Friday, February 4, 2011

Garwood's Population Increases for the First Time in Decades

It's official. Garwood grew by 2% since the 2000 Census. According to new numbers from the 2010 count Garwood added 73 residents raising its population to 4,226 from 4,153. The gain in numbers is the first increase in total population since the 1960 census, statistics show. Garwood has been shrinking in every decade since.

Garwood grew at the same pace of neighboring Westfield which saw its population increase from 29,644 in 2000 to 30,316 in 2010, a 2% increase. Neighboring Cranford didn't grow at all. 

Garwood's 2010 official population is a bit lower than its estimate in 2009 which was thought to be numbered at 4,530. Oddly enough Garwood came just 1 resident shy from having the same population it did in 1990. Back then Garwood had 4,227 residents, just 1 more than it did in 2010. Garwood's population peaked in 1960 with 5,426 residents calling the borough home. 1990 saw the largest decrease in population when the town had a 11% drop in residents, according to census data.

Garwood is also estimated to be far more diverse than its ever been with Asians accounting for 7% of the borough's population, census data shows. Whites are still the majority in town, accounting for 88% of the borough's population, but, that number is down from a nearly homogeneous 96% in 2000.    

Official Garwood Figures: 
2010- 4,226
2000- 4,153
1990- 4,227
1980- 4,792
1970- 5,260
1960- 5,426

Even with Garwood's 2% net gain in population it still remains the second smallest town in Union County, ranked 20th out of the 21 municipalities. Only tiny Winfield Township is smaller with a population of 1,471. Garwood is far from catching the 19th ranked town in the county- Mountainside has a population of 6,685. Union County's largest municipality is still Elizabeth.

Smallest Municipalities in Union: 19th- Mountainside: 6,685
20th- Garwood: 4,226
21st- Winfield: 1,471



  1. This isn't a comment about our census - but i am wondering what happened to your poll on bulk - it just disappeared. What was the outcome? If I recall - it was about 77% in favor of bringing it back like it was. Thanks.

  2. I think we would all "like" bulk back. The real question is, "would you be willing to lose other services or pay more taxes to fund the reinstatement of bulk?" If you're answer is not yes to that, the poll might as well have just said, "do you believe money grows on trees?"
    The outrage on bulk in this town is unbelievably ridiculous -- We had to shut down a school this year and lose free public pre-school -- yet I hear no outrage on that... just more and more talk about losing precious bulk... Get a few friends together and rent a dumpster and that way the little old lady down the street on a fixed income doesn't have to pay for it or lose her senior citizen programs.

  3. Read my comment again. I was asking about the poll. It was important because as you may recall during the election last year, it was a big campaign issue. So if this year's council and Mayor do not come up with restoring the bulk at least one or two pickups this year as we had it, they will go back on one of their campaign issues. Don't you think?

  4. Whether the people want it back or not is not relatvent to the campaign pledge they made. Even if the poll decidedly said "no" they will have gone back on a pledge. Of course everyone would want it back (if there was no cost to taxes or services) -- it makes life easy and its a nice service to have (and I imagine our neighboring towns who illegally used our service for their own bulk needs would agree). The election pledge itself should have addressed how they would pay for it... but since so many voters are one-dimensionally focused they don't even have to -- They can make campaign promises like a 6th grader running for student council and promise to put a juke box in the lunchroom.

    Ultimately it still it baffles me how our town's citizens care more about bulk service than they do about the school system. Whether you have school-aged children or not let's face it -- a town's school system is more of a driver of property value and town reputation than whether the town offers to pick up your old dresser a few times a year.

  5. Very well said - my child went through our school system and I always supported our schools. Too bad that people years ago were so short sited when they voted down the original school referendum. the school would have been paid for and we would have more than enough space.
    Talking about another subject - I hope the mayor and council get their act together and finally build the field complex - which we have probably over $1 million in grants and other money set aside. which will bring up our property values.

  6. Schools come first. everything else second. Bulk garbage third.

  7. Family is first, everything else is secondary.
    But the town should have passed the school referendum a long time ago, then our kids would have had a new school with enough of room and the bond would have been paid off already.

  8. these population census figures are not formal, they were quickly floated out here so NJ could complete their districting process for this decade. The true census figures will be out in 2012 I beleive. Have no idea what +/- toerance these numbers carry.