2010 District Data Table

DISTRICT	Total Pop 2000	Total Pop 2010	Total Pop Change	% Change	Ideal Senate	Deviation
01	172,269	185,350	13,081	107.59%	192,306	(6,956)
02	170,547	175,067	4,520	102.65%	192,306	17,239
03	163,940	180,403	16,463	110.04%	192,306	11,903
04	172,972	189,038	16,066	109.29%	192,306	3,268
05	180,558	207,003	26,445	114.65%	192,306	(14,697)
06	176,207	201,051	24,844	114.10%	192,306	(8,745)
07	174,644	192,376	17,732	110.15%	192,306	(70)
08	176,993	212,899	35,906	120.29%	192,306	(20,593)
09	164,116	179,807	15,691	109.56%	192,306	12,499
10	169,344	176,153	6,809	104.02%	192,306	16,153
11	166,328	188,547	22,219	113.36%	192,306	3,759
12	177,673	188,880	11,207	106.31%	192,306	3,426
13	176,846	227,448	50,602	128.61%	192,306	(35,142)
14	169,137	179,926	10,789	106.38%	192,306	12,380
15	168,266	193,013	24,747	114.71%	192,306	(707)
16	176,108	231,510	55,402	131.46%	192,306	(39,204)
17	176,294	208,424	32,130	118.23%	192,306	(16,118)
18	180,979	222,166	41,187	122.76%	192,306	(29,860)
19	163,769	167,010	3,241	101.98%	192,306	25,296
20	173,785	194,112	20,327	111.70%	192,306	(1,806)
21	179,987	194,069	14,082	107.82%	192,306	(1,763)
22	178,768	219,862	41,094	122.99%	192,306	(27,556)
23	178,988	254,672	75,684	142.28%	192,306	(62,366)
24	180,205	184,244	4,039	102.24%	192,306	8,062
25	164,120	176,409	12,289	107.49%	192,306	15,897
26	173,853	185,292	11,439	106.58%	192,306	7,014
27	169,464	176,499	7,035	104.15%	192,306	15,807
28	170,195	166,047	(4,148)	97.56%	192,306	26,259
29	167,392	146,103	(21,289)	87.28%	192,306	46,203
30	170,727	158,793	(11,934)	93.01%	192,306	33,513
31	163,996	196,021	32,025	119.53%	192,306	(3,715)
32	166,490	208,718	42,228	125.36%	192,306	(16,412)
33	174,323	179,193	4,870	102.79%	192,306	13,113

* Please note: The ideal population for a Senate District in 2000 was 172,403. A District with an ideal population in 2000 would need a population increase of 19,903 (the difference between 192,306 and 172,403) to continue to have an ideal population in 2010.