Population 19,786 · Census ACS 2020–24
Choose a measure to map it.Tap a measure to map it. Swipe the row for more. Arrows show the change since 2006–10.
Median age by neighborhoodHistory and comparison ↓︎
Younger residents
Older residents
Colorblind friendly
off
More maps of Linda: Best Neighborhoods · Walk Grade · Household income · Home prices · Race · Politics · Traffic noise · Internet
Population and households in Linda
Household size in Linda
| Period | Linda | California | U.S. |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2006–10 | 3.32 | 3.04 | 2.68 |
| 2010–14 | 3.17 | 3.10 | 2.73 |
| 2015–19 | 3.13 | 3.09 | 2.71 |
| 2020–24 | 3.13 | 3.01 | 2.65 |
| Change | −0.19 | −0.03 | −0.03 |
Households in Linda are large by national standards, averaging 3.13 people against 2.65 for the U.S. That usually means more families with children at home. Since 2006–10, household size has dropped from 3.32, a much bigger shift than nationally.
Household size: the average number of people living in each occupied home. Source: BestNeighborhood calculations from U.S. Census Bureau ACS 5-year block-group estimates (table B25010).
Median age in Linda
| Period | Linda | California | U.S. |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2006–10 | 28.4 | 35.8 | 37.7 |
| 2010–14 | 30.1 | 36.8 | 38.6 |
| 2015–19 | 30.2 | 37.9 | 39.6 |
| 2020–24 | 31.7 | 39.0 | 40.1 |
| Change | +3.3 | +3.1 | +2.3 |
With a median age of just 31.7, Linda is far younger than the country as a whole (40.1), a population that tilts toward young families with children. Since 2006–10, the median age has climbed from 28.4, in line with the national trend. Of the 689 California cities with 5,000+ people, only 46 are younger.
Median age: the age that splits residents into two equal halves. Source: BestNeighborhood calculations from U.S. Census Bureau ACS 5-year block-group estimates (table B01002).
Single-parent households in Linda
| Period | Linda | California | U.S. |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2006–10 | 20.8% | 13.5% | 12.3% |
| 2010–14 | 21.1% | 13.5% | 12.3% |
| 2015–19 | 16.5% | 12.3% | 11.6% |
| 2020–24 | 19.7% | 12.3% | 11.6% |
| Change | −1.1 pts | −1.2 pts | −0.6 pts |
Single-parent households are common in Linda: 19.7% of all households, against 11.6% nationally. The single-parent share has edged down 1.1 points since 2006–10, mirroring the country. Of the 689 California cities with 5,000+ people, only 63 have a higher share of single-parent households.
Single-parent households: households where one adult with no spouse present lives with children under 18. Source: BestNeighborhood calculations from U.S. Census Bureau ACS 5-year block-group estimates (table B11003).
Housing in Linda
Renters in Linda
| Period | Linda | California | U.S. |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2006–10 | 49.2% | 42.6% | 33.3% |
| 2010–14 | 51.6% | 45.2% | 35.6% |
| 2015–19 | 48.4% | 45.2% | 36.0% |
| 2020–24 | 43.4% | 44.1% | 34.8% |
| Change | −5.8 pts | +1.5 pts | +1.5 pts |
Renting is more common in Linda than nationally: 43.4% of households rent their homes, against 34.8% for the U.S. More than a third of owners (36.1%) have paid off their mortgages, below the national share of 39.8%. Rentals cluster in the northwest; owners are most common in the southeast. The renter share has fallen 5.8 points since 2006–10, even as the national share rose.
Renters: occupied homes that are rented rather than owned. Source: BestNeighborhood calculations from U.S. Census Bureau ACS 5-year block-group estimates (table B25003).
