HOTEDD will complete and submit the annual update to our Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy within the next few weeks. Once this is completed, it is likely that the EDD Board will look ahead to constructing a new five-year CEDS document.
While the current CEDS has been in effect for only three of the allowable five years, the currency of Census data, the availability of a new web-based platform, and the unrolling of new guidance from EDA through NADO all mean there is a wealth of good information for producing a new CEDS. Why wait?
Monday, June 13, 2011
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Census Counts and the Heart of Texas Region
Much of what the 2010 Census will tell us about the Heart of Texas is still unknown to us, as socioeconomic and other data has not yet been released. The population figures, however, are available – and they mostly tell us what we’ve been able to observe ourselves: namely, that the parts that are growing, keep growing, and the parts that aren’t growing, keep not growing.
The region’s population grew from 321,536 in 2000 to 349,273 in 2010 – a rate of growth of approximately .83% per year. The moderate growth contributes to economic vitality without placing excessive demands on existing infrastructure. (High population growth can lead to traffic congestion and stress water/wastewater capacity, among other issues.) A gentle rate of growth means the region can accommodate the new folks, and build its infrastructure to match, comfortably over time. At the same time, a slightly higher rate than this would still fall in the “comfortable” range – so we should continue to focus on attracting businesses and families to even the fastest-growing parts of the region.
Bosque County, which grew by 5.86%, has a 2010 population density of 18.41.
Falls County, which declined by 3.82%, has a 2010 population density of 23.23.
Freestone County, which grew by 10.91%, has a 2010 population density of 22.58.
Hill County, which grew by 8.56%, has a 2010 population density of 36.46.
Limestone County, which grew by 6.05%, has a 2010 population density of 25.73.
McLennan County, which grew by 10.02%, has a 2010 population density of 225.46.
The region as a whole grew by 8.63%, and has a population density of 62.95.
Let’s discuss the differing growth rates. For the most part, Heart of Texas counties with higher population densities had higher rates of population growth, and counties with lower population densities had lower rates of growth. Simply put, people like to go to where people already are – and where there are plenty of the amenities that come with those existing population densities. This pattern is consistent with statewide trends, so it’s not likely to change any time soon. This poses a challenge for sparsely-populated counties working to maintain quality of life.
McLennan County is growing at the highest rate; Limestone and Hill Counties have some slow growth; Bosque County has very little growth; and Freestone County is growing faster – and Falls County slower – than their densities would suggest. Hill and, to a lesser extent, Limestone Counties are working to achieve “escape velocity” – to achieve a density of people and amenities that will make those counties draws in themselves. They’re assisted in this by the expansion of development from the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex and the increased economic activity in McLennan County. Bosque County, on the other hand, is working to maintain enough growth and activity to continue its high quality of life.
Looking at the outliers, Freestone County has the second-lowest population density, but it enjoyed he highest rate of population growth in the region from 2000 to 2010 – 11%. Falls County’s population density falls in the middle at around 22 people per square mile, but its population declined by 3%. It may be no coincidence that these outliers also differ from the rest of the region economically: Freestone with higher economic values, and Falls County with lower ones.
While much is riding on Census numbers in terms of outside resources, the greatest impact on the Heart of Texas communities will come from what their growth rates mean in terms of local effects. Outside the City of Waco, Heart of Texas communities must compete for Federal block grant funds – so their populations may change the amount of matching funds they are required to contribute to projects if they’re funded, but they won’t affect their ordinary revenues much. On the other hand, for communities struggling to maintain population and attract and retain businesses, a modest amount of growth is essential to maintain the current standard of living.
The region’s population grew from 321,536 in 2000 to 349,273 in 2010 – a rate of growth of approximately .83% per year. The moderate growth contributes to economic vitality without placing excessive demands on existing infrastructure. (High population growth can lead to traffic congestion and stress water/wastewater capacity, among other issues.) A gentle rate of growth means the region can accommodate the new folks, and build its infrastructure to match, comfortably over time. At the same time, a slightly higher rate than this would still fall in the “comfortable” range – so we should continue to focus on attracting businesses and families to even the fastest-growing parts of the region.
Bosque County, which grew by 5.86%, has a 2010 population density of 18.41.
Falls County, which declined by 3.82%, has a 2010 population density of 23.23.
Freestone County, which grew by 10.91%, has a 2010 population density of 22.58.
Hill County, which grew by 8.56%, has a 2010 population density of 36.46.
Limestone County, which grew by 6.05%, has a 2010 population density of 25.73.
McLennan County, which grew by 10.02%, has a 2010 population density of 225.46.
The region as a whole grew by 8.63%, and has a population density of 62.95.
Let’s discuss the differing growth rates. For the most part, Heart of Texas counties with higher population densities had higher rates of population growth, and counties with lower population densities had lower rates of growth. Simply put, people like to go to where people already are – and where there are plenty of the amenities that come with those existing population densities. This pattern is consistent with statewide trends, so it’s not likely to change any time soon. This poses a challenge for sparsely-populated counties working to maintain quality of life.
