AngelouEconomics Feedback Loop # 1
As you may recall, AngelouEconomics was hired by the City of Tacoma to analyze the economic impact of downtown Tacoma and help develop a plan for economic development. They hosted focused groups. They had an online survey. Yesterday, at the Economic Development Committee meeting, AngelouEconomics presented their resident and business survey results, economic impact analysis, and a draft of their market assessment.
What’d we learn?
To begin with – Downtown Tacoma has 43,482 employees representing 38.2% of total employment in the city. The number shocked several folks in the peanut gallery. Who are these people? For example, 14,283 in health services. 7193 in government. Financial services was only 3076 employees, but contributed $526 million in economic impact. So…
There’s a lot of data in there and you can sort through it yourself… However, we did learn that lower than average wages is a double edged sword. It may be good if one’s hiring. It may not be good if one’s recruiting. As is the lower cost of commercial office space. For example, the average Class A rent in Tacoma is less than $25 per square foot. It’s $37 per square foot in Bellevue with effectively the same construction costs. The result – no speculative building in Tacoma.
There’s also a lot of good information regarding perception. Do people hate Tacoma? Or do Tacoman’s simply think everybody hates Tacoma?
Economic Impact – Handout (pdf)
Survey Results – Powerpoint (pdf)
Economic Impact Results – Powerpoint (pdf) –
Thank you, Roxanne
More information on this project at www.cityoftacoma.org/downtownstrategy
Filed under: Developments
24 comments
J jamie from thriceallamerican April 9, 2008
Woohoo! Software Development is the most-wanted industry for expansion downtown. Bring it on!
Is there more breakdown of the current employment numbers beyond that which you listed above? I didn’t see it in the presentation, but I flipped through pretty quickly…
D Derek staff April 9, 2008
Is there more breakdown of the current employment numbers beyond that which you listed above?
The detailed numbers were part of the presentation immediately before the survey results. We’ll see if we can find it for you.
M Matt April 9, 2008
I couldn’t find anywhere what they considered “downtown.” Does anyone know boundry streets? From the number of health services employees I would imagine that it includes TG, Mary Bridge, and St. Joes…which would stretch what I think of as “downtown” Tacoma.
C CA April 9, 2008
It would be interesting if a survey asked how many of those 43,482 employees working downtown, actually lived downtown. And then followed up with questions about what would get those who do not live downtown(the majority) to actually live there. I want to know what it really is that people want, that would convince them to live near where they work. I think the “downtown is dead” sentiments are a reflection of the lack of people living there.
M Matt April 9, 2008
Thanks Jake – certainly a liberal definition of downtown. But, then again, what do I know about survey methodology.
D Derek staff April 9, 2008
It would be interesting if a survey asked how many of those 43,482 employees working downtown, actually lived downtown.
Still looking for that part of the report… However, my notes say that 50.9% of downtown employees live in the city of Tacoma.
D Derek staff April 9, 2008
Okay. We’ve added the Economic Impact Powerpoint.
Thank you, Roxanne
C CA April 9, 2008
“50.9% of downtown employees live in the city of Tacoma.”
Wow, I would not have guessed that.
J John Sherman April 9, 2008
I find some of the Economic Impact data presented suspect because the table “total annual downtown Tacoma impact” describes jobs as 40.3k, but from the City of Tacoma, “Interesting Tacoma facts”, at http://www.ci.tacoma.wa.us/tacomanews/General_Information/factsheet.asp describes “jobs at Downtown Tacoma has more than 20,000 employees. Projected to increase by 33% by the year 2010”; therefore for this report to get from 20k to 40.3k jobs some supporting data collection facts must have been omitted from this published reports?
So does anybody have access to the data collection sheets that supports this published “Economic Impact Analysis” document? And, if you do just post it to the exit133.com website for public view.
Thanks.
J Jake April 9, 2008
“jobs at Downtown Tacoma has more than 20,000 employees.”
20,000 employees was probably the number in employees in the old definition of Downtown.
When you put add in the areas added by the new definition of Downtown you add in the hospitals employees, Dome District employees, Stadium District employees, etc.
J John Sherman April 9, 2008
13/Jake
So the Tacoma General Hospital and Sisters of St. Francis are part of “New Tacoma”; as a result, is “New Tacoma” now the definition of “Downtown”?
Where is the citation for what City of Tacoma considers this downtown area that must be 1.96-sq miles based on the reports 4-percent of the City of Tacoma area equal 49-sq miles “Demographic Profile for Downtown Tacoma, Washington” at http://www.cityoftacoma.org/Page.aspx?nid=48
Thanks for the information.
J Jake April 9, 2008
The hospitals are in the New Tacoma Neighborhood Council Area.
N Nick April 10, 2008
Interesting that it’s apparrently hard build an educated workforce here (relatively speaking of course).
This made me think of something – I always thought it was a shame there wasn’t more of a cross-interaction between our local colleges/universities and our communities. I can’t speak for the others, but I know at UPS it was rare to find encouragement to get out into the community to get involved (not entirely absent, just rare).
This may actually be one of the primary reasons Tacoma has such a hard time retaining graduates from these schools. Almost 80% of my friends instantly moved away following graduation, and I can’t say I blame them. Most of them were not connected with the local community, had no personal/professional contacts or relationships outside campus, and thus had no reason to stay.