Vacant homes in Linda
| Period | Linda | California | U.S. |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2006–10 | 11.4% | 8.7% | 11.4% |
| 2010–14 | 8.1% | 8.1% | 11.4% |
| 2015–19 | 4.0% | 7.5% | 11.1% |
| 2020–24 | 6.4% | 7.3% | 9.6% |
| Change | −5.0 pts | −1.4 pts | −1.8 pts |
Vacancy is on the low side in Linda: 6.4% of homes sit empty, against 9.6% nationally, which points to steady demand for housing. The picture is much the same across California. Vacancy is down 5.0 points from 2006–10, mirroring the country.
Vacant homes: homes with no one living in them, including vacation homes and homes for sale or rent. Source: BestNeighborhood calculations from U.S. Census Bureau ACS 5-year block-group estimates (table B25002).
Age of homes in Linda
| Period | Linda | California | U.S. |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2006–10 | 1988 | 1972 | 1974 |
| 2010–14 | 1987 | 1973 | 1975 |
| 2015–19 | 1989 | 1974 | 1977 |
| 2020–24 | 1994 | 1976 | 1980 |
| Change | +6 | +4 | +6 |
Much of the housing in Linda is relatively new: half of its homes were built after 1994, compared with 1980 for the U.S. as a whole. The median year built has moved up from 1988 in 2006–10, a sign of steady new building. The newest homes are mostly in the southeast, the oldest in the north. Of the 689 California cities with 5,000+ people, only 62 have newer homes.
Age of homes: the year that splits the housing stock into older and newer halves. Source: BestNeighborhood calculations from U.S. Census Bureau ACS 5-year block-group estimates (table B25035).
Rent in Linda
| Period | Linda | California | U.S. |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2006–10 | $882 | $1,298 | $965 |
| 2010–14 | $1,037 | $1,379 | $1,040 |
| 2015–19 | $1,165 | $1,721 | $1,213 |
| 2020–24 | $1,565 | $2,229 | $1,571 |
| Change | +$683 | +$931 | +$606 |
A typical rental in Linda costs $1,565 a month with utilities, close to the national median of $1,571. Rents here are lower than in California overall ($2,229). Rents are up $683 a month from 2006–10, a 77% jump, faster than rents rose nationally. Rent takes 28.2% of the typical renter's income, just under the 30% mark often used to define affordable rent.
Rent: monthly rent plus the utilities renters pay themselves. Source: BestNeighborhood calculations from U.S. Census Bureau ACS 5-year block-group estimates (table B25064).
Education in Linda
Bachelor's degrees in Linda
| Period | Linda | California | U.S. |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2006–10 | 8.6% | 29.1% | 28.4% |
| 2010–14 | 8.7% | 30.1% | 29.6% |
| 2015–19 | 14.2% | 32.9% | 32.1% |
| 2020–24 | 19.1% | 36.3% | 35.6% |
| Change | +10.5 pts | +7.1 pts | +7.2 pts |
Fewer adults in Linda have a four-year degree than in the country as a whole: 19.1%, against 35.6% nationally. The share with a degree is up 10.5 points from 2006–10, as it has nationally. College graduates are most concentrated in the south and least in the north.
Bachelor's degrees: adults 25 and older with a bachelor's degree or higher. Source: BestNeighborhood calculations from U.S. Census Bureau ACS 5-year block-group estimates (table B15003).
High school graduates in Linda
| Period | Linda | California | U.S. |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2006–10 | 70.2% | 79.9% | 84.9% |
| 2010–14 | 73.2% | 80.7% | 86.1% |
| 2015–19 | 79.9% | 82.6% | 87.7% |
| 2020–24 | 86.1% | 84.2% | 89.3% |
| Change | +16.0 pts | +4.3 pts | +4.3 pts |
About one in seven adults in Linda never finished high school, a bit more than nationally: 86.1% have a diploma or equivalent, against 89.3% across the U.S. Still, the rate is higher than in California as a whole (84.2%). The share with a diploma has risen 16.0 points since 2006–10, a much bigger shift than nationally.
