hoteddtx.comhoteddtx.com/assets/ceds-update-2019-with-opportunity-zones.pdf · heart of texas....

HEART OF TEXAS 2015-2020 REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY _________________________________________________________

This document was prepared by the Heart of Texas Economic Development District (HOTEDD) for the Region that includes Bosque, Falls, Freestone, Hill, Limestone and McLennan Counties, and was approved in May 2016. Revised December 2019. H E A R T O F T E X A S E C O N O M I C D E V E L O P M E N T D I S T R I C T 2 5 4 - 2 9 2 - 1 8 0 0 h o t e d d t x . c o m 1 5 1 4 S . N e w R o a d W a c o , T e x a s 7 6 7 1 1 An electronic version of the 2015-2020 HOTEDD CEDS is located at the following website: http://hoteddtx.com

http://hoteddtx.comg/

HOTEDD Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy 2015-2020

Heart of Texas Economic Development District 2

CONTENTS

Executive Summary………………………………………………………………………………………4

Prologue: History of HOTEDD + the CEDS………………………………………………… 5-9

The Economic Development Administration, the Heart of Texas Economic Development District & the CEDS…………5

The Planning Organization……………………………………………………… 6

What is a CEDS? ……………………………………………………………………… 7

The 2015-2020 Heart of Texas CEDS Building Process……… 8

Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 10-13

The Context…………………………………………………………………………………… 10

Economic Development Defined………………………………………………… 11

Overview of the Heart of Texas Region………………………………………12 2015-2020 HOTEDD CEDS Guiding Principle, Vision and Goals………14-24

Explanation…………………………………………………………………………………… 14

Guiding Principle…………………………………………………………………………… 14

Vision……………………………………………………………………………………………… 14

Goals, Objectives & Actions Overview……………………………………… 14

The Ten Goals of the HOTEDD CEDS List…………………………………15

Goal by goal with objectives and actions………………………16-24

1. Advance regional economic progress through enhanced regional marketing efforts………………………… 16

2. Implement a broad based, inclusive & unified regional

economic development initiative that improves economic development collaboration……………………………………………17

3. Advance regional economic progress by increasing hard

economic development capacity & infrastructure……… 18

4. Advance regional economic progress by increasing soft economic development capacity & infrastructure……… 19

5. Attract, Support and fund small businesses & entre-

preneurs as a means of growing & diversifying the regional economy………………………………………………………… 20

6. Advance regional economic progress by increasing rural telecommunications capacity & infrastructure……21

7. Inspire intentional successful management of the

environment (water, air quality, solid waste & natural resources) ……………………………………………………… 21

8. Build on strong and growing clusters………………………… 22

9. Increase workforce hard and soft skills……………………… 23

10. Develop new data and strategies to address current

Poverty & future needs…………………………………………………24

Survey of Economic Conditions in the Heart of Texas Region……… 25

Overview………………………………………………………………………………………… 25

Geography……………………………………………………………………………………… 26

Population……………………………………………………………………………………… 26

Population by age: most current………………………………27 Population by city/town……………………………………………… 28



County, regional, State & national population comparison…………………………………………………………………… 30 Population by gender………………………………………………… 31 Special age groups & gender…………………………………… 31 Population by race……………………………………………………… 33 Population projections………………………………………………… 4 County to county migration……………………………………… 4 Workforce & Employment………………………………………… 7 Income…………………………………………………………………………… 9 Housing………………………………………………………………………… 9 Education……………………………………………………………………… 9 Transportation and Access………………………………………… 9

Environment………………………………………………………………… 11 Water…………………………………………………………………………… 11

Survey of Economic Development Resources in the Region……………54-57

Organizations………………………………………………………………………………… 54

Programs, Studies & Projects……………………………………………………… 55

Economic Development Partnerships………………………………………… 56 Disaster, Economic Incident Preparedness, Economic Resilience…58-60

Disaster Relief Economic Development Planning……………………… 58

Economic Disruption……………………………………………………………………… 58

Disaster Preparedness………………………………………………………………… 58

Economic Resilience Planning……………………………………………………… 59

HOTEDD CEDS Evaluation Framework………………………………………………………… 61

Performance Measures………………………………………………………………… 61

HOTEDD OPPORTUNITY ZONES……………………………………………………………………… 62

Appendix A: Heart of Texas Regional SWOT Analysis……………………… 70-75

Strengths…………………………………………………………………………………………70

Weaknesses…………………………………………………………………………………… 71

Opportunities………………………………………………………………………………… 72

Threats…………………………………………………………………………………………… 75

Appendices B-G: County by County Analysis………………………………………… 76-117

Appendix B: Bosque …………………………………………………………………77

Appendix C: Falls ……………………………………………………………………… 82

Appendix D: Freestone …………………………………………………………… 88

Appendix E: Hill ……………………………………………………………………… 94

Appendix F: Limestone …………………………………………………………… 100

Appendix G: McLennan …………………………………………………………… 106

Appendix H: HOTEDD CEDS Strategy Committee & HOTEDD Board of Directors …………………………… 112

Appendix I: HOTCEDS Developers + Contributors …………… 114

Appendix J: Listing of Past Reports + Resources Reviewed/Consulted ………………………………………… 115



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FROM RUSSELL DEVORSKY, PRESIDENT—HEART OF TEXAS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

THE PLAN

According to the EDA, a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) is a strategic blueprint for regional collaboration, building capacity (through hard and soft infrastructure) and guiding the economic prosperity and resiliency of an area. The goal of the CEDS is to create a road map or framework for a regional awareness that results in a conscious, intentional and robust economic framework that contributes to individual, business and industry, community, county and regional success; put another way, the goal of the CEDS is to create a tool to guide the public sector’s role in investing in new ideas, knowledge transfer, and infrastructure so that the private sector can flourish. In a nutshell, it answers the question “what’s next?” in terms of how the region can grow wealth.

This planning document assesses current conditions and trends, identifies potential for positive and negative change, and proposes strategies for achieving economic development in the Heart of Texas region. THE PROCESS

Guided by the United States Economic Development Administration (EDA), this strategy-driven plan for regional economic development was created via a multi-year, locally based, regionally driven planning process in which individual citizens, community leaders, local governments, institutes of learning, small businesses, private industry, and service organizations engaged in meaningful conversations about economic development capacity building efforts and what these efforts should include. THE PLANNING ORGANIZATION

The Heart of Texas Economic Development District (HOTEDD) is designated as an Economic Development District (EDD) by the U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic Development Administration (EDA). Current members of the EDD are Bosque, Falls, Freestone, Hill, Limestone and McLennan Counties. The EDA provides financial assistance to designated districts in part for the purpose of developing a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS), the region’s economic guidebook to diversify and strengthen the regional economy.

As a designated Economic Development District, HOTEDD is responsible for preparing and adopting a CEDS document at least every five years. The CEDS planning process is performed by the HOTEDD CEDS Committee. HOTEDD provides the organizational structure for the formulation of the CEDS and serves as a regional coordinating body. The Heart of Texas Economic Development District Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy is approved and adopted by the HOTEDD Board of Directors which also serves as the HOTEDD CEDS Committee.

The purpose of the CEDS is multi-faceted:

• The CEDS is designed to provide baseline information on demographics and economic data, economic development strategies and implementations plans, and identify potential projects within the region.

• Preparation and adoption of the CEDS maintains both the region’s EDD designation and grant eligibility for those participating units of government. Entities interested in applying for project grants under the EDA’s Public Works and Economic Adjustment Programs must demonstrate how the investment fits into the regional CEDS.

The CEDS is a working document used by both the public and private sectors to provide leadership with a current picture of the economic state and trajectory of the region.



PROLOGUE: HISTORY OF EDA + HOTEDD + THE CEDS

As the EDA designated economic

development district for the

Heart of Texas Region, HOTEDD prepares

the regionalComprehensive Economic

Development Strategy (CEDS) every 5 years, and also provides

annual updates.

In 2003 EDA sanctioned the Heartof Texas Economic Development

District (HOTEDD) to serve the Heart of Texas Region:

Bosque, Falls, Freestone, Hill, Limestone, and McLennan Counties

Economic Development Administration (EDA):The mission of the EDA is to lead the federal economic

development agenda by promoting innovation andcompetitiveness, preparing American regions for growth and

success in the worldwide economy.The U.S. Economic Development Administration's investment policy is designed to establish a foundation for sustainable job growth and the building of durable regional economies throughout the United States.

This foundation builds upon two key economic drivers - innovation and regional collaboration. Innovation is key to global competitiveness, new and better jobs, a

resilient economy, and the attainment of national economic goals. Regional collaboration is essential for economic recovery because regions are the centers of

competition in the new global economy and those that work together to leverage resources and use their strengths to overcome weaknesses will fare better than those that do not. EDA encourages its partners around the country to develop initiatives that advance new ideas and creative approaches to address rapidly

evolving economic conditions. Guided by the basic principle that communities must be empowered to develop and implement their own economic development and

revitalization strategies, EDA works directly with local economic development officials to make grant investments that are well-defined, timely, and linked to a long-term

sustainable economic development strategy.

US Department of Commerce: The mission of the Department is to create the conditions for economic growth and opportunity. The Department's 5 strategic goals include Trade and

Investment, Innovation, Environment, Data and Operational Excellence.

http://www.eda.gov/



THE PLANNING ORGANIZATION: THE HEART OF TEXAS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (HOTEDD) There are nearly 300 Economic Development Administration (EDA) recognized Economic Development Districts (EDD) in the United States. EDD’s have been created to facilitate a regional level of economic development planning, capacity building and measurement. An EDD has three specific purposes:

1. Creation and maintenance of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS);

2. Engagement in implementation efforts described in a region’s EDA-approved Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS);

3. Measuring the effectiveness of these efforts.

EDA notes that it is especially incumbent on EDD’s and its member cities and counties to collaborate in the following economic development efforts: Supporting business growth, development and attraction;

o The District continues its efforts to maintain a supportive business environment in its interactions with member communities as there is no better tool for business retention and expansion, and ultimately business attraction, than efficient service delivery and satisfied customers.

Securing state and federal funds for vital projects in the district;

Improving awareness, access and ability to apply for state, federal and private funds. The EDA provides financial assistance to the designated district in part for the purpose of developing a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS). Preparation and adoption of the CEDS maintains the region’s EDD designation and grant eligibility for those participating units of government.

