Statewide Investment Hubs · 2019. 10. 14. · 0.0%. 0.5%. 1.0%. 1.5%. 2.0%. Decline across the...

Post on 04-Oct-2020

1 views 0 download

Transcript of Statewide Investment Hubs · 2019. 10. 14. · 0.0%. 0.5%. 1.0%. 1.5%. 2.0%. Decline across the...

STATEWIDE INVESTMENT HUBS

A new concept in regionalism.

POPULATION/WORKFORCE

2011 – 2016 Population Change • Austin 15.5%

• Raleigh 12.0%

• Nashville 9.8%

• Denver 9.7%

• Columbus 6.0%

• Indianapolis 4.9%

• Milwaukee 1.6%

• Pittsburgh -0.7%

Low IN birth rate

Declining birth rate

Over dependence on IL, OH, MI

Not Terrible

2015 to 2016 change and rankings

• Nashville 4.0%, 6th

• Austin 3.8%, 7rd

• Raleigh 3.7%, 10th

• Denver 2.6%, 37th

• Indy 2.5%, 40th

• Columbus 2.5%, 44th

• Milwaukee 0.8%, 87th

• Pittsburgh 0.1%, 95th

JOB GROWTH – INDY MSA

$35,620 $36,030 $36,870 $37,490 $37,490 $37,570 $37,800

$42,140

$-

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

$30,000

$35,000

$40,000

$45,000

MSA Median Wage 2016

2016 US Median

BUT WAGES ARE LOW, GROWTH SLOW

Only Nashville is lower

But their wages are growing twice as fast

2006 to 2016 change and rankings• Raleigh 13.0%, 4th

• Pittsburgh 12.0%, 7th

• Columbus 8.6%, 34th

• Denver 8.0%, 36th

• Nashville 7.7%, 40th

• Austin 7.3%, 43rd

• Milwaukee 4.6%, 75th

• Indy 3.6%, 85th

$119,961 $121,884

$127,758

$133,471 $134,107 $136,176

$139,851

$139,892

$105,000

$110,000

$115,000

$120,000

$125,000

$130,000

$135,000

$140,000

$145,000

MSA GMP Per Worker 2016

2016 Average

MSA PRODUCTIVITY

Competitive, but growing most slowly Why low wages when productivity is average?

2006 – 2016 Change in Total GMP• Pittsburgh +22.5%, 1st

• Nashville 9.9%, 14th

• Austin 8.4%, 21st

• Columbus 6.3%, 34th

• Denver 5.0%, 42nd

• Milwaukee 3.6%, 52nd

• Raleigh 3.6%, 53rd

• Indianapolis +2.7%, 60th

0.2%

1.2%

3.7% 3.9% 4.2% 4.3%

7.5%

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

8.0%

Columbus Nashville Indy MSA Raleigh Denver Pittsburgh Austin

MSA Job Growth at Young Firms 15-16

MSA ENTREPRENEURSHIP

Jobs at young firms (age 5)• Low and losing ground

• Recent year a bit better

2006 to 2016 change and rankings

• Austin 36.0%, 1st

• Denver 5.0%, 5th

• Nashville. -1.7%, 13th

• Raleigh -6.9%, 19th

• Columbus -7.4%, 21st

• Milwaukee -10.3%, 26th

• Indianapolis -17.9%, 53rd

• Pittsburgh -28.5%, 79th

(3,945)(2,642) (561) (330) (157) (47)

617

6,099

(6,000)

(4,000)

(2,000)

-

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

Milwaukee Denver Pittsburgh Raleigh Indianapolis Nashville Columbus Austin

Information Technology/Analytical Instruments ClusterChange in Jobs 2010 to 2015

MSA TECH CLUSTER

Total Jobs in cluster 2015

• Austin 22,869

• Pittsburgh 10,925

• Milwaukee 9,623

• Raleigh 9,509

• Denver 6,967

• Indianapolis 4,644

• Columbus 3,869

• Nashville 2,164

Poverty Not HSDenver -19.1% 0.7%Austin -17.4% 4.4%Pittsburgh -14.9% -20.9%Nashville -8.6% -1.0%Raleigh -8.6% -14.0%Columbus 0.9% 0.1%Milwaukee 3.4% 8.3%Indianapolis 6.3% 4.3%

