leandro than non-Hispanic whites, according to the data. Just 10 years ago, non-Hispanic whites made up more than half of the city’s population.

San Leandro’s population rose nearly 7 percent over the past decade, according to the data, a slower rate than the state as a whole, which grew by 10 percent. The city is now home to just under 85,000 people.

Around 30 percent of residents identified themselves on the census form as Asian. Around 27 percent of them identified themselves as non-Hispanic white.

Overall, 37.6 percent of census responders in San Leandro identified themselves as white, including Hispanics or Latinos. The U.S. Census Bureau considers Hispanic/Latino an ethnicity, not a race, and therefore the numbers overlap.

Black or African American residents make up about 12 percent of the population, while Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islanders, and American Indians and Alaska Natives each make up less than one percent of the population.

Residents who identified themselves as being of two or more races make up 5.6 percent of the population.

The results mark a substantial demographic change in the city since the last census. In 2000, more than 50 percent of the city’s residents identified themselves as white, 23 percent as Asian and 20 percent as Hispanic or Latino. African Americans made up approximately 10 percent of the population then.

In comparison, Oakland, with a population of about 391,000, is approximately 26 percent non-Hispanic white (35 percent white if Hispanics are included), 27 percent African American, 17 percent Asian, and 25 percent Hispanic, according to 2010 Census data.

Livermore, the city whose size is most similar to San Leandro’s in Alameda County, at 81,000 people, is approximately 65 percent white (75 percent if Hispanics are included), 8 percent Asian, 2 percent African American, and 21 percent Hispanic.

The state’s population grew by 10 percent since the last census, to reach 37.3 million. Non-Hispanic whites make up approximately 40 percent of California’s population. Whites, including Hispanics, make up approximately 58 percent of the state's population.

Hispanics or Latinos of all races make up 37.6 percent of the state's population.

See the table below for more data. 

Total Population by Race (Hispanic exclusive) and Hispanic or Latino: 2010

% of Total Population State/ County/ Place Total Pop. White alone, Not Hispanic Black or African American alone, Not Hispanic Asian alone, Not Hispanic Hispanic or Latino (1) California 37.3m 40.10% 5.80% 12.80% 37.60% Alameda County 1.5m 34.10% 12.20% 25.90% 22.50% Alameda city 73,812 45.30% 6.10% 30.90% 11.00% Albany city 18,539 49.30% 3.30% 31.00% 10.20% Ashland CDP 21,925 15.60% 18.60% 18.10% 42.80% Berkeley city 112,580 54.70% 9.70% 19.10% 10.80% Castro Valley CDP 61,388 49.50% 6.60% 21.10% 17.40% Cherryland CDP 14,728 20.90% 10.80% 9.20% 54.00% Dublin city 46,036 44.30% 9.20% 26.40% 14.50% Emeryville city 10,080 40.20% 17.20% 27.30% 9.20% Fairview CDP 10,003 36.20% 20.50% 14.80% 21.70% Fremont city 214,089 26.50% 3.10% 50.30% 14.80% Hayward city 144,186 18.80% 11.30% 21.60% 40.70% Livermore city 80,968 64.70% 1.90% 8.20% 20.90% Newark city 42,573 27.50% 4.50% 26.80% 35.20% Piedmont city 10,667 71.50% 1.30% 18.00% 3.90% Pleasanton city 70,285 60.80% 1.60% 23.10% 10.30% San Leandro city 84,950 27.10% 11.80% 29.30% 27.40% San Lorenzo CDP 23,452 32.40% 4.50% 21.10% 37.70% Sunol CDP 913 78.80% 0.10% 5.30% 10.00% Union City city 69,516 14.40% 6.00% 50.40% 22.90%

Source: California State Data Center, Department of Finance, based on 2010 data files from the U.S. Census Bureau. 