McLennan County is growing at the highest rate; Limestone and Hill Counties have some slow growth; Bosque County has very little growth; and Freestone County is growing faster – and Falls County slower – than their densities would suggest. Hill and, to a lesser extent, Limestone Counties are working to achieve “escape velocity” – to achieve a density of people and amenities that will make those counties draws in themselves. They’re assisted in this by the expansion of development from the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex and the increased economic activity in McLennan County. Bosque County, on the other hand, is working to maintain enough growth and activity to continue its high quality of life.
Looking at the outliers, Freestone County has the second-lowest population density, but it enjoyed he highest rate of population growth in the region from 2000 to 2010 – 11%. Falls County’s population density falls in the middle at around 22 people per square mile, but its population declined by 3%. It may be no coincidence that these outliers also differ from the rest of the region economically: Freestone with higher economic values, and Falls County with lower ones.
While much is riding on Census numbers in terms of outside resources, the greatest impact on the Heart of Texas communities will come from what their growth rates mean in terms of local effects. Outside the City of Waco, Heart of Texas communities must compete for Federal block grant funds – so their populations may change the amount of matching funds they are required to contribute to projects if they’re funded, but they won’t affect their ordinary revenues much. On the other hand, for communities struggling to maintain population and attract and retain businesses, a modest amount of growth is essential to maintain the current standard of living.
Thursday, April 28, 2011
What's a Triple Bottom Line?
In Economic Development, we understand the bottom line. It's a matter of pride that we consider a project all the way through to the end, to evaluate whether over time the reward will outweigh the risk. Of course, there's some risk involved - we're making guesses about the future, however well-informed - but we can at least rest assured we've done our due diligence.
We may need to think again. Even when we are sure our project is going to mean bottom-line profits, that bottom line may not cover everything we need it to.
Just yesterday I put together some information about economic development programs and had some "negative" examples - projects that didn't make money - that were also transformative projects in their communities. On the other hand, we've all seen projects that made money on paper, but resulted in overdevelopment, played out early and left an empty big box, or had other unintended consequences. The bottom line is an important measure, but it doesn't measure everything.
It's this fact that has inspired many - including, now, the Economic Development Administration - to expand their thinking about what constitutes "profit." Enter the "Triple Bottom Line" - a way of looking at a project that asks about not only its financial net profit, but also at its social and environmental consequences as well. It's a fancy new term, but it captures things we intuitively grasp in the Heart of Texas - we understand our communities need lots of things, not just money. So it may not be a new concept at heart, but the Triple Bottom Line does give us a new tool: a way of measuring, comparing, and evaluating projects looking at all three of those areas.
Watch this space for more information as it becomes available: EDA is currently vetting a Triple Bottom Line evaluation tool that all our communities will soon be able to use.
We may need to think again. Even when we are sure our project is going to mean bottom-line profits, that bottom line may not cover everything we need it to.
Just yesterday I put together some information about economic development programs and had some "negative" examples - projects that didn't make money - that were also transformative projects in their communities. On the other hand, we've all seen projects that made money on paper, but resulted in overdevelopment, played out early and left an empty big box, or had other unintended consequences. The bottom line is an important measure, but it doesn't measure everything.
It's this fact that has inspired many - including, now, the Economic Development Administration - to expand their thinking about what constitutes "profit." Enter the "Triple Bottom Line" - a way of looking at a project that asks about not only its financial net profit, but also at its social and environmental consequences as well. It's a fancy new term, but it captures things we intuitively grasp in the Heart of Texas - we understand our communities need lots of things, not just money. So it may not be a new concept at heart, but the Triple Bottom Line does give us a new tool: a way of measuring, comparing, and evaluating projects looking at all three of those areas.
Watch this space for more information as it becomes available: EDA is currently vetting a Triple Bottom Line evaluation tool that all our communities will soon be able to use.
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Honoring Robert Gordon
At its meeting last week, the HOTEDD Board honored Robert Gordon with the following Resolution:
Whereas, the Honorable Robert Gordon has served his nation, state, and community over many years; and,
Whereas, Mr. Gordon, a Korean War Veteran, served his nation honorably; and,
Whereas, Mr. Gordon, a distinguished educator for several decades has helped and enriched the lives of thousands; and,
Whereas, Mr. Gordon, was a council member in the City of Lacy-Lakeview and served on several local and regional boards and councils; and,
Whereas, Mr. Gordon, a charter member of the Heart of Texas Economic Development District Board of Directors, and chaired the Recycling and Environmental Committee and made major contributions to the success of the District board; now,
Therefore, be it resolved that the Heart of Texas Economic Development District Board of Directors does hereby and hereon honor and commend Mr. Robert Gordon for his exceptional and dedicated service.
Thanks, Bob, for all your work for your community and this Region!