Formed in 2003, the Heart of Texas Economic Development District, Inc. (HOTEDD) is the US Department of Commerce-Economic Development Administration’s (EDA) designated Economic Development District (EDD) for the Heart of Texas Region. HOTEDD was created as a joint effort of municipalities and counties located in the Texas Council of Governments region known as the Heart of Texas. This region includes Bosque, Falls, Freestone, Hill, Limestone and McLennan counties. From these governmental units, and the main economic interests in the region (including public officials/administration, private sector, community leaders, private individuals, utilities, non-profit organizations, educational institutions, representatives of work force development boards, minority groups and labor) 22 representatives are appointed to serve on the Heart of Texas Economic Development District, Inc. (HOTEDD) Board of Directors, and concurrently as the CEDS Strategy Committee.

Thoughts on HOTEDD’S Role in the Region

HOTEDD, through coordination and

communication intends to build on and steadily increase the effectiveness of

current efforts that address economic development. By raising awareness among all members of the economic

development community, focusing the alignment of mutually reinforcing

activities for more effective outcomes, and increasing the levels of

engagement of individuals and organizations, TOGETHER we can bring

about measurable and sustainable change in the Heart of Texas region’s

tax and employment base.

--Russell Devorsky, President— Heart of Texas Economic Development District, Inc.

(HOTEDD)

http://www.eda.gov/



The HOTEDD Board of Directors is charged with carrying out the federally determined duties listed for EDA-designated Economic Development Districts, including preparation of the Heart of Texas Regional Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS). The Board of Directors also determines policy for HOTEDD. In addition to CEDS creation, implementation, measurement and maintenance, the EDD provides information about economic development strategies and initiatives, sources of funds for businesses and public agencies, and community data when requested. Regular and ongoing private sector participation results from the makeup of the HOTEDD Board. Board members representing a broad array of private interests including small business, agriculture, legal, utilities, real estate, banking and finance, ensuring that all discussions of policy and direction are made with the private sector’s needs in mind. There is also active representation by the professional economic developers and resource agencies within the region. HOTEDD is headquartered in the center of the region in the City of Waco (McLennan County) at the Heart of Texas Council of Governments Office which is located at 1514 S. New Road, Waco, Texas, 76711. WHAT IS A COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY (CEDS)?

According to the United States Economic Development Administration (http://www.eda.gov/ceds/ March2015):

The Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) contributes to effective economic development in America’s communities and regions through a locally-based, regionally-driven economic development planning process. Economic development planning – as implemented through the CEDS – is not only a cornerstone of the U.S. Economic Development Administration’s (EDA) programs, but successfully serves as a means to engage community

http://www.eda.gov/



leaders, leverage the involvement of the private sector, and establish a strategic blueprint for regional collaboration. The CEDS provides the capacity-building foundation by which the public sector, working in conjunction with other economic actors (individuals, firms and industries), creates the environment for regional economic prosperity. Simply put, a CEDS is a strategy-driven plan for regional economic development. A CEDS is the result of a regionally-owned planning process designed to build capacity and guide the economic prosperity and resiliency of an area or region. It is a key component in establishing and maintaining a robust economic ecosystem by helping to build regional capacity (through hard and soft infrastructure) that contributes to individual, firm, and community success. The CEDS provides a vehicle for individuals, organizations, local governments, institutions of learning, and private industry to engage in a meaningful conversation and debate about what capacity building efforts would best serve economic development in the region. The CEDS takes into account and, where appropriate, integrates or leverages other regional planning efforts, including the use of other available federal funds, private sector resources, and state support which can advance a region’s CEDS goals and objectives. Regions must update their CEDS at least every five years to qualify for EDA assistance under its Public Works and Economic Adjustment Assistance programs. In addition, a CEDS is a prerequisite for designation by EDA as an Economic Development District (EDD).

It is important to note that entities interested in applying for project grants under the EDA’s Public Works and Economic Adjustment Programs must demonstrate how the investment fists into the regional CEDS. THE 2015-2020 HEART OF TEXAS CEDS BUILDING PROCESS

As a designated Economic Development District, HOTEDD is responsible for preparing and adopting a CEDS document at least every five years. Specifically, HOTEDD provides the organizational structure for the formulation of the CEDS and serves as a regional coordinating body. The Heart of Texas Economic Development District, Inc. (HOTEDD) Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy is approved and adopted by the HOTEDD CEDS Committee and the HOTEDD Board of Directors. The CEDS planning process is facilitated by the HOTEDD CEDS Strategy Committee which mirrors the HOTEDD Board of Directors. The CEDS was accomplished through a collaboration of the Heart of Texas Economic Development District (HOTEDD), the Heart of Texas Council of Government (HOTCOG) and the Heart of Texas Efficient Towns and Counties Co-Op (HOTETC) which is the region’s regional planning entity. The CEDS planning process is coordinated by the staff of the Heart of Texas Economic Development District, Inc. (HOTEDD) and the Heart of Texas Council of Governments (HOTCOG). In addition to public meetings held throughout the region, HOTEDD staff, its board of directors, and member governments worked hand-in-hand with numerous other interested organizations and individuals including input from local businesses, civic leaders, citizens, and timely, significant research and analysis of reports. Specifically:

• Rather than completely recreate many recent efforts, the HOTCEDS draws from several recent reports that provide information relating to the economic development process. These reports are listed in Appendix J.

• Experts and specialists were also consulted on the development and preparation of the HOTEDD CEDS. See Appendix I.

• Additionally, planning tools, model CEDS, and guidance was sought from federal, state and regional government organizations including the United States Economic Development Administration (EDA), the National Association of Development Organizations (NADO), the



Kisatchie-Delta Regional Planning and Development District, the Texoma Council of Governments, the South Western Oklahoma Development Authority, and the Alabama Statewide Consolidated Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy. See Appendix J.

• Individual citizen participation in the creation of the CEDS took place not only during formal EDD meetings, but also in one-on-one and group visits, outreach meetings and presentations with stakeholders throughout the region. These meetings began in 2011 with the majority taking place in 2014 and 2015.

• Additionally, officials in each county reviewed and contributed to this document prior to its approval.

This document was approved by the Heart of Texas Economic Development District, Inc. (HOTEDD) Board of Directors on May 26, 2016. Updated December 2017 Updated December 2018 Updated December 2019

http://www.lapdd.org/district-six-kisatchie-delta-regional-planning-development-district/



INTRODUCTION To begin, the Heart of Texas Comprehensive Economic Development strategy document (HOTEDD CEDS) guides the priorities, policies, choices and actions of the Heart of Texas Economic Development District Board (HOTEDD). HOTEDD is committed to regular and systematic economic development strategic planning and evaluation, including monitoring progress of its plan and activities, measuring progress and impacts, and making strategic changes as warranted. As this document is updated at least annually, it can and will be updated in rapid response to changing economic conditions in the Region. In its commissioning and design, this document is also intended for use by all who engage in economic development related activities on behalf of the citizens, communities and counties of the Heart of Texas Region. It is also hoped that citizens of all ages will find the information contained herein to be meaningful and helpful when they seek to understand the trajectory of economic development in the Heart of Texas Region. Finally, for those who seek to start, grow, or move a business here; or, live, work, and/or play here, we hope this document will serve as a useful tool that contributes to their decision to choose the Heart of Texas Region. THE CONTEXT The following is a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) for the Heart of Texas Region. It has been created in acknowledgement that economic development in general, and business retention, expansion, and attraction in particular, are vital to the growing prosperity and improvement in the quality of life of the Region’s citizens. This strategy also acknowledges the particular challenges of a Region that is:

1. primarily rural; and

2. primarily composed of cities and counties recognized as “small” by the Federal Government agencies (Counties of less than 150,000 and cities less than 50,000; specifically all less than 10,000).

On September 18th and 19th of 2014 HOTEDD staff and Board Members attended the Forum for Regional Innovation in Rural America in Washington, DC hosted by the United States Department of Agriculture. At this forum, the following information was presented during a discussion of rural regional economic development:

Regional development is an economic development approach increasing sustainable economic growth by engaging diverse stakeholders, including elected officials, community foundations, community colleges, and other community leaders, in regional planning. Regional development can work especially well in rural areas where communities traditionally have been isolated and do not have a strong history of working together on economic planning as this often results in duplicative or overlapping efforts. A significant body of literature supports regional

Economic development means

“fostering a dynamic environment where economic

opportunities can be discovered, taken advantage of

and maximized to their fullest extent to create balanced and sustainable economic growth,

jobs, a positive sense of ‘place’ and an improved quality of life

in a defined geographic region.” (D. Gines, Federal Reserve

Bank of Kansas City, 2014).



development as a successful model; government leadership and economic development stakeholders at all levels are recognizing this.

Regional development emphasizes collaboration among communities that share a common set of resources and assets, and often a common set of social and economic challenges, to foster economic growth and improve quality of life. Regions may vary in size, but for economic development purposes, they tend to form from clusters of communities, typically over a multi-county area. Jurisdictional boundaries such as State lines can be important in terms of specific policies and availability of public programs that assist development; in the long run, however, regions that exhibit economic coherence are the most likely to benefit from collaboration. Coherence does not necessarily mean uniformity, as regions are often a mix of urban and rural territory with a variety of industry sectors where economic performance is interrelated.

A regional development approach typically focuses on one or more common economic features or challenges where multi-community collaboration increases the efficiency of development efforts.

Thus, a unified, coordinated, robust and sustainable regional approach for economic growth and stability for a region is only possible after a careful review of the facts, realities, assets, liabilities, and current and future challenges. However, even the most well thought out plan/blueprint/playbook/approach would be worthless without the input and critical reflection of those for whom, ultimately, it is designed to serve. The path forward described in the HOTEDD CEDS is the result of the work of the HOTEDD CEDS Strategy Committee which mirrors the HOTEDD Board of Directors. The HOTEDD CEDS process is coordinated by the staff of the Heart of Texas Economic Development District, Inc. (HOTEDD) with additional support from the Heart of Texas Council of Governments (HOTCOG). In addition to public meetings throughout the region, HOTEDD staff, its board of directors, and member governments worked hand-in-hand with numerous other interested organizations and individuals including gathering input from local businesses, civic leaders, citizens, and timely, significant research and analysis reports. Experts and specialists were also consulted on the development and preparation of the HOTEDD CEDS. Specifically, community participation in the creation of the CEDS took place not only during formal EDD meetings, but also in one-on-one and group visits with stakeholders throughout the region beginning in 2011, with the majority taking place in 2014 and 2015. Additionally, officials in each county reviewed and contributed to this document prior to its approval. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEFINED

The story of the Blind men and an elephant. The story of The Blind Men and an Elephant originated in the Indian subcontinent from where it has widely diffused. A Jain version of the story says that six blind men were asked to determine what an elephant looked like by feeling different parts of the elephant's body. The blind man who feels a leg says the elephant is like a pillar; the one who feels the tail says the elephant is like a rope; the one who feels the trunk says the elephant is like a tree branch; the one who feels the ear says the elephant is like a hand fan; the one who feels the belly says the elephant is like a wall; and the one who feels the tusk says the elephant is like a solid pipe.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_subcontinent

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jainism



A wise man explains to them:

All of you are right. The reason every one of you is telling it differently is because each one of you touched the different part of the elephant. So, actually the elephant has all the features you mentioned.