Total Population by Race (Hispanic included in each race group): 2010

% of Total Population State/ County/ City Total Population White Alone Black or African American alone American Indian and Alaska Native alone Asian alone Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone California 37,253,956 57.6% 6.2% 1.0% 13.0% 0.4%   Alameda County 1,510,271 43.0% 12.6% 0.6% 26.1% 0.8% Alameda city 73,812 50.8% 6.4% 0.6% 31.2% 0.5% Albany city 18,539 54.6% 3.5% 0.5% 31.2% 0.2% Ashland CDP 21,925 30.6% 19.5% 1.1% 18.4% 1.2% Berkeley city 112,580 59.5% 10.0% 0.4% 19.3% 0.2% Castro Valley CDP 61,388 58.0% 6.9% 0.5% 21.4% 0.7% Cherryland CDP 14,728 41.0% 11.5% 1.4% 9.5% 2.1% Dublin city 46,036 51.3% 9.4% 0.5% 26.8% 0.6% Emeryville city 10,080 44.5% 17.5% 0.4% 27.5% 0.2% Fairview CDP 10,003 45.0% 21.0% 0.8% 15.2% 1.3% Fremont city 214,089 32.8% 3.3% 0.5% 50.6% 0.5% Hayward city 144,186 34.2% 11.9% 1.0% 22.0% 3.1% Livermore city 80,968 74.6% 2.1% 0.6% 8.4% 0.3% Newark city 42,573 41.3% 4.7% 0.7% 27.2% 1.5% Oakland city 390,724 34.5% 28.0% 0.8% 16.8% 0.6% Piedmont city 10,667 74.2% 1.3% 0.1% 18.2% 0.1% Pleasanton city 70,285 67.0% 1.7% 0.3% 23.2% 0.2% San Leandro city 84,950 37.6% 12.3% 0.8% 29.7% 0.8% San Lorenzo CDP 23,452 47.4% 4.8% 1.0% 21.6% 0.8% Sunol CDP 913 85.4% 0.1% 0.7% 5.3% 0.8% Union City city 69,516 23.9% 6.3% 0.5% 50.9% 1.3%

Source: California State Data Center, Department of Finance, based on 2010 data files from the U.S. Census Bureau. 


Population Change of major Race/Ethnic groups in San Leandro and Hispanic, non-hispanic breakdown

POPULATION 2000 2010 Number Percent Number Percent   Total population 79,452 100.0 84,950 100.0 RACE       One race 74,874 94.2 80,195 94.4     White 40,754 51.3 31,946 37.6     Black or African American 7,849 9.9 10,437 12.3     American Indian and Alaska Native 609 0.8 669 0.8     Asian 18,242 23.0 25,206 29.7     Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 683 0.9 642 0.8     Some Other Race 6,737 8.5 11,295 13.3   Two or More Races 4,578 5.8 4,755 5.6         HISPANIC OR LATINO       Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 15,939 20.1 23,237 27.4   Not Hispanic or Latino 63,513 79.9 61,713 72.6

