Apple Valley's Poverty Increase Seems Out of Place

As a resident of Apple Valley, the numbers on this chart concern me:

Suburban Poverty Rates: (comparison of 2000 vs 2010)

City                 Pop Grwth   2000 Pov.Rate    2010 Pov.Rate      %Inc/Dec

Rosemount          +50%            3.3%                 2.5%                -24%

Prior Lake             +30%            3.6%                3.0%                -17%

Lakeville               +30%            2.0%                 2.8%               +40%

Savage                +27%            2.3%                 3.4%               +48%

Eagan                   +1%             2.9%                 4.5%               +55%

Burnsville                0%             5.1%                 8.1%               +59%

Apple Valley        +8%             2.1%                 5.7%             +171%

Data from MinnPost graphic

Why does Apple Valley have a disproportional rise in poverty?

I frankly don't know the answer. Are we in some kind of unusual pocket? Rosemount had a decrease in poverty. Lakeville has half the rate that we do. Burnsville and Eagan had significant increases, but not on the level of Apple Valley. The MinnPost article on suburban poverty seemed to indicate that the older outer ring suburbs had the most increase in poverty which would explain Burnsville and Eagan—older suburbs with less growth. But Apple Valley had more growth with a disproportional increase in poverty. Odd.

So, what does poverty mean? The current poverty level is $11,300 for individuals and $22,100 for a family of four. A challenging way to live to say the least. But why is Apple Valley's rate growing more rapidly?

Just to speculate on some possible causes, I thought that maybe there was a higher immigrant population in the city. But why would it be disproportional? Why not Rosemount? Why not Lakeville? Maybe someone has an answer.

The other possibility I thought of dealt with the housing crisis. Maybe there were a lot of foreclosures in the city. The MinnPost graphic does mention housing and lists the percentage of family income devoted to housing. Apple Valley stood at 31%. But Burnsville was the same and Lakeville and Eagan came in at 28%. Although that is a high percentage across the board, Apple Valley isn't out of sync with its neighbors.

So the question still remains. Why Apple Valley? If somebody out there has an answer I'd sure like to hear it.