9.4%10.0%

10.8% 10.9%11.6%

13.3%

14.2%15.0%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

Denver Raleigh Pittsburgh Austin Nashville Indianapolis Columbus Milwaukee

2016 Poverty Rate

MSA US

POVERTY IN MSA

High and growing fastest

From 2011 to 2016

Number of People

Why are we trailing when we have so much success?

• Revenue deficit• City of Indianapolis $1,041 per capita

• Per capita for other core cities $1,553

• Annual gap $460.7m$1,041

$1,339 $1,371 $1,447

$1,561

$1,716 $1,788

$2,074

$-

$500

$1,000

$1,500

$2,000

$2,500

Indianapoliscity

Austin Nashville Milwaukee Columbus Denver Raleigh Pittsburgh

Total per Capita Revenue 2016 CAFR

City Aggregate per Capita

Why are we trailing, when we have so much success?

• Finance deficit• Fishers $290 per capita

• Greenwood $389 per capita

• Per capita for other regions’ suburbs $1,270

• Annual gap Fishers $26m

• Annual gap Greenwood $22m

$857 $880 $925 $980 $1,029 $1,122

$1,267 $1,315 $1,482 $1,504

$2,627

$-

$500

$1,000

$1,500

$2,000

$2,500

$3,000

Total per Capita Revenue 2016 CAFR

City Aggregate per Capita

POPULATION

6.8%

1.0%

3.8%1.6%

4.0%5.0%

0.0%1.0%2.0%3.0%4.0%5.0%6.0%7.0%8.0%

Population Change 2013 - 2016

Metro Average

-0.3%

1.1%

-0.1%-0.4%

-0.2%

1.7%

-0.5%

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

Presenter
Presentation Notes
Decline across the board Low current IN birth rate Declining overall birth rate Over dependence on IL, OH, MI for growth Rankings compared to peer metros NWI: 6/6 South Bend: 6/6 (.4%) Ft. Wayne: 6/6 (1.8%) Indianapolis: 6/8 (4.9%) Evansville: 6/6 (1%) Jasper-Huntingburg [micro]: 7/8 (0.0%)

TALENTworkforce with BA or more

31.2%38.2%

27.3%34.3%

28.9%36.9%

0.0%5.0%

10.0%15.0%20.0%25.0%30.0%35.0%40.0%45.0%

Boise Des Moines Fort Wayne GrandRapids

Greenville,SC

Omaha

Metro Average

20.0%

39.3%

16.9%

42.6% 44.5%

20.0%

31.7%

16.2%

0.0%5.0%

10.0%15.0%20.0%25.0%30.0%35.0%40.0%45.0%50.0%

Ashland Boone Danville Durango Edwards Jasper Rexburg Tiffin

Percent with BA or more 2016

Metro Average

Presenter
Presentation Notes
Rankings compared to peer metros NWI: 6/6 (Grew 3.1%) South Bend: 4/6 Grew 2.1% from 2013-16 Ft. Wayne: 6/6 Grew 4.7% from 2013-16 Indianapolis: 6/8 Grew 24.5% from 2013-16 Evansville: 5/6 Grew 1.4% from 2013-16 Jasper-Huntingburg [micro]: 6/8 Grew 1.5% from 2013-16