Source: U.S. Census Bureau. Data tables accessed via American FactFinder

The Omordha March 09, 2011 at 02:02 AM
For California, I located these files. http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demographic/state_census_data_center/census_2010/documents/2010Census_Pop_Rankers.xls
The Omordha March 09, 2011 at 02:09 AM
The California website uses the following words on the numbers which account for why the 2000 results do not match. (1) Census 2000 counts include changes from the Count Question Resolution program. Data may not match data published in Census 2000 reports.
David March 09, 2011 at 04:26 AM
Leah, overall in America the white population is relatively stable, it's "shrinking" only in a relative way due to immigration. If I recall, the birth rate for white women in the USA is 1.9 or so, just under the replacement rate. It's the same in France; it's only higher overall due to their Muslim minority, which the French do not break out in their version of a census. That degree of white flight in SL is astounding. I didn't live here 10 years ago, but my neighborhood here certainly didn't change that much in the past 4 years.
Barry Kane March 09, 2011 at 04:41 AM
I lived in SL in 1993 - 1999 and then moved back here in 2006 due to a job relocation. I can see and feel the difference. I thought I was imagining it, but it really is a radically different city.
Barry Kane March 09, 2011 at 05:00 AM
City of SF is interesting, very stable, a increase in white population percentage to 43%. Asian @ 33% Hispanic @ 15% and Black @ 6%
Marga Lacabe March 09, 2011 at 05:32 AM
David, I daresay much of the change actually took place early in the decade. We bought here in 2000, but most of our local friends came a year to four after. That's when the real estate market started to go crazy in the Bay Area, and San Leandro was one of the last affordable places. I think many young(ish) couples and families move in and replaced the old folk which were dying out. But in any case, I think your neighborhood is the last bastion of "whiteness" in SL, as with those around it it's the priciest one.
Leah Hall March 09, 2011 at 06:02 AM
David, our population growth rate in the US is 0.977% (2010 est.) Birth rate 13.5 births/1,000 population (2010 est.). This is the lowest in a century. There were 4,136,000 births in 2009. 13.9 births/1,000 population/year (Provisional Data for 2008) 14.3 births/1,000 population/year (Provisional Data for 2007) (reference wikipedia)
Leah Hall March 09, 2011 at 06:13 AM
http://www.cesifo-group.de/portal/page/portal/ifoContent/N/neucesifo/CONFERENCES/SC_CONF_2008/Fertility%20and%20Public%20Policy/Thevenon_fpp08.pdf Abstract: Does Fertility Respond to Work and Family-life Reconciliation Policies in France? From the abstract -- France’s fertility level can be explained by its longstanding family policy, which has changed in-depth since the 1980s to accommodate with women’s increasing labour force participation. This policy encompasses a wide range of instruments, based on different actors and motivations, since this policy is aimed to serve different objectives. Despite some ambiguities, family policy seems to have created especially positive attitudes towards 2 or 3 children families in France, and to have bounded the propensity to remain childless. We argue that a key aspect is the favourable context created for the conciliation between work and family through a relatively comprehensive and continuous support over the family life-course.
Leah Hall March 09, 2011 at 06:28 AM
Speaking only for my neighborhood of 10 years, this is the delta: -- we moved into house where previous white owners died (we are white = no white flight) -- house across the street white owners died and 50 year old son now occupies (no white flight) -- next door neighbors (white) retired to Chico. Not exactly "white flight." First generation Hispanic family bought the home. -- two other homes changed owners due to divorce (one White to Hispanic) -- one house lost due to loss of job, another divorce (white couple moved into one, not sure what is happening with the second. It doesn't appear as though any change most would call "white flight" has happened in our neighborhood, in my view. Moves have been caused by death or other stresses in families.
Jill Replogle March 09, 2011 at 06:36 AM
In response to a question earlier about the actual numbers, not just percentages, the numbers are out. I just included percentages here because the chart was too big to view it all on the page. I'll work on uploaded more data in the coming days.
David March 09, 2011 at 12:35 PM
marga, don't you live in my neighborhood?
Fran March 09, 2011 at 02:53 PM
Marga, I also know quite a few non-whites fleeing San Leandro for better schools. Mostly to Alameda, Castro Valley and Dublin. Also, as a result of our bad schools, more same sex couples are moving to SL, taking advantage of the values since most don't have kids in school. Is there anything in the census that reflects LGBT statistics?
David March 09, 2011 at 03:40 PM
how much worse are the schools compared to 10 years ago? I dobt the middle school and high school got as bad as they are only in the past 10 yrs but maybe I'm wrong.
Leah Hall March 09, 2011 at 03:49 PM