Imagine the talent pool Tacoma could draw from if all the local graduates didn’t high-tail it out of here afterwards. Obviously not everyone leaves (I’m still here!), but an unnecessary large proportion do. I suppose it’s a chicken-or-the-egg thing – after all, the job market in Tacoma isn’t exactly fantastic either. But still….
C citywonk April 10, 2008
Hey, the City “redrew” the boundaries of “downtown” about two years ago specifically so that they could include the two hospitals and all of their employees. It makes downtown sound so much bigger. :) “Downtown now supposedly comes all the way up to L Street in the Hilltop. Go figure.
M Marty April 10, 2008
I had a chance to talk with the consultants in a small group setting Monday night for about 3 hours. We had a chance to explore how they interpreted the data and how our numbers compared to other cities.
The total number of respondent was about 50% above normal. They noted that Tacomans are involved and vocal (see Exit133.com ).
They were surprised buy the very low numbers for retail in terms of number of jobs and number of retailers.
We also discussed the response to UWT was very positive and indicated it was doing the job it was intended to do when it was brought to Tacoma.
Tacoma’s Arts Scene also received positive marks from the respondents.
Parking received several negative comments, but they were uncertain if it was due cost of parking or the perceived lack of available parking.
By contrast the Public Transit System ranked relatively high.
All in all there is a ton that we can learn and apply from this data. I can think of a couple of groups that will be using the data to help make decisions about marketing and business recruiting.
Take some time, read the data and ask questions.
R Republican (By Default) April 10, 2008
citywonk (#17) – If the city redrew the boundaries for downtown (announced Jan. 5, 2007 by city manager) then there could be a problem with the growth numbers for the 1995 comparisons.
Does anyone know if Angelou adjusted their numbers accordingly?
A altered chords April 10, 2008
Marty @ 18. I was concerned about residents of Tacoma believing that residendts in “surrounding” areas view Tacoma negatively.
In the survey, what radius constitues “surrounding”.
Are Tacomans thinking that folks in Parkland view Tacoma negatively or do they think that folks in Bellevue view Tacoma negatively?
Thanks,
D DavidS April 10, 2008
John@14: this downtown area that must be 1.96-sq miles
As was ID’d by RBD@19, it was early 2007 when the redraw occurred. (Maybe RBD has the legislative reference. It looks like E133 missed it as I couldn’t find an archive post on it.) This made the “downtown” area about 2 miles long (tDome to StadiumHS) and a mile wide (up to L St.).
This is a pretty big downtown for a City of Tacoma’s size. With the style of development allowed around its edges, it’s clear that this is not all really considered downtown in the same sense as most of our lexicons. (2-story townhomes are not “downtown”.)
M Marty April 10, 2008
altered chords @ 14
The responses were more of a self esteem response and surveyed Tacoman’s perception rather than a surveying the surrounding residents.
Q: What type of perception do you think Downtown has among:
-it’s residents:
Positive 30%
Negative 30%
-surrounding area:
Positive 9%
Negative 61%
We think everybody hates us and will believe that until we are proven differently.
It also appears we are a very divided community in how we perceive ourselves. Also illustrated by the open ended question:
What do you consider the greatest strengths of Tacoma’s workforce?
Top three answers:
Education
Cost of labor
Loyalty / Dedication of Employees
What do you consider the greatest weakness of Tacoma’s workforce?
Top three answers:
Lack of Education
Lack of skills / experience
Limited work ethic / ambition
R Republican (By Default) April 10, 2008
I checked with Angelou, they did compare 1995 and 2008 data for the same area (maybe it was 2007 data). I’m waiting to hear back on inflation adjustments.
I found the announcement of the new area, not the ordinance. There’s a link on my site in the Angelou post.
The education/skills issue was addressed by Angelou in the public forum. It’s probably due to different businesses looking for different education and skill levels. Some are satisfied with the labor pool in Tacoma, others are looking for more higher education.
DavidS@21 – I made a list of some of my concerns about these boundaries and posted them 5views.com. http://www.commencementbayopinion.com has some more thoughts on it.
Something is becoming clear, especially from this thread. Redrawing the boundaries is confusing and somewhat questionable.
R Republican (By Default) April 11, 2008
I just heard back from Angelou. The growth numbers in the slide show and flier were not adjusted for inflation.
So, for a quick example, the “139%” increase in “total economic activity produced by downtown jobs” is actually only a 50% increase when adjusted for inflation (from ’95 to ’07 using a 3.42% inflation rate which is a 100 year average, I didn’t look up the actuals).
This is because $2 billion in 1995 would actually be $3 billion in 2007. A 50% is not as impressive as 139%, but is still respectable, especially when you consider the impact of 9/11 on the economy during that time.
It does, however, make me question why the numbers weren’t adjusted.
R Republican (By Default) April 11, 2008
Oops. It’s actually a 60% increase. I should have double checked my calculations before hitting submit.
Also, instead of the “income and retail sales generated” doubling, it’s only a 34% increase when adjusted for inflation using the same method.
R rich April 11, 2008
how much did we pay for this?
R Republican (By Default) April 12, 2008
The study? I don’t know what it’s costing the city. Six figures for sure.
Not adjusting for inflation is a rookie mistake. I can’t imagine them missing it. My guess is they were instructed to report it that way.