High school graduates: adults 25 and older with a high school diploma, GED or more. Source: BestNeighborhood calculations from U.S. Census Bureau ACS 5-year block-group estimates (table B15003).
Jobs in Linda
| Period | Linda | California | U.S. |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2006–10 | 16.7% | 9.2% | 8.1% |
| 2010–14 | 18.4% | 11.3% | 9.4% |
| 2015–19 | 9.0% | 6.3% | 5.6% |
| 2020–24 | 5.6% | 6.6% | 5.4% |
| Change | −11.1 pts | −2.6 pts | −2.7 pts |
Unemployment in Linda is close to the national rate: 5.6% of the labor force, against 5.4%. The rate is lower than in California as a whole (6.6%). Unemployment is down 11.1 points from 2006–10, a much bigger shift than nationally.
Unemployment: people looking for work as a share of everyone working or looking. Source: BestNeighborhood calculations from U.S. Census Bureau ACS 5-year block-group estimates (table B23025).
Linda compared with nearby cities
| City | Household size | Median age | Single parents | Renters | Vacant homes | Median year built | Median rent | Bachelor's degree | High school diploma | Unemployment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Linda | 3.13 | 31.7 | 19.7% | 43.4% | 6.4% | 1994 | $1,565 | 19.1% | 86.1% | 5.6% |
| Olivehurst | 3.52 | 32.8 | 16.0% | 34.4% | 7.7% | 1986 | $1,473 | 13.7% | 79.2% | 8.5% |
| Marysville | 2.62 | 38.1 | 20.2% | 50.8% | 6.8% | 1967 | $1,277 | 15.6% | 84.0% | 10.8% |
| Yuba City | 3.05 | 38.1 | 14.1% | 40.7% | 5.5% | 1982 | $1,706 | 21.3% | 80.1% | 7.5% |
| Hammonton | 1.93 | 33.5 | 3.4% | 33.3% | 5.3% | 1991 | $1,590 | 30.5% | 95.9% | 0.4% |
| Plumas Lake | 3.11 | 36.6 | 9.0% | 7.5% | 6.7% | 2011 | $2,302 | 25.7% | 90.0% | 4.4% |
| Lomo | 3.19 | 47.9 | 7.8% | 21.0% | 6.3% | 1987 | $1,301 | 17.7% | 80.5% | 3.9% |
| Wheatland | 2.78 | 38.7 | 20.2% | 32.0% | 1.1% | 1994 | $1,060 | 20.6% | 91.6% | 5.4% |
| Beale Afb | 2.53 | 26.0 | 3.0% | 73.6% | 7.4% | 2002 | $2,297 | 31.6% | 97.5% | 4.1% |
| Sutter | 2.47 | 45.1 | 4.0% | 21.0% | 5.4% | 1976 | $1,672 | 25.1% | 96.5% | 8.4% |
| Rio Oso | 3.21 | 39.4 | 9.8% | 24.7% | 14.0% | 1980 | $1,489 | 24.9% | 83.5% | 5.2% |
All figures 2020–24.
Cities with similar populations: Windham, ME · Glassmanor, MD · Glen Mills, PA · Gorham, ME · Great Bend, KS · Great Falls, VA · Greenfield, MA · Greensburg, IN · Greenville, OH · Griffith, IN
About these numbers
Every figure on this page is a BestNeighborhood calculation from the Census Bureau's American Community Survey (ACS), built up from the Census block groups that make up Linda. Each ACS 5-year release pools five years of responses; this page shows the last 15 releases, 2006–10 through 2020–24. Neighboring releases share four of their five years, so they move gradually and small changes between them are within the survey's margin of error; in small places the lines can jump from one release to the next for the same reason. The maps show the same measures for each neighborhood, ranked against the whole country.
No other site shows detail at this level for free. We are able to keep this site free by receiving a small commission from the referring links on this page. Please share or cite this page if you aren’t able to otherwise support our work.