JOB GROWTH

2.4%

5.3%4.2%

0.8% 1.2%

3.5%

0.0%1.0%2.0%3.0%4.0%5.0%6.0%

Job Growth 2014 - 2017

Metro Average

Presenter
Presentation Notes
Not Terrible Rankings compared to peer metros NWI: 6/6 .2% growth South Bend: 4/6 No growth from 2016-17 Ft. Wayne: 6/6 .9% growth from 2016-17 Indianapolis: 5/8 2.5% growth from 2016-17 Evansville: 6/6 1.1% growth from 2016-17 Jasper-Huntingburg [micro]: 6/8 .6% growth from 2016-17

BUT WAGES ARE LOW, GROWTH SLOW

$45,650

$51,674

$47,004 $45,246

$43,696

$47,573

$38,000 $40,000 $42,000 $44,000 $46,000 $48,000 $50,000 $52,000 $54,000

Appleton CedarRapids

GrandRapids

Lancaster South Bend York

2017 Wages

Metro Averge

$35,620 $36,030 $36,870 $37,490 $37,490 $37,570 $37,800 $42,140

$- $5,000

$10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 $45,000

2016 US Median

Presenter
Presentation Notes
Rankings compared to peer metros NWI: 6/6 South Bend: 6/6 Ranks 4th for growth (7.9% from 2014-17) Ft. Wayne: 5/6 Ranks 4th for growth (8% from 2014-17) Indianapolis: 7/8 Ranks 8th for growth (3.6% from 2014-17) Evansville: 3/6 Ranks 5th for growth (7.3% from 2014-17) Jasper-Huntingburg [micro]: 3/8 Ranks 5th for growth (5.7% from 2014-17

MSA ENTREPRENEURSHIPjob growth at young firms <5

21.4%

10.3%

-2.4%

40.1%

4.4%11.2%

-5.0%0.0%5.0%

10.0%15.0%20.0%25.0%30.0%35.0%40.0%45.0%

9.0%

-14.2%

-0.2%

2.0%

0.0%

15%

-20.0%-15.0%-10.0%

-5.0%0.0%5.0%

10.0%15.0%20.0%

Metro Average

Presenter
Presentation Notes
Rankings compared to peer metros NWI: 2/6 South Bend: 5/6 3/6 for jobs at firm <5 years (28.4%) Ft. Wayne: 6/6 6/6 for jobs at firm <5 years (27.6%) Indianapolis: 6/8 Lost 17.9% from 2006 to 2016 Evansville: 6/6 5/6 for jobs at firm <5 years (26.6%) Jasper-Huntingburg [micro]: 8/8 5/8 for jobs at firm <5 years (40%)

POVERTY

8.4% 9.4%

13.4%10.8%

17.2%

10.5%

0.0%2.0%4.0%6.0%8.0%

10.0%12.0%14.0%16.0%18.0%20.0%

Appleton CedarRapids

GrandRapids

Lancaster South Bend York

Metro Average

9.4%10.0%

10.8% 10.9%11.6%

13.3%14.2%

15.0%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

Presenter
Presentation Notes
High and growing fastest Rankings compared to peer metros NWI: 2/6 South Bend: 1/6 Slowed by .5% from 2013-16 Ft. Wayne: 3/6 No change from 2013-16 Indianapolis: 3/8 Grew 6.3% from 2011-16 Evansville: 4/6 Slowed by .8% from 2013-16 Jasper-Huntingburg [micro]: 7/8 Grew by 5.2% from 2013-16

TWO CHALLENGES

Annual budget deficit = less investment in local operations

Annual budget deficit = no ability to make inter-jurisdictional transformative infrastructure investment

We need to tackle both

work together to invest in inter-municipal assets / amenities

Work together to address annual deficits which prevent us from investing in local capital infrastructure

WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?

STATEWIDE INVESTMENT HUBS

Enabling Legislation

Provides metropolitan areas the ability to collaborate and marshal its collective resources toward transformative capital projects

Provides metropolitan areas access to new revenue sources

Provides flexibility for each metropolitan area to decide the best tax policy for its residents

Provides a structure for ongoing systemic regional collaboration