I guess I'm still interested in the break down of which whites a) left for better public schools b) left due to stressors such as death, divorce, job loss and c) what demographic has moved to San Leandro? My sense is it is mostly Hispanic families with 2-4 children, immigrated within last generation or so. d) all data tied in with birth rates and taking a close look at low birth rates of "native" citizens as a whole. My family, for example, probably wouldn't have moved to San Leandro in the first place if we had remianded childless. We would have stayed in our Berkeley apartment. There isn't much housing in San Leandro to attract 2 income college grads without children here, it is a sleepy town without much housing for childless families (unless they want to invest in a house with a BIG YARD.)
Marga Lacabe March 09, 2011 at 04:11 PM
David, no. I live near McKinley Middle School, in a mostly working class Latino/Black neighborhood (with some white people left over from before). My kids go to Roosevelt because we gave McKinley a try (for 3 years!) and decided it was either transfer them or move.
Marga Lacabe March 09, 2011 at 04:15 PM
You have to go and look at the statistics, but the schools have gotten worse in the last 10 years (with some exceptions, Madison has been getting better since the last principal was hired, now that's a guy that the Patch should be interviewing - how come he's the only one in SL improving his school?). But the schools have also become, not just more "Latino/black" but also poorer. I haven't looked at the numbers for the HS, but we have at least one elementary school that it's over 2/3 "free or reduced lunch". What I hear about our Middle schools and HS (but it's definitely not true for our elementary schools other than Roosevelt/Madison) is that if you are a middle class kid you'll be able to get a good education that will prepare you for a top university. If you're not, good luck.
David March 09, 2011 at 04:26 PM
for some reason i thought you moved, not transferred. and btw, random checks indicate that my census tract is not the 'whitest' in SL. there's Assumption Parish and Bay O.
David March 09, 2011 at 04:38 PM
Interestingly, the Census tract around McKinley is flipped from SL's average white/black ratios (census tract=23% black vs 12% overall, 13% white vs 27% overall), the Asian/Latino are mostly similar .
David March 09, 2011 at 05:14 PM
So i looked at some statistics, and spot checking (it's hard because I don't think the testing is comparable) but most of the grade schools appear to be holding their own, some stable (roosevelt/washington), some dropping a bit (McKinley), some improvements (Madison), but what stands out is the huge drop off from grade school to middle school and high school is terrible (which I knew before moving here). I'm not sure your statement about being a middle class kid at Bancroft and the high school and getting in anywhere stands. do we know where students went after SLUHS?
Marga Lacabe March 09, 2011 at 05:33 PM
This is from a 2007 blog entry by Stephen Cassidy: "Harvard and Stanford universities accepted two seniors. Fifty-five seniors were accepted to University of California campuses, and almost 120 seniors are continuing their studies at California State University campuses" That was out of 655 seniors.
Jennifer Courtney March 09, 2011 at 06:08 PM
FWIW, we always felt that if you were a motivated person who wanted to excel at SLHS you had that option. You could complete the necessary summer work to take AP and honors courses and participate in sports, music, theater and service clubs. When I graduated in 2006, some of my peers were going to Harvard, Stanford, Cornell, Johns Hopkins, NYU, Wellesley, Bryn Mawr, dozens to UC Berkeley/Davis/Santa Barbara/etc and dozens more to CSU campuses. While there are definite disparities between the highest performing and lowest performing students, would people agree this is a larger issue at urban high schools in general to 'close the achievement gap'?
Leah Hall March 09, 2011 at 07:42 PM
Speaking as a mom of a 5th grader in an independent school in Oakland: While I am heartened by the success of students such as yourself, Jennifer, neither I nor any parent I know would consider the gap a "selling point" as we "shop" for high schools for our children in the next 2-3 years. Teenagers are much less influenced by there parents and much more influenced by their peers at this stage of their lives. Given the resources, quite frankly most of the parents I know intend to get their children into schools with small achievement gaps. Those with children who are extremely independent and confident might consider a "Berkeley High" or an "Oakland Tech" to take advantage of public school cost savings and the excellent programs which can be had, if the student is ready to navigate and advocate for his or herself.
David March 09, 2011 at 08:23 PM