Whereas, the Honorable Robert Gordon has served his nation, state, and community over many years; and,
Whereas, Mr. Gordon, a Korean War Veteran, served his nation honorably; and,
Whereas, Mr. Gordon, a distinguished educator for several decades has helped and enriched the lives of thousands; and,
Whereas, Mr. Gordon, was a council member in the City of Lacy-Lakeview and served on several local and regional boards and councils; and,
Whereas, Mr. Gordon, a charter member of the Heart of Texas Economic Development District Board of Directors, and chaired the Recycling and Environmental Committee and made major contributions to the success of the District board; now,
Therefore, be it resolved that the Heart of Texas Economic Development District Board of Directors does hereby and hereon honor and commend Mr. Robert Gordon for his exceptional and dedicated service.
Thanks, Bob, for all your work for your community and this Region!
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Economic Gardening: an article from NMPolitics.net
This is an article by Nick Voges, published on 1/6/11 on NMPolitics.net. It captures the concept of Economic Gardening, which is a practice that fits very well with the Heart of Texas Region's values and strengths.
http://www.nmpolitics.net/index/2011/01/economic-gardening-a-fresh-paradigm-for-growing-local-jobs/
http://www.nmpolitics.net/index/2011/01/economic-gardening-a-fresh-paradigm-for-growing-local-jobs/
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Images Needed for HOTEDD Web Site!
One of the dimensions that will be added by our new web site will be the ability to tell a visual story about our Region. That story will only be as good as the information and images we collect - so this is your call to action! If you have or encounter images of your community, industry, or lifestyle that would help us tell the Region's story, please send them! If you need our contact information, please respond to this post and we'll follow up with you.
Thanks so much!
Thanks so much!
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
A New Take on Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy
According to officials in the Economic Development Administration, it's time to put the Strategy back in the CEDS.
The CEDS, or Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy, is the planning document that economic development districts - of which HOTEDD is one - exist to create. Districts do lots of things, but their foundation and core purpose, according to their funders at EDA, is creating the CEDS.
Unfortunately, the CEDS is a mixed bag of benefits and burdens. The regulations describing it are fairly dense, and districts are eager to meet the requirements, so many CEDS end up as data dumps - huge, unwieldy documents that are heavy on tables and lists, pages upon pages of specifics, from which it is impossible to discern an overall strategic direction for a region.
Interestingly, districts and EDA both know this and are working from their respective positions toward a better model for the CEDS. Megan participated in a work session in Washington whose purpose was to craft a way forward to a more relevant, more strategic, and more useable CEDS, and one thing that came out of that meeting was an informal list of criteria describing what CEDS should be and do. In the coming months, HOTEDD will use those criteria to make gentle changes as part of our annual CEDS update. For 2013, the new web environment currently in construction, new guidance from EDA and peer best practices will inform the creation of a new five-year CEDS that will be a true strategic document. We're excited, as better tools mean a better economic development effort in the Heart of Texas.
According to discussion at the workshop of some draft CEDS goals, NADO's workgroup thinks CEDS should:
* Be asset-based, respecting the diversity among regions
* Be a strategy on how to align a broad array of resources, not just EDA's
* Be evidence-based, including a variety of measurements and timetables for implementation
* Be strategic, not encyclopedic - focus on big picture, and any thick lists or data tables should be removed to an appendix
* Allow for a flexible, district-led peer-review process
* Ultimately roll up into statewide strategies that are based on districts' needs
* Be framed in terms of a clear strategy in an executive summary, delivered using a nimble communications plan
* Reflect a commitment to innovation, including cluster-based strategies
* Engage the public sector, private sector, and the public both in framing and in implementation
The CEDS, or Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy, is the planning document that economic development districts - of which HOTEDD is one - exist to create. Districts do lots of things, but their foundation and core purpose, according to their funders at EDA, is creating the CEDS.
Unfortunately, the CEDS is a mixed bag of benefits and burdens. The regulations describing it are fairly dense, and districts are eager to meet the requirements, so many CEDS end up as data dumps - huge, unwieldy documents that are heavy on tables and lists, pages upon pages of specifics, from which it is impossible to discern an overall strategic direction for a region.
Interestingly, districts and EDA both know this and are working from their respective positions toward a better model for the CEDS. Megan participated in a work session in Washington whose purpose was to craft a way forward to a more relevant, more strategic, and more useable CEDS, and one thing that came out of that meeting was an informal list of criteria describing what CEDS should be and do. In the coming months, HOTEDD will use those criteria to make gentle changes as part of our annual CEDS update. For 2013, the new web environment currently in construction, new guidance from EDA and peer best practices will inform the creation of a new five-year CEDS that will be a true strategic document. We're excited, as better tools mean a better economic development effort in the Heart of Texas.
According to discussion at the workshop of some draft CEDS goals, NADO's workgroup thinks CEDS should:
* Be asset-based, respecting the diversity among regions
* Be a strategy on how to align a broad array of resources, not just EDA's
* Be evidence-based, including a variety of measurements and timetables for implementation
* Be strategic, not encyclopedic - focus on big picture, and any thick lists or data tables should be removed to an appendix
* Allow for a flexible, district-led peer-review process
* Ultimately roll up into statewide strategies that are based on districts' needs
* Be framed in terms of a clear strategy in an executive summary, delivered using a nimble communications plan
* Reflect a commitment to innovation, including cluster-based strategies
* Engage the public sector, private sector, and the public both in framing and in implementation
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)