The selection of a definition for the term “economic development” is essential in order to make progress toward a truly unified vision and plan for regional economic development. Choosing a definition that was free of jargon, and spoke to the needs of both rural and urban, was critical for the success of the conversations held with stakeholders. Ask a professional economic developer the question: “What is economic development?”, and the likely response is a definition that sounds like it came out of an industrial marketing textbook. Ask the mayor of a rural town of few thousand people the same question and his or her answer is likely to sound like a long list of community development needs.

The definition of economic development used for the HOTEDD CEDS is as follows: Economic development means “fostering a dynamic environment where economic opportunities can be discovered, taken advantage of and maximized to their fullest extent to create balanced and sustainable economic growth, jobs, a positive sense of ‘place’ and an improved quality of life in a defined geographic region.” (D. Gines, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, 2014). Additional terminology utilized this document includes:

• Hard economic development infrastructure and capacity: physical infrastructure, the right kinds, in the correct condition and enough of it;

• Soft economic development infrastructure and capacity: educational and workforce development, institutional support systems, community capabilities and readiness, and regulatory issues.

OVERVIEW OF THE HEART OF TEXAS REGION The Heart of Texas Region is heavily agricultural. Five of its six counties are considered “small” by federal standards and are classified as 100% rural. McLennan County (WACO MSA), the largest of the 6 counties, has a strong industrial and commercial center in the City of Waco with smaller industrial and commercial centers in Hillsboro (Hill County) and Mexia (Limestone County). By all accounts, the Region is on the verge of substantial growth, and has many of the necessary ingredients to support successful economic development including:

• A strong State economy and strong, diverse regional economy; • Its location in central Texas on both I-35 and I-45 is within easy driving distance of four of the fastest-

growing metropolitan areas in the country— Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, and Austin—makes it an excellent logistical distribution and supply center;

• Abundant workforce and relatively low labor costs; • Its location, as well as its climate and geography, enhance the cultural, recreation, tourism, and travel

opportunities for residents and visitors alike; • Abundant water, clean air and natural resources;



• Diverse population and culture; • Boasting two major hospitals as well as a wide array of specialists and specialized treatment facilities it

has become the medical epicenter of the Heart of Texas Region; • The Region is home to outstanding training and educational institutions: few primarily rural regions can

boast of having three two-year training institutions, a State University Center and a nationally recognized major private university;

• A strong collaborative network of foundations, nonprofit organizations, and churches; • Important quality of life attributes like good schools, safe neighborhoods, and competitively priced

housing; and • Strong city, county and regional leadership with a growing commitment to, and understanding of, the

importance of regionalism. However, like all parts of the country, the Heart of Texas also has its own set of economic development challenges and corresponding needs: Challenges

• a post-agricultural economy with relatively low-skilled workforce and low median wage and without existing growth drivers

• high poverty rate in both rural and in-town areas throughout the Region

Additional economic development challenges faced by rural communities:

• minimally-diversified economy, low industrial base, few jobs

• decaying infrastructure • no true population centers • economically depressed areas

Needs • workforce development • community development • industrial development • infrastructure • housing • public transportation enhancements • blight remediation • catalyst projects • larger airport • improved internet access

Many residents of the Region have few economic opportunities not only because their low educational attainment and lack of skills, but because of limited employment prospects. The increasing demand for skilled workers multiplies the difficulties facing economically disadvantaged residents who have been not be able to establish strong work histories. On the flip-side, many of the graduates of the area’s university and colleges, including 2-year, 4-year and advanced study programs, seek employment elsewhere because of better opportunities and wages.

GUIDING PRINCIPLES + VISION + GOALS

EXPLANATION



The Heart of Texas Economic Development District, Inc. 2015-2020 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy consists of the following components:

- Guiding Principle + Vision Statement o The broad, high level statement designed to guide policy and activity. It represents what

HOTEDD and the regional stakeholders stand for and want to achieve and/or become over the long term.

- Goal Statements o These are the primary economic development goals to be achieved over the next 1-5 years

and beyond, and they provide more detail for the vision statement. - Objectives

o The goal operationalized into components, or, put another way, the specific elements that make up each goal.

- Actions o These are specific efforts (activities, programs, projects) that will be undertaken to achieve

goals.

GUIDING PRINCIPLE GROW THE ECONOMY: Create economic prosperity for all through growth of the Regions tax and employment base.

VISION HOTEDD will work in collaboration with the counties, communities, economic development entities, business, industry, and the stakeholders of the Heart of Texas to grow the economy of the Region. We will work together to establish the Heart of Texas as the premier Region of the State to live, work, and play, and to start, grow, sustain or move a business or organization.

GOALS, OBJECTIVES & ACTIONS The following 10 goals, and their corresponding objectives and actions, serve as the playbook or path forward for achieving the aims set forth in the HOTEDD CEDS Guiding Principle and Vision. Each goal is broken down into objectives and actions.

The goals, along with the corresponding objectives and actions, serve to: 1) Inform and drive the work plan of the HOTEDD Board and staff, and 2) Serve as advisory directions and trajectory indicators for all who practice economic development in the Region

or who are seeking economic development information about the Region.



The Ten Goals of the HOTEDD CEDS

1) Advance regional

economic progress through enhanced regional marketing efforts.

2) Implement a broad based, inclusive and unified regional economic development initiative that improves economic development collaboration.

3) Advance regional economic progress by increasing hard economic development capacity and infrastructure.

4) Advance regional economic progress by increasing soft economic development capacity and infrastructure.

5) Attract, support and fund small businesses and entrepreneurs as a means of growing and diversifying the regional economy.

6) Advance regional economic progress by increasing rural telecommunications capacity and infrastructure.

7) Inspire intentional successful management of the environment (water, air quality, solid waste and natural resources).

8) Build on strong and growing clusters.

9) Increase workforce hard and soft skills.

10) Develop new data and strategies to address current poverty and future needs.



Goal 1 ADVANCE REGIONAL ECONOMIC PROGRESS THROUGH ENHANCED REGIONAL MARKETING EFFORTS

Objectives

1. Successfully attract business, tourism and future residents to the Heart of Texas Region.

2. Successfully represent the entire Heart of Texas Region (all six counties and over 100 communities) in a one stop shop web-based portal.

3. Work with local economic development

professionals and communities to market the Region as a cohesive economy, a dynamic home for business and industry, and great place to work, live and play.

4. Maintain and expand data and information

collection capacity for information inquiries, lead responses, regional analysis, and performance evaluation.

5. Improve intra-regional communication in regard to trends and changes in: a. Economic conditions, as well as strategic

responses. b. Demographic conditions, as well as

strategic responses. c. Business/industry as well as strategic

responses. d. Quality of life indicators as well as

strategic responses.

Actions (activities, programs, projects)

• Re-develop/enhance the HOTEDDTX.com economic development website into a web and social media platform that can compete on a national level.

o Develop a marketing strategy with a united brand and related sub-messages to promote business and economic development.

• HOTEDDTX.com will contain relevant data, information, and news about the Region and provide a useful and appropriate array of resources for those who wish to: o start, grow, or move a business here;

relocate to live and work here; visit or vacation here; and

o serve as the economic development information and training hub of the Region for individual citizens, municipal and county governments, as well as Industrial and Economic Development Corporations, Chambers of Commerce, Convention and Visitors Bureaus.

• Promote the use of HOTEDDTX.com to local commercial and residential realtors, businesses, and local, regional, State and national economic development entities.

• Continue and expand no-cost and low-cost partnerships with State organizations that help bring positive attention and economic development opportunities to the Region. (Current partnerships include the UTSA-Rural Business Program, Texas Film Commission and their Certified Film Friendly Community program, Texas Department of Agriculture and their Certified Retirement Community).

• Expand regional capacities to inventory and market sites and buildings for the Region’s economic development.

• Assist communities with data needs related to economic development and business recruitment.



Goal 2 IMPLEMENT A BROAD BASED, INCLUSIVE & UNIFIED REGIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE THAT IMPROVES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COLLABORATION

Objectives 1. Develop mechanisms to guide the

implementation of regional economic development initiatives.

2. Increase emphasis on support for regional approaches to economic development, including marketing/branding.

3. Strengthen and expand economic cooperation

and collaboration intra-regionally and beyond the Region’s borders.

4. Improve mechanisms, as appropriate, to

respond to unexpected economic losses and economic disasters.


• Build and launch a collaborative regional economic development organization that includes all economic development entities in the Region: representatives from all municipalities, communities, counties, community leaders and interested citizens, chambers of commerce EDC’s/IDC’s, Chambers of Commerce, and the like.

o Primary functions: unified regional marketing message and sharing of best practices—a rising tide lifts all boats.

• Expand the role of the annual Texas Rural Challenge event (see Appendix K) beyond training by creating a pre- or post- conference workshop that will serve as economic forum for local governments, businesses, and citizens to come together and discuss important regional economic development issues. http://www.cvent.com/events/2016-texas-rural-challenge/event-summary-2cfde23f25ba496ba7024355cd2534ff.aspx

• Engage with neighboring regional planning organizations through the Texas Association of Regional Councils (TARC).



Goal 3 ADVANCE REGIONAL ECONOMIC PROGRESS BY INCREASING HARD ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY & INFRASTRUCTURE (infrastructure and community improvements to support development, redevelopment and revitalization of the built environment)

Objectives

1. Actively promote the message that infrastructure – be it roads, sewer, water, energy, communication networks or transportation – is the underpinning of economic growth and development, and that it must be maintained and improved to support the goals and strategies contained in this plan.

2. Increase the capacity of local governments, nonprofits, and businesses to improve the nature of hard economic development infrastructure in their communities and the Region.

3. Support community-driven initiatives that

improve neighborhoods and town centers that stimulate economic activity and promote the development of quality communities.

4. Foster the development of regional projects

that improve the functionality of built infrastructure and the hardscape environment for business and for the quality of life for workers.

5. Identify a path forward for further work and implementation of the land use, housing, infrastructure, economic development, and environmental planning work done in the 2011-2015 HUD Sustainable Communities Grant (A.K.A. The Heart of Texas Efficient Towns and Counties Co-Op Project (HOTETC)) to help ensure that future development decisions continue to apply and utilize these important findings.


• Improve HOTEDTX.com website content including information such as creating “How To” guides or factsheets for downtowns regarding topics such as ordinance development, policy development, streetscaping practices, and market analyses, current techniques, practices, and training opportunities.

• Increase HOTEDD staff and Board member outreach and training in the community.

• Encourage local housing policy that encourages quality affordable housing, and the repair or removal of substandard housing.

• Seek and develop additional partnerships with educational institutions to conduct outreach, research, and other economic and community development efforts throughout the Region.

• Apply for grants from TDA and other State and private sources that will enhance HOTEDD’s technical assistance capabilities to build capacity throughout the Region.

• Apply for grants from HUD, USDA and other federal agencies that will enhance HOTEDD’s technical assistance capabilities, build capacity throughout the Region and fund continued work on the HOTETC project.

• Assist communities with grant applications to EDA, TDA, USDA and other federal, State and private sources especially those that address the regional development of hard infrastructure assets.

• Activate recently created HOTEDD Board Committees & Work Groups: o Entrepreneurship & Small Business Development

Education and Workforce Development o Housing o Regional Marketing



Goal 4 ADVANCE REGIONAL ECONOMIC PROGRESS BY INCREASING SOFT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY & INFRASTRUCTURE (educational and workforce development, institutional support systems, community capabilities and readiness, and regulatory issues)

Objectives

1. Increase the capacity of local governments, nonprofits, and businesses to improve the nature of soft economic development infrastructure in their communities and the Region.

2. Staunch the flow of generational wealth

draining out of the Region.

3. Reduce the exit of youth (rural brain drain) from the Region.

4. Identify a path forward for further work and

implementation of the land use, housing, infrastructure, economic development, and environmental planning work done in the HUD Sustainable Communities Grant (A.K.A. The Heart of Texas Efficient Towns and Counties Co-Op Project (HOTETC) from 2011-2015 in order that future development decisions continue to apply and utilize the findings.


• Improve HOTEDTX.com website content including information that helps municipalities and citizens gain a better understanding of what economic development looks like in small towns and rural communities.

• Seek and develop additional partnerships with educational institutions to conduct outreach, research, and other economic and community development efforts throughout the Region.

• Increase HOTEDD staff and Board member outreach and training in the community.

• Encourage, expand and possibly incentivize community planning.

• Develop and distribute transfer of wealth data and community asset-building strategies to staunch the flow of wealth out of rural communities, counties and the Region. Launch outreach and training campaign supporting the creation of community foundations.

• Bring innovative youth-focused programs such as training academies and Pioneers Youth Leadership to the Region.

• Utilize Federal, state and local support to help of all kinds Heart of Texas businesses of all sizes grow, as well as attract new businesses.

• Apply for grants from TDA and other federal, State and private sources that will enhance HOTEDD’s technical assistance capabilities to build capacity throughout the Region.

• Apply for grants from HUD, USDA and other federal agencies that will enhance HOTEDD’s technical assistance capabilities, build capacity throughout the Region and fund continued work on the HOTETC project.

• Assist communities with grant applications to EDA, TDA, USDA and other federal, State and private sources especially those that address the regional development of soft infrastructure assets.

• Activate recently created HOTEDD Board Committees & Work Groups: o Entrepreneurship & Small Business Development o Education and Workforce Development o Housing o Regional Marketing



Goal 5 ATTRACT, SUPPORT, AND FUND SMALL BUSINESSES AND ENTREPRENEURS AS A MEANS OF GROWING AND DIVERSIFYING THE REGIONAL ECONOMY

Objectives

1. Develop mechanisms to enhance support of small business and entrepreneurs at the community, county and regional levels.

2. Support efforts to increase minority entrepreneurship and small businesses ownership and the entry of minority populations into business and the workforce.

3. Increase awareness among businesses, workers, and residents about the benefits to the local economy through the act of supporting Heart of Texas businesses.

4. Increase small businesses’ and

entrepreneur’s access to capital.


• Provide message emphasis and training on the benefits of supporting retention, growth, and expansion of existing small businesses, as well as attraction of new-to-the Region and start-up businesses.

• Identify and provide resources to

communities to improve opportunities for entrepreneurs and Small Businesses.

• Develop a page(s) with the HOTEDDTX.com website that serves as regional clearinghouse of information and resources for small businesses and entrepreneurs.

• Continue to operate HOTEDD Revolving

Loan Fund for small, rural businesses. o Grow revolving loan fund programs

by identifying and applying for additional funding streams.

• Encourage communities and counties to

consider starting revolving loan funds and, if needed, provide technical assistance and market the availability of such programs.

• Monitor state and federal business assistance programs and communicate about those programs as well as advocate for program changes as needed.

• Conduct a best-practices study of rural small business success in similar regions.

• Continue partnership with Sam Houston State University—Center for Rural Studies entrepreneurship expert Dr. Michael Fortunato. Consider partnering with Governor’s Office for Small Business Summit.

• Promote and support “shop local” efforts

whenever possible (for example TDA’s “Go Texan” program.



Goal 6 ADVANCE REGIONAL ECONOMIC PROGRESS BY INCREASING RURAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS CAPACITY & INFRASTRUCTURE Objectives 1. Recognize that telecommunication networks,

particularly wireless communication, internet access, and broadband service—are sorely lacking in rural America and have been hindering economic development and growth in rural communities and must be improved and maintained.


• Encourage and emphasize the development and maintenance of telecommunications infrastructure, including broadband service, in order to support opportunities arising from digital technologies and increase those opportunities for rural communities.

Goal 7 INSPIRE INTENTIONAL SUCCESSFUL MANAGEMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT (WATER, AIR QUALITY, SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES) Objectives

1. Develop mechanisms to enhance support of strategies and efforts of local, regional and state agencies that serve in the roles of managers and stewards of the environment and the Region’s natural resources.


• Pursue and engage in partnerships with the Region’s environmental and natural resource related committees and agencies.



GOAL 8 BUILD ON STRONG AND GROWING CLUSTERS

Objectives

1. Support industry clusters that have high growth/high value potential to provide future opportunities for economic development.

a. Expand health care cluster i. Services

ii. Products

b. Expand advanced manufacturing cluster

i. Aerospace ii. Avionics

c. Expand professional services cluster

i. Business services ii. Engineering and design

d. Expand supply chain cluster

i. Transportation and warehousing

ii. Wholesale trade

2. Non-Traditional opportunities for growth a. Tourism and hospitality b. Entrepreneurship and creative

industries

3. Include information about business and growth opportunities for these targeted cluster areas within business expansion and attraction marketing and communication efforts.


• Enhance regional marketing (see goal #1) to assist in the recruiting and retention of companies and talent.

• Increase and enhance partnerships and support of workforce development related agencies and educational institutions.

• Continue to assist local and regional economic development organizations, communities and counties with lead responses.

• Expand health care workforce development.

• Continue aviation alliance.

• Enhance technical training.



Goal 9 INCREASE WORKFORCE HARD AND SOFT SKILLS Objectives

1. Retain talent.

2. Increase opportunity for underskilled/ underemployed adults.

3. Boost skills delivery in K-12.

4. Create new partnerships with, within, and

among post-secondary schools.

5. Partner with employers on all strategies.


• Increase enrollment at Waco Advanced Manufacturing Academy, and the Fairfield Career and Technical Training Center (Freestone Co.).

• Support Baylor Research and Innovation Collaborative.

• Strengthen Small Business Development Center partnerships.

• Support projects recommended in HOTETC and Waco Upjohn Study (see Appendix J).



Goal 10 DEVELOP NEW DATA AND STRATEGIES TO ADDRESS CURRENT POVERTY AND FUTURE NEEDS Objectives

1. Grow a backbone of data/technical support for local jurisdictions and the region.

2. Conduct rigorous, data-driven local economic development plans to drive local investments of time, space, and incentives.

3. Conduct review of population projections

for rural counties.

4. Complete Efficient Towns & Counties regional sustainability work:

a. Community Development b. Environmental Development c. Emergency Preparedness d. Economic Development e. Next-Generation Plans, i.e. Water

Supply Studies, Intergovernmental Partnerships

5. Complete Waco’s Economic Development Strategic Plan and tie its results to regional efforts.

6. Study the network of veterans’ support services as well as veterans’ impact to regional economy.


• Perform study of veterans as supply and demand drivers of skills and services.

• Move into implementation planning: o Water Supply o Infrastructure Maintenance o Regional and/or Intergovernmental

Partnerships o Alignment of CDBG Investment



SURVEY OF THE ECONOMIC CONDITIONS OF THE HEART OF TEXAS REGION OVERVIEW The Heart of Texas Region consists of 6 counties: Bosque, Falls, Freestone, Hill, Limestone and McLennan counties. There are over 50 municipalities and more than 100 communities (unincorporated cities, former town sites, etc.). The Region consists of 5,648 square miles with a population density of 61.84 residents per square mile compared to a statewide density of 95.92.



GEOGRAPHY The land surface form topography for the Region is a variation which can be described as tablelands with moderate relief and irregular plains. Natural amenities of the area, according to the U.S. Department of Interior, reflect an overall percent of surface water of 1.7 percent compared to 2.5 percent statewide. Considerably more detailed information can be found at: http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/texaswater/sb1/ and http://www.netstate.com/states/geography/tx_geography.htm. POPULATION The Heart of Texas Region had an estimated population of 357,014 in 2013 up from 349,273 in 2010 which is an increase of 7,741 (about 2%) in just 3 years. The Texas State Demographers Office (2015) predicts that population growth in the Heart of Texas Region will continue at a similar rate through 2050. Following Population Data by Stats America.

18,097 17,273 19,62435,077

23,468

247,934

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

Bosque Falls Freestone Hill Limestone McLennan

2 0 1 6 P O P U L AT I O N BY C O U N T Y

http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/texaswater/sb1/

http://www.netstate.com/states/geography/tx_geography.htm



POPULATION BY AGE: MOST CURRENT

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013 ACS 5-year estimates

Under 20 years, 28.4%

20-39 years, 26.9%

40-59 years, 24.9%

60-79 years, 15.8%

80 years and over, 4.0%

2 0 1 3 A G E D E M O G R A P H I C S

2013 NUMBER POPULATION BY AGE GROUP FOR THE REGION

2013 POPULATION: 351,254

UNDER 5 YEARS 23,766

5 TO 9 YEARS 24,132

10 TO 14 YEARS 23,620

15 TO 19 YEARS 28,230

20 TO 24 YEARS 30,343

25 TO 29 YEARS 22,726

30 TO 34 YEARS 21,133

35 TO 39 YEARS 20,177

40 TO 44 YEARS 19,629

45 TO 49 YEARS 22,230

50 TO 54 YEARS 23,393

55 TO 59 YEARS 22,369

60 TO 64 YEARS 18,751

65 TO 69 YEARS 15,859

70 TO 74 YEARS 11,187

75 TO 79 YEARS 9,559

80 TO 84 YEARS 6,987

85 YEARS AND OVER 7,165

6.8%6.9%

6.7%8.0%

8.6%6.5%

6.0%5.7%

5.6%6.3%

6.7%6.4%

5.3%4.5%

3.2%2.7%

2.0%2.0%

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%

Under 5 years5 to 9 years

10 to 14 years15 to 19 years20 to 24 years25 to 29 years30 to 34 years35 to 39 years40 to 44 years45 to 49 years50 to 54 years55 to 59 years60 to 64 years65 to 69 years70 to 74 years75 to 79 years80 to 84 years

85 years and over

2 0 1 3 P E R C E N T P O P U L AT I O N BY A G E G R O U P



POPULATION BY CITY/TOWN

NUMBER AND PERCENT POPULATION CHANGE BY CITY AND TOWN POPULATION 2000 POPULATION 2010 NUMBER CHANGE PERCENT CHANGE

BOSQUE COUNTY CLIFTON 3542 3442 -100 -2.82%

CRANFILLS GAP 335 281 -54 -16.12% IREDELL 360 281 -79 -21.94%

MERIDIAN 1491 1493 2 0.13% MORGAN 485 490 5 1.03%

VALLEY MILLS (PT.) 1120 1190 70 6.25% WALNUT SPRINGS 755 827 72 9.54%

FALLS COUNTY BRUCEVILLE-EDDY (PT.) 2 4 2 100.00%

GOLINDA (PT.) 336 413 77 22.92% LOTT 724 759 35 4.83%

MARLIN 6628 5967 -661 -9.97% ROSEBUD 1493 1412 -81 -5.43%

FREESTONE COUNTY FAIRFIELD 3094 2951 -143 -4.62%

KIRVIN 122 129 7 5.74% OAKWOOD (PT.) 9 37 28 311.11%

STREETMAN (PT.) 202 247 45 22.28% TEAGUE 4557 3560 -997 -21.88%

WORTHAM 1082 1073 -9 -0.83%

HILL COUNTY ABBOTT 300 356 56 18.67% AQUILLA 136 109 -27 -19.85%

BLUM 399 444 45 11.28% BYNUM 225 199 -26 -11.56%

CARL'S CORNER 134 173 39 29.10% COVINGTON 282 269 -13 -4.61% HILLSBORO 8232 8456 224 2.72% HUBBARD 1586 1423 -163 -10.28%

ITASCA 1503 1644 141 9.38% MALONE 278 269 -9 -3.24%

MERTENS 146 125 -21 -14.38% MOUNT CALM 310 320 10 3.23%

PENELOPE 211 198 -13 -6.16% WHITNEY 1833 2087 254 13.86%

LIMESTONE COUNTY COOLIDGE 848 955 107 12.62%

GROESBECK 4291 4328 37 0.86% KOSSE 497 464 -33 -6.64%

MART (PT.) 0 2 2 200.00% MEXIA 6563 7459 896 13.65%

TEHUACANA 307 283 -24 -7.82% THORNTON 525 526 1 0.19%

…continued POPULATION 2000 POPULATION 2010 NUMBER CHANGE PERCENT CHANGE

MCLENNAN COUNTY BELLMEAD 9,214 9,901 687 7.46%

BEVERLY HILLS 2,113 1,995 -118 -5.58%



BRUCEVILLE-EDDY (PT.) 1,488 1,471 -17 -1.14% CRAWFORD 705 717 12 200.00%

GHOLSON 922 1,061 139 15.08% GOLINDA (PT.) 87 146 59 67.82%

HALLSBURG 518 507 -11 -2.12% HEWITT 11,085 13,549 2464 22.23%

LACY-LAKEVIEW 5,764 6,489 725 12.58% LEROY 335 337 2 0.60%

LORENA 1,433 1,691 258 18.00% MART (PT.) 2,273 2,207 -66 -2.90%

MCGREGOR (PT.) 4,727 4,987 260 5.50% MOODY 1,400 1,371 -29 -2.07%

RIESEL 973 1,007 34 3.49% ROBINSON 7,845 10,509 2664 33.96% ROSS CITY 228 283 55 24.12%

VALLEY MILLS (PT.) 3 13 10 333.33% WACO 113,726 124,805 11079 9.74% WEST 2,692 2,807 115 4.27%

WOODWAY 8,733 8,452 -281 -3.22% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 and 2010 Census



HEART OF TEXAS COUNTY, REGIONAL, STATE + NATIONAL POPULATION COMPARISON

Source: U.S. Census Bureau & 2013 ACS 5-year Estimates

NUMBER AND PERCENT POPULATION CHANGE BY COUNTY, REGION, STATE, AND COUNTRY 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2013 EST

BOSQUE 17,390 19,013 18,032 15,750 15,761 11,836 10,809 10,966 13,401 15,125 17,204 18,212 18,094 FALLS 33,342 35,649 36,217 38,771 35,984 26,724 21,263 17,300 17,946 17,712 18,576 17,866 17,719

FREESTONE 18,910 20,557 23,264 22,589 21,138 15,696 12,525 11,116 14,830 15,818 17,867 19,816 19,657 HILL 41,355 46,760 43,332 43,036 38,355 31,282 23,650 22,596 25,024 27,146 32,321 35,089 35,051

LIMESTONE 32,573 34,621 33,283 39,497 33,781 25,251 20,413 18,100 20,224 20,946 22,051 23,384 23,417 MCLENNAN 59,772 73,250 82,921 98,682 101,194 130,194 150,553 147,755 170,755 189,123 213,517 234,906 237,316

HOTCOG REGION 203,342 229,850 237,049 258,325 246,213 240,983 239,213 227,833 262,180 285,870 321,536 349,273 351,254

INCR/DECR 26,508 7,199 21,276 -12,112 -5,230 -1,770 -11,380 34,347 23,690 35,666 27,737 26,508 % INCR/DECR 13.0% 3.1% 9.0% -4.7% -2.1% -0.7% -4.8% 15.1% 9.0% 12.5% 8.6% 0.6%

TEXAS 3,048,710 3,896,542 4,663,228 5,824,715 6,414,824 7,711,194 9,579,677 11,196,730 14,229,191 16,986,335 20,851,820 25,145,561 25,639,373

INCR/DECR 847,832 766,686 1,161,487 590,109 1,296,370 1,868,483 1,617,053 3,032,461 2,757,144 3,865,485 4,293,741 847,832 % INCR/DECR 27.8% 19.7% 24.9% 10.1% 20.2% 24.2% 16.9% 27.1% 19.4% 22.8% 20.6% 2.0%

UNITED STATES 76,212,168 92,228,496 106,021,537 123,202,624 132,164,569 151,325,798 179,323,175 203,211,926 226,545,805 248,765,170 281,421,906 308,745,538 311,536,594

INCR/DECR 16,016,328 13,793,041 17,181,087 8,961,945 19,161,229 27,997,377 23,888,751 23,333,879 22,219,365 32,656,736 27,323,632 16,016,328 13,793,041

% INCR/DECR 21.0% 15.0% 16.2% 7.3% 14.5% 18.5% 13.3% 11.5% 9.8% 13.1% 9.7% 0.9%



POPULATION BY GENDER

The gender distribution of an area can provide additional insight into the Region. Of the area's population, 171,483 were male which represents 49.1 percent and 177,790 were female which represents 50.9 percent. This compares to the statewide percentage of 49.6 percent for male and 50.4 percent for female.

SPECIAL AGE GROUPS + GENDER Youth and Older Workers. Other age cohorts may be of special interest for Workforce Development Board's summer youth programs and older worker programs. The Heart of Texas Region has 57,820 persons age 14-21 representing 16.6 percent of the population. This compares with 14.7 percent statewide. For the potential older age cohort, 121,265 persons or 34.7 percent are 55 or over in the Heart of Texas Region based on the 2010 Census, Demographic Profiles table. This compares to 30.9 percent statewide. Ages 25-44. If the population cohort 45 and over is higher than the State average, this suggests a stable, mature population comprised of mainly "empty-nesters," retirees and the aged. When the 25-44 age cohort is higher than the State average, this is a healthy economic situation since this group contains the greatest share of the labor force. Decreases over time in this group, especially when similar changes are not occurring statewide, can be an indication that people are moving out of an area they consider to be a poor labor market. In Heart of Texas the total number in the age groups of 25 to 44, was 83,894 or 24.0 percent. This compares to a statewide percentage of 28.1 percent based on the 2010 Census, Demographic Profiles table. Ages 18 and Older. For the population generally considered in the ages to participate in the labor market, based on the 2010 Census, Demographic Profiles table, the total statewide population who were 18 years and over totaled 18,279,737 which represented 72.7 percent of the total population. In the Region, the total persons in this age group was 262,813 or 75.2 percent of the total population. Within this age group in Texas the number of males in 2010 who were 18 years and over represented 8,962,031 persons or 35.6 percent of the total population while females age 18 years and over represented 9,317,706 or 37.1 percent. In the Heart of Texas area, males 18 and over represented 126,871 or 36.3 percent in comparison and females totaled to 135,942 or 38.9 percent. Veteran Status. According to the U.S. Bureau of Census, American Community Survey Veterans data, the area had 257,356 persons in the population age 18 years and older in the year 2010. Of that number, 28,230 or 11.0 percent responded as being a civilian veteran, compared to 9.3 percent statewide. A "civilian veteran" is a person 18 years old or over who has served (even for a short time), but is not now serving, on active duty in the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, or the Coast Guard, or who served in the U.S. Merchant Marine during World War II. People who served in the National Guard or military Reserves are classified as veterans only if they were ever called or ordered to active duty, not counting the 4-6 months for initial training or yearly summer camps. Disability Status. From the 2010 Census, data on Disability Status were derived when respondents reported long-lasting conditions: (a) blindness, deafness, or a severe vision or hearing impairment, (sensory disability) and (b) a condition that substantially limits one or more basic physical activities such



as walking, climbing stairs, reaching, lifting, or carrying (physical disability). Disability status was also derived if the individuals in the working age range of 18 to 64 years had a physical, mental, or emotional condition lasting 6 months or more that made it difficult to perform certain activities such as: (a) learning, remembering, or concentrating (mental disability); (b) dressing, bathing, or getting around inside the home (self-care disability); (c) going outside the home alone to shop or visit a doctor's office (going outside the home disability); and (d) working at a job or business (employment disability). It was reported in the 2010 Census that the Region had an estimated 52,309 persons residing here between the ages of 5 to 17 years of age with approximately 3,445 or 6.6 percent with a disability. In Texas, the percent with disabilities in this same age bracket was 5.3 percent. In the working age population group - ages 18 to 64 years, the area had approximately 177,222 persons, of which 21,067 were categorized to be in a disability status. This represented 11.9 percent compared to 10.0 percent in the State overall. For those persons in this age group that had a disability, approximately 7,109 or 33.7 percent were employed. For those who had no disability, an estimated 113,910 or 72.9 percent were employed. For the retirement age group of 65 years of age and older, 37,288 persons resided of which 15,481 were disabled. The percent of this age group with a disabled status was 41.5 percent and this compared to 40.7 percent in Texas overall. Areas reporting 0 are suppressed due to small sample size or no reported data. Ages 65 and Older. For the population who are considered to be at the age of retirement or older - 65 years and older, the total number of persons in Texas was 2,601,886 or 10.3 percent of the total population in 2010. This Region had a total of 49,452 or 14.2 percent in this older age group. In the same age group of 65 years and over, males in Texas represented 1,135,664 or 4.5 percent of the total population and females totaled to 1,466,222 or 5.8 percent, while in this study area, males totaled to 21,652 or 6.2 percent of all persons in this area and females represented 27,800 or 8.0 percent of all persons. For other general and special population information from the 2010 Census as well as specific populations topics, link to http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml.

http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml



POPULATION BY RACE According to the county-based population estimates from the United States Census Bureau, the Heart of Texas Region changed in population by 27,737 residents, from 321,536 in April 2000 to an estimated 349,273 in April 2010. This reflects an increase of 8.6 percent in population. During the same time period, the State's population changed by 4,293,741 residents from 20,851,820 to an estimated 25,145,561 persons representing a comparative change of 20.6 percent. A variety of data topics for Texas and all the counties is available at: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/ states/48000.html.

2010 RACE/ETHNIC DISTRIBUTION BY GENDER ALL AGES BY RACE/ETHNICITY 16 AND OVER POPULATION REGION

PERCENT STATEWIDE

PERCENT POPULATION REGION PERCENT

STATEWIDE PERCENT

WHITE 251,171 71.9 70.4 WHITE 203,204 74.6 72.1 MALE 123,169 35.3 34.8 MALE 98,346 36.1 35.3

FEMALE 128,002 36.6 35.5 FEMALE 104,858 38.5 36.8 BLACK 49,107 14.1 11.8 BLACK 36,537 13.4 11.6

MALE 23,163 6.6 5.7 MALE 16,503 6.1 5.4 FEMALE 25,944 7.4 6.1 FEMALE 20,034 7.4 6.2

OTHER 48,995 14.0 17.8 OTHER 32,704 12.0 16.3 MALE 25,151 7.2 9.0 MALE 16,825 6.2 8.3

FEMALE 23,844 6.8 8.7 FEMALE 15,879 5.8 8.0 HISPANIC* 75,699 21.7 37.6 HISPANIC* 50,191 18.4 34.1

MALE 39,158 11.2 18.9 MALE 26,003 9.5 17.1 FEMALE 36,541 10.5 18.7 FEMALE 24,188 8.9 17.0

*Hispanic count includes White, Black and other representation when reported. Source: 2010 U.S. Census Bureau Summary File 1 tables

White, Non-Hispanic,

61.5% White, Hispanic,

22.1%

Black Non-Hispanic,

13.8%All other

races, 2.6%

2 0 1 3 R A C E D E M O G R A P H I C S

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/%20states/48000.html

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/%20states/48000.html



POPULATION PROJECTIONS

The Office of the State Demographer for the State of Texas distributes the most widely used population projections for Texas. Projection estimates in these tables and the methodology for migration scenarios have been revised as of 2012 by the Texas State Data Center and Office of the State Demographer - now housed at University of Texas San Antonio. Each projection series includes three scenarios resulting in three alternative sets of population values for the State and each county are presented in these projections. These scenarios assume the same set of mortality and fertility assumptions in each scenario but differ in their assumptions relative to net migration. The net migration assumptions made for four scenarios are derived from 2000-2010 patterns which have been altered relative to expected future population trends. This is done by systematically and uniformly altering the adjusted 1990-2000 net migration rates by age, sex and race/ethnicity. The scenarios so produced are referred to as the zero migration (0.0) scenario, the one-half 2000-2010 (0.5) scenario, the 2000-2010 (1.0) scenario.

The recommended scenario for most county based projection reporting is the 0.5 scenario. This scenario has been prepared as an approximate average of the zero (0.0) and 2000-2010 (1.0) scenarios. It assumes rates of net migration one-half of those of the 2000s. The reason for including this scenario is that many counties in the State are unlikely to continue to experience the overall levels of relatively extensive growth of the 2000s. A scenario which projects rates of population growth that are approximately an average of the zero and the 2000-2010 scenarios is one that suggests slower but steadier growth than occurred during 2000-2010. (For a more detailed discussion see http://txsdc.utsa.edu).

Using this projection scenario, the following table represents population projections for Heart of Texas as computed in 2012 by The Office of the State Demographer for the State of Texas:

REGION POPULATION PROJECTIONS AND PERCENT CHANGE SINCE 2000* YEAR TOTAL PCT CHG ANGLO PCT CHG BLACK PCT CHG HISPANIC PCT CHG OTHER PCT CHG 2000 321,536 --- 217,328 --- 48,260 --- 51,962 --- 3,986 --- 2005 333,881 3.8 216,761 -0.3 50,588 4.8 62,154 19.6 4,378 9.8 2010 349,273 8.6 216,302 -0.5 47,998 -0.5 75,699 45.7 9,274 132.7 2015 361,214 12.3 215,145 -1.0 49,855 3.3 86,109 65.7 10,105 153.5 2020 374,033 16.3 214,003 -1.5 51,307 6.3 97,621 87.9 11,102 178.5 2025 387,751 20.6 212,759 -2.1 52,348 8.5 110,397 112.5 12,247 207.3 2030 400,349 24.5 210,019 -3.4 52,899 9.6 123,991 138.6 13,440 237.2 2035 411,564 28.0 205,764 -5.3 53,102 10.0 138,058 165.7 14,640 267.3 2040 421,960 31.2 200,727 -7.6 52,960 9.7 152,474 193.4 15,799 296.4 2045 432,379 34.5 195,467 -10.1 52,600 9.0 167,506 222.4 16,806 321.6 2050 443,734 38.0 190,503 -12.3 52,069 7.9 183,427 253.0 17,735 344.9

*Anglo, Black, and Other excludes Hispanic counts. Source: 2012 The Office of the Texas State Demographer

http://txsdc.utsa.edu/



For comparison purposes, the Texas population projections, using the same scenario methodology, are as follows:

TEXAS POPULATION PROJECTIONS AND PERCENT CHANGE SINCE 2000* YEAR TOTAL PCT

CHG ANGLO PCT CHG BLACK PCT

CHG HISPANIC PCT CHG OTHER PCT

CHG 2000 20,851,820 --- 11,074,716 --- 2,421,653 --- 6,669,666 --- 685,785 --- 2005 22,556,046 8.2 11,327,873 2.3 2,588,605 6.9 7,820,842 17.3 818,726 19.4 2010 25,145,561 20.6 11,397,345 2.9 2,886,825 19.2 9,460,921 41.8 1,400,470 104.2 2015 27,000,199 29.5 11,599,884 4.7 3,094,388 27.8 10,698,906 60.4 1,607,021 134.3 2020 28,921,650 38.7 11,752,527 6.1 3,295,218 36.1 12,047,446 80.6 1,826,459 166.3 2025 30,905,192 48.2 11,840,265 6.9 3,484,786 43.9 13,520,940 102.7 2,059,201 200.3 2030 32,927,245 57.9 11,850,199 7.0 3,658,975 51.1 15,106,347 126.5 2,311,724 237.1 2035 34,962,746 67.7 11,788,395 6.4 3,814,605 57.5 16,772,258 151.5 2,587,488 277.3 2040 37,022,513 77.6 11,676,168 5.4 3,951,928 63.2 18,511,750 177.6 2,882,667 320.3 2045 39,125,589 87.6 11,530,632 4.1 4,072,933 68.2 20,337,984 204.9 3,184,040 364.3 2050 41,311,221 98.1 11,376,567 2.7 4,182,147 72.7 22,270,859 233.9 3,481,648 407.7

*Anglo, Black, and Other excludes Hispanic counts. Source: 2012 The Office of the Texas State Demographer

COUNTY TO COUNTY MIGRATION Out-Migration. Using Internal Revenue Service (IRS) information regarding changes in residences between two filing years 2010 and 2011, statistics regarding moving in and out of counties can reveal patterns of migration as well as patterns of out-of-state and foreign migration to and from selected counties. During this time, the Heart of Texas Region reported that 113,811 total tax returns were matched to tabulate outflow migration. Of these returns approximately 6.6 percent showed a change in residences by moving out from their originating county in 2010 to another county in 2011. Of these who moved out of their original county, 77.8 percent moved to another county within Texas, while 21.9 percent moved to a different state but within the U.S. Those who moved from their originating county in the year 2010 to a foreign country in 2011 was approximately 0.3 percent. The IRS county migration data reports income by the number of returns and the number of exemptions. The number of returns - as a unit of analysis - may be used as a proxy for household income and the number of exemptions may be used as a proxy for the number of individuals in a family. Using the number of returns for household income, the Heart of Texas Region overall has an average household earning of $45,345. Of those households which remained in the same area, an average non-migrating household income of $46,130 was reported during the period 2010 to 2011. The total income earned by 7,471 households leaving the Region was $255,315,000 which represents an average income of $34,174. The top 5 counties showing the most households and their average income leaving Heart of Texas Region to other counties during 2010 to 2011 were:

TOP COUNTIES RECEIVING HOUSEHOLDS FROM THE REGION COUNTY AND STATE HOUSEHOLDS MOVING OUT AVERAGE INCOME MOVING OUT

DALLAS COUNTY 435 $31,278 BELL COUNTY 417 $32,609

TARRANT COUNTY 416 $34,163 HARRIS COUNTY 283 $32,774 TRAVIS COUNTY 249 $28,735

Source: Heart of Texas Workforce Commission, 2015



In-Migration. During the period 2010 to 2011, there were approximately 113,903 total tax returns matched to calculate inflow migration. Of these returns approximately 6.6 percent showed a change in residences by moving in from their originating county in 2009 to a county in the region in 2010. Of these who moved into the region from another county, 72.9 percent moved from other counties in Texas, while 26.6 percent moved from a county in a different state but within the U.S. Those who moved into the region during the 2010-2011 period from a foreign country was approximately 0.5 percent. Using the number of returns as a proxy for household income, the Heart of Texas Region overall has an average household earnings of $45,466. Those households which remained in the same region had an average reported non-migrating household income of $46,130 during the period 2010 to 2011. Total income earned by 7,563 households entering the region was $273,298,000 which represents an average income of $36,136. The top 5 counties showing the most households and their average income migrating into Heart of Texas from other counties during 2010 to 2011 were:

Change in Aggregated Earnings. Gains and losses of residential earnings and buying power due to migration can be reflected in observed differences in aggregate dollars entering and leaving an area. County to county migration information from the IRS shows a net change for the Heart of Texas Region of $17,983,000. A positive value represents an increase in earnings for an area and a negative value represents a loss of income during the 2010 - 2011 period. Vital Statistics. According to the Texas Department of State Health Services for vital statistics for the year 2013, the Heart of Texas Region had a total of 4,795 live births which represents a live birth rate of 13.4 births for every 1,000 persons in the study area compared to a statewide rate of 14.6 births per 1,000 persons in the population. The area had a total of 3,409 deaths representing a rate of 9.5 for every 1,000 persons compared to a statewide rate of 6.7.

TOP COUNTIES LOSING HOUSEHOLDS TO THE REGION

COUNTY AND STATE HOUSEHOLDS MOVING IN AVERAGE INCOME MOVING IN TARRANT COUNTY 415 $39,082

BELL COUNTY 381 $39,055 DALLAS COUNTY 349 $29,097 HARRIS COUNTY 260 $39,762

JOHNSON COUNTY 178 $33,039 Source: is there a source for this?

2013 NUMBER OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS FOR COUNTIES AND REGION 2013 TOTAL POPULATION 2013 BIRTHS 2013 DEATHS

TEXAS 26,448,193 387, 110/14.6 per 1,000 178,501/6.7 per 1,000 BOSQUE 18,454 200 239

FALLS 17,492 214 179 FREESTONE 20,078 387 221

HILL 35,239 387 415 LIMESTONE 23,320 275 270

MCLENNAN 242,430 3,516 2,085 HOT REGION 357, 014 4,795/13.4 per 1,000 3,409/9.5 per 1,000 Source: Texas Department of State Health Services, Nov. 2015



WORKFORCE + EMPLOYMENT Local Workforce Board. The counties in the study area are members of the Heart of Texas Workforce Solutions local workforce board area. http://www.hotworkforce.com/ Civilian Labor Force (CLF). The most recent civilian labor force estimates from TWC for Texas in September 2014 is 13,044,241 which is an increase in the labor force of 162,375 persons since September 2013. This represents a 1.3 percent change in Texas during this time period. These estimates are not seasonally adjusted. The Heart of Texas Region had a civilian labor force of 167,254 for September 2014 which was a change of -1,329 in CLF since September 2013. This change represented a decrease of -0.8 percent for the study area. For another glimpse into TWC/LMI's Texas and County information, link to: http://www.tracer2.com/cgi/dataanalysis/ AreaSelection.asp?tableName=Labforce.


72.1% 68.6% 72.2% 74.9%62.2%

79.3%

17.2% 23.8% 19.2% 16.4%29.1%

14.6%10.5% 7.5% 8.3% 8.5% 8.0% 6.0%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


C L A S S O F W O R K E R BY C O U N T Y

Self-employed workers in own notincorporated business

Federal, state, or local governmentworkers

Private wage and salary workers

http://www.hotworkforce.com/

http://www.tracer2.com/cgi/dataanalysis/%20AreaSelection.asp?tableName=Labforce




30.3%24.6% 27.9% 26.0% 29.4% 31.6%

21.3%

22.2%21.7%

16.9%

21.3% 18.7%

20.3%21.2% 17.2%

26.2%19.4%

25.7%

12.4%15.5% 19.0% 15.0% 14.0%

10.3%

15.7% 16.5% 14.2% 16.0% 15.8% 13.8%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


O C C U PAT I O N S BY C O U N T Y

Production, transportation, andmaterial moving occupations

Natural resources, construction, andmaintenance occupations

Sales and office occupations

Service occupations

Management, business, science, andarts occupations



Employment by Major Industry Sector. The most recent employment data from TWC by major industrial sector for the Heart of Texas Region compared to Texas are shown below in a table for two years. The Department of Labor calls these major categories "Super Sectors". One advantage in reviewing employment changes at broad industrial levels is that it allows for a unique snapshot of major differences in the total employment for a selected study area when compared to any larger statewide trend. When employment changes at a higher rate than the State, there may be comparative advantages in the local economy which are driving these changes. Conversely, when change is at a lower rate, then the Super Sector is showing less change in comparison to the State and may consequently have a smaller comparative change impact.

EMPLOYMENT BY MAJOR INDUSTRY SECTOR FOR THE REGION, STATE, AND NATION REGION EMPLOYMENT STATEWIDE EMPLOYMENT U.S. EMPLOYMENT

INDUSTRY SECTOR 2013

1ST QTR 2014

1ST QTR EMP CHG

PCT CHG

2013 1ST QTR

2014 1ST QTR

EMP CHG

PCT CHG

2013 1ST QTR

2014 1ST QTR

EMP CHG

PCT CHG

TOTAL, ALL INDUSTRIES 132,021 131,999 -22 -0.02 10,845,323 11,141,603 296,280 2.73 131,517,074 133,753,215 2,236,141 1.70

NATURAL RESOURCES & MINING 2,196 2,170 -26 -1.18 337,145 350,403 13,258 3.93 1,855,330 1,894,038 38,708 2.09

CONSTRUCTION 8,399 8,410 11 0.13 626,857 654,767 27,910 4.45 5,571,067 5,814,311 243,244 4.37

MANUFACTURING 16,869 16,973 104 0.62 872,173 877,912 5,739 0.66 11,927,768 12,049,075 121,307 1.02

TRADE, TRANSPORT. & UTILITIES 25,033 25,269 236 0.94 2,276,695 2,340,218 63,523 2.79 26,328,141 26,804,001 475,860 1.81

INFORMATION 1,345 1,362 17 1.26 204,861 208,239 3,378 1.65 2,817,221 2,847,807 30,586 1.09

FINANCIAL ACTIVITIES GROUP 6,993 6,940 -53 -0.76 665,366 680,338 14,972 2.25 7,592,075 7,652,586 60,511 0.80

PROF., BUSINESS & OTHER SVCS 10,650 10,607 -43 -0.40 1,438,895 1,511,156 72,261 5.02 18,176,217 18,696,877 520,660 2.86

EDUCATION & HEALTH SVCS. 36,725 36,218 -507 -1.38 2,558,275 2,605,099 46,824 1.83 31,859,028 32,147,051 288,023 0.90

LEISURE & HOSPITALITY GROUP 12,897 12,999 102 0.79 1,118,430 1,162,449 44,019 3.94 13,916,621 14,346,560 429,939 3.09

OTHER SERVICES 3,227 3,492 265 8.21 302,785 309,211 6,426 2.12 4,108,134 4,177,661 69,527 1.69

PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 6,807 6,623 -184 -2.70 439,011 437,267 -1,744 -0.40 7,157,368 7,110,694 -46,674 -0.65

Source: is there a source for this?



Compared to Texas, the table above shows employment sectors in Heart of Texas changed at a higher rate for Other Services between 1st quarter 2013 and 1st quarter 2014. During that same time period, area employment for Natural Resources & Mining, Construction, Manufacturing, Trade, Transport & Utilities, Information, Financial Activities Group, Professional, Business & Other Services, Education & Health Services, Leisure & Hospitality Group and Public Administration changed at a lower rate when compared to Texas. Quarterly Workforce Indicators. The Quarterly Workforce Indicators (QWI) are derived from State administrative records and basic demographic information from the Census Bureau through a program called Local Employment Dynamics. Employment totals from the QWI are not exactly comparable with those from other sources. Generally, coverage and definitions differ between the QWI and data about establishments from administrative records (e.g., the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages or QCEW), and about workers from surveys (e.g., the decennial census, the American Community Survey, and the Current Population Survey or CPS.) More specifically, the QWI capture the complexity of workforce dynamics. Because the LED data from which the QWI are derived include all the jobs a worker holds in each quarter, multiple definitions of employment are possible (just as there are multiple definitions of unemployment). The definitions include: (1) All jobs held in a quarter, regardless of length of time the job is held (2) Jobs held at the beginning of a quarter (3) Jobs held at the end of a quarter and (4) Jobs held for a full quarter (the most stable measure of employment). For more information go to www.texasindustryprofiles.com/apps/led/QWI.asp.

QUARTERLY WORKFORCE INDICATORS FOR THE REGION 2ND QTR 2012 3RD QTR 2012 4TH QTR 2012 1ST QTR 2013 2ND QTR 2013

TOTAL EMPLOYMENT 124,093 124,183 130,723 127,955 128,795 NET JOB FLOW 674 72 1,497 -505 -112 JOB CREATION 5,575 4,777 5,401 5,201 4,871

NEW HIRES 20,078 20,744 18,352 21,308 22,430 SEPARATIONS 21,507 22,729 18,912 24,150 24,679

AVG MONTHLY EARNING $3,335.83 $3,350.48 $3,501.76 $3,438.76 $3,443.33 AVG NEW HIRE EARNING $2,157.54 $2,108.95 $2,029.84 $2,111.92 $2,010.16

Source: Census Bureau Quarterly Workforce Indicators (QWI)

QUARTERLY WORKFORCE INDICATORS FOR THE REGION 2ND QTR 2012 3RD QTR 2012 4TH QTR 2012 1ST QTR 2013 2ND QTR 2013

TOTAL EMPLOYMENT 10,498,414 10,506,657 10,573,440 10,818,207 10,831,279 NET JOB FLOW 81,089 14,813 98,785 77,318 12,985 JOB CREATION 557,802 434,995 479,012 520,792 466,624

NEW HIRES 1,845,680 1,829,639 1,607,960 1,882,310 1,993,202 SEPARATIONS 1,974,200 1,983,937 1,692,017 2,018,394 2,158,042

AVG MONTHLY EARNING $4,191.00 $4,228.00 $4,610.00 $4,305.00 $4,348.00 AVG NEW HIRE EARNING $2,925.00 $2,768.00 $2,666.00 $2,914.00 $2,816.00

Source: Census Bureau Quarterly Workforce Indicators (QWI)

http://www.texasindustryprofiles.com/apps/led/QWI.asp



New Hires: New hires represent workers at a business who were not working at that same business in the previous quarter. These data answer the question of which industries are doing the most hiring. The data does not say anything about job quality, simply hiring activity. New hires as a percent of total employment points to the employment volatility of an industry. Although a high percentage of new hires could indicate rapid hiring activity typically higher numbers represent more volatile, high turnover industries.

NUMBER AND PERCENT OF NEW HIRES FOR THE REGION BY INDUSTRY

TOP 10 INDUSTRIES HIRING 2ND QUARTER 2013 NEW HIRES AS A PERCENTAGE OF

TOTAL EMPLOYMENT NEW HIRES

72 ACCOMMODATION AND FOOD SERVICES 26% 4,051 56 ADMINISTRATIVE & SUPPORT, WASTE MANAGEMENT & REMEDIATION SERV. 30% 3,259

44-45 RETAIL TRADE 18% 3,120 62 HEALTH CARE AND SOCIAL ASSISTANCE 12% 2,692

61 EDUCATIONAL SERVICES 11% 2,091 31-33 MANUFACTURING 10% 1,848

23 CONSTRUCTION 16% 1,556 42 WHOLESALE TRADE 11% 613

52 FINANCE AND INSURANCE 8% 507 81 OTHER SERVICES (EXCEPT PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION) 13% 504


Stable New Hires. Stable new hires are those workers that were employed for a full quarter at the same business. This means they were also employed for at least part of the quarter before and part of the following quarter. Stable separations are workers who had a job for at least one full quarter before the job ended. The data does not distinguish between voluntary and involuntary separations. Stable hires and separations demonstrate labor market churn even among steady workforce participants.

NUMBER AND PERCENT OF STABLE NEW HIRES AND STABLE SEPARATIONS FOR THE REGION BY INDUSTRY

TOP 10 INDUSTRIES WITH HIGHEST TURNOVER 2ND QUARTER 2013

PERCENT OF TOTAL EMPLOYMENT IN EACH INDUSTRY

STABLE NEW HIRES

STABLE SEPARATIONS

72 ACCOMMODATION AND FOOD SERVICES 18% 1,620 1,573 56 ADMINISTRATIVE AND SUPPORT AND WASTE

MANAGEMENT AND REMEDIATION SERVICES 18% 915 991

71 ARTS, ENTERTAINMENT, AND RECREATION 12% 120 96 44-45 RETAIL TRADE 11% 1,322 1,403

11 AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY, FISHING AND HUNTING 11% 79 66 23 CONSTRUCTION 11% 726 787

81 OTHER SERVICES (EXCEPT PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION) 10% 330 278 62 HEALTH CARE AND SOCIAL ASSISTANCE 9% 1,521 1,766

53 REAL ESTATE AND RENTAL AND LEASING 9% 108 125 48-49 TRANSPORTATION AND WAREHOUSING 8% 194 214




Average Monthly Earnings. The QWI also show average monthly earnings for all workers and for new hires only. Industries where new hires earn a lower percentage relative to all workers generally have more jobs in which seniority or industry specific knowledge command a wage premium. The more new hires earn relative to all workers is an indication that the required skills can be more readily learned or more transferable from another workplace.

AVERAGE MONTHLY EARNING FOR THE REGION BY INDUSTRY

TOP 10 INDUSTRIES WITH HIGHEST MONTHLY EARNINGS PERCENT FOR NEW HIRES 2ND QUARTER 2013 EARNINGS %

AVERAGE EARNINGS

FOR NEW HIRES

TOTAL MONTHLY AVERAGE EARNINGS

48-49 TRANSPORTATION AND WAREHOUSING 82% $ 2,820 $ 3,453 22 UTILITIES 80% $ 4,174 $ 5,235

55 MANAGEMENT OF COMPANIES AND ENTERPRISES 77% $ 2,397 $ 3,129 72 ACCOMMODATION AND FOOD SERVICES 74% $ 1,036 $ 1,393

92 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 72% $ 2,400 $ 3,339 23 CONSTRUCTION 72% $ 2,696 $ 3,756

81 OTHER SERVICES (EXCEPT PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION) 71% $ 1,823 $ 2,553 31-33 MANUFACTURING 70% $ 2,997 $ 4,255

21 MINING, QUARRYING, AND OIL AND GAS EXTRACTION 70% $ 4,073 $ 5,827 53 REAL ESTATE AND RENTAL AND LEASING 67% $ 2,248 $ 3,339

Source: is there a source for this? Highest Monthly Earnings. Clearly not all industries pay the same the chart below shows the top 10 highest paying industries in the Region. Employment growth in higher paying industries injects more money into the regional economy helping to increase living standards.

HIGHEST MONTHLY EARNINGS FOR THE REGION BY INDUSTRY TOP 10 INDUSTRIES WITH HIGHEST MONTHLY EARNINGS FOR NEW HIRES

2ND QUARTER 2013

AVERAGE EARNINGS

FOR NEW HIRES

TOTAL MONTHLY AVERAGE EARNINGS

22 UTILITIES $ 4,174 $ 5,236 21 Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas Extraction $ 4,073 $ 5,827 54 Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services $ 3,356 $ 5,455 31-33 Manufacturing $ 2,997 $ 4,255 52 Finance and Insurance $ 2,882 $ 4,638 48-49 Transportation and Warehousing $ 2,820 $ 3,454 23 Construction $ 2,696 $ 3,757 42 Wholesale Trade $ 2,492 $ 3,947 92 Public Administration $ 2,400 $ 3,339 55 Management of Companies and Enterprises $ 2,397 $ 3,129




Help Wanted Online (HWOL). Another way to view the vibrancy of the Heart of Texas Region labor market is through available online job postings. The Conference Board publishes a data series referred to as Help Wanted Online (HWOL) in which spidering technology is used to scour the internet and download job postings from individual company job and aggregator job boards such as Monster, Career Builder and Craigslist. Below are the occupation fields in which the largest number of online postings were found in the 2nd quarter 2014.

OCCUPATION FIELDS WITH THE LARGEST NUMBER OF ONLINE JOB POSTINGS TOP 5 OCCUPATIONS WITH MOST HELP WANTED ADVERTISEMENTS

2ND QUARTER 2014

TOTAL JOB POSTINGS FOR THE REGION

TOP 5 OCCUPATIONS WITH MOST HELP WANTED ADVERTISEMENTS

STATEWIDE 2ND QUARTER 2014

TOTAL JOB POSTINGS

STATEWIDE

MOTOR VEHICLE OPERATORS 996 COMPUTER SPECIALISTS 61,636 HEALTH DIAGNOSING & TREATING PRACTITIONERS 445 MOTOR VEHICLE OPERATORS 39,864

INFORMATION & RECORD CLERKS 356 HEALTH DIAGNOSING & TREATING

PRACTITIONERS 38,406

CONSTRUCTION TRADES WORKERS 349 INFORMATION & RECORD CLERKS 22,411 COMPUTER SPECIALISTS 296 OTHER MANAGEMENT OCCUPATIONS 20,494

Source: Help Wanted Online (HWOL) Occupations. The best source of occupational information at the county level is from the 2010 Bureau of Census/American Community Survey (ACS). The total number of persons 16 years of age or older who were employed in Heart of Texas during the 2010 Census estimates 148,689. The following presents a table of those employed by occupational categories for this Region compared to statewide percentages:

NUMBER AND PERCENT OF EMPLOYMENT BY OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORIES COUNT AREA

PERCENT STATEWIDE

PERCENT MANAGEMENT, PROFESSIONAL OCCUPATIONS 45,007 30.3 33.7

SERVICE OCCUPATIONS 27,186 18.3 16.9 SALES & OFFICE OCCUPATIONS 37,259 25.1 25.7

CONSTRUCTION, EXTRACTION OCCUPATIONS 17,599 11.8 11.6 PRODUCTION, TRANSPORTATION OCCUPATIONS 21,638 14.6 12.1

Source: 2010 Bureau of Census/American Community Survey (ACS))



Class of Worker. Another way to view the types of workers in an area's labor force is by class of worker. According to the 2010 Bureau of Census/American Community Survey (ACS) estimates, the area had 111,845 employees who were private wage and salary workers representing 75.2 percent of all workers. The Region had another 25,575 persons who were government workers or 17.2 percent, 11,064 who were self-employed workers or 7.4 percent and 205 who were unpaid family workers representing 0.1 percent. This compares to the Texas statewide distribution of 77.9 percent for private wage and salary workers, 14.7 percent for government workers, 7.2 percent for self-employed, and 0.2 percent for unpaid family workers.


Unemployment. According to TWC unemployment figures for September 2014 the Heart of Texas Region had an unemployment estimate of 8,382 persons which represents a rate of 5.0 compared to a Texas statewide unemployment rate of 5.0 for the same month. For the study area these estimates represent a decrease from September 2013 unemployment rate of 6.1 percent. The Texas statewide unemployment rate was 6.2 for September 2013. For the latest unemployment rates, see TWC's LMI website - Unemployment Rates (LAUS): http://www.tracer2.com/cgi/ dataanalysis/AreaSelection.asp?tableName=Labforce and for a description of methodology link to: http://www.tracer2.com/article.asp?ARTICLEID=148. Reporting Establishments. The TWC indicates 7,103 business reporting units operating in the Heart of Texas Region in the first quarter of 2014 with an average of 18.58 workers per unit. Average firm size makes a difference for job hunting and job development strategy because larger firms tend to have better defined ports of entry and in-house training capabilities. Although definitions vary greatly, small business can be defined as less than 50 workers and medium sized is 250 or less. The Texas average is 18.07 workers per unit. Regions with higher than average number of workers per unit tend to be

72.1% 68.6% 72.2% 74.9%62.2%

79.3%

17.2% 23.8% 19.2% 16.4%29.1%

14.6%

10.5% 7.5% 8.3% 8.5% 8.0% 6.0%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


C L A S S O F W O R K E R BY C O U N T Y

Self-employed workers in own notincorporated business

Federal, state, or local governmentworkers

Private wage and salary workers

http://www.tracer2.com/cgi/%20dataanalysis/AreaSelection.asp?tableName=Labforce

http://www.tracer2.com/cgi/%20dataanalysis/AreaSelection.asp?tableName=Labforce

http://www.tracer2.com/article.asp?ARTICLEID=148



dominated economically by a few very large employers. Commuting to Work. According to the 2010 Bureau of Census/American Community Survey (ACS) the number of workers 16 and over commuting to work, has a number of implications for transportation and municipal services. The Heart of Texas Region had a total of 116,875 or 80.5 percent who drove their car to