That's good that motivated students can still find success at SLUHS. From the CST data for SLUHS, however, we see 39% of students scoring proficient or advanced (i.e. above 50th percentile) in English, a dismal 13% in mathematics, 45% in science and 37% in history. So either motivated students are in short supply, or the quality of instruction is not high, or some combination thereof. As an aside, it's results like 13% in math vs 45% in science that really make me question the tests. How can you do that much better in science, a good portion of which is based in mathematics and often uses similar logic skills? (rhetorical, i know this isn't a forum where that can be answered)
Jill Replogle March 09, 2011 at 11:47 PM
Thanks for attaching the city's Diversity Resource Directory, Jennifer. Just checked it out, super useful.
Barry Kane March 10, 2011 at 03:54 AM
I agree with you Leah, except it is not really a sleepy town on the crime front. I really agree though that there is not much to do here. Except for the weather and view (Bay o Vista) and the good commute location, it really has nothing to offer as a community for either a single person or a middle class family desiring good schools and a safe city with nice amenities. It is not a creative or interesting place, lacks reataurants or good entertainment locations, does not have good schools and certainly is not a fun, creative class city and it is becoming more dingy and edgy. It also has none of the pristine benefits of a Pleasanton, Danville or Walnut Creek. To me it is just a kind of ok place close to places that are better and is very suitable as a stepping stone for any mixture of ethnicities and races that want out of East Oakland or other more dangerous and poor areas less suitable for young families with limited to middle income resources. It also works reasonably well for those that can not tolerate the economically homogenous enclaves to our east and/or want to be close to the creative energy of Berkeley/SF and either can not afford those cities or have children and those cities are just to congested, complex and expensive for a family.
David March 10, 2011 at 04:30 AM
Funny thing is that I remember (it wasn't that long ago) when Alameda was considered a sleepy town with nothing to do and maybe ok for families that couldn't afford Berkeley but still wanted to be "close to the action." Now, I don't think SL will necessarily ever be Alameda, but it might behoove "city elders" to take a close look as to what happened with Alameda over the past 15 years. As far as I can tell it involved improving the schools, keeping a lid on crime, and the "nicer" retail etc followed, along with keeping quirky joints like Ole's Waffle house and the New Zealander. It did NOT involve building housing projects near downtown, hassling business owners or lowering the vigilance level on crime.
Barry Kane March 10, 2011 at 05:01 AM
You are right about Alameda, but Alameda did have a better housing stock and is protected as an Island from some of the nearby urban problems. I think a combo of Alameda and Emeryville would work quite nicely in SL. Not sure there is the population base left here that could help make that happen or the creativity and will of the city leaders. Would be nice if it could happen, I am just afraid we are too far down the declining suburb cycle to right the ship.
Barry Kane March 10, 2011 at 06:07 AM
Leah, I hope you are right, I just don't see it even with fingers crossed, not with the poor schools and poor reputation the city has to most outsiders, especially non-immigrants. I have several young employees (25-30) where I work that grew up here and all have moved out of town to Alameda, Castro Valley, Pleasanton, Walnut Creek and a couple to SF and Emeryville and all sight the same reasons for moving, a feeling of overall decline in quality of life in the city the last 10-15 years. They are trying to get their 60 something parents to move, as they do not feel it is safe for them any more. I did see hope when I 1st moved here and have become more jaded with my experiences here. I am also a bit worn down by my peers at work almost universal negative reactions when I tell them where I live, I now say I live on the edge of Castro Valley to avoid the "yuck, why would you stay in San Leandro, its scary there, when you can afford to live elsewhere?." As I said, I really hope you are right and we are aligned for a turn around! (1 gay male, upper middle income boomer, no kids, 2 dogs).
David March 10, 2011 at 12:50 PM
I like the emeryville alameda combo :). Alameda housing stock is nice, but all the foundation repairs...anyway, perhaps the relevant question for a survey would be, if you could afford to, would you move? (and why). And for those who moved here, do your reasons for moving still apply? Mine do, so I'm not as pessimistic despite that being my general disposition.
Jill Replogle March 14, 2011 at 10:36 PM
EDITOR'S NOTE: I've updated this story to more accurately reflect results of the 2010 census data using two sets of results: population by race including Hispanic or Latino residents; population by race with a separate category for Hispanic or Latino residents. The U.S. Census Bureau considers Latinos an ethnic group. They're also considered a minority group, so there are several questions on the census form specifically addressing Hispanics or Latinos. I'll be writing more on this in the coming days/weeks. In the meantime, I hope the updated story is more clarifying than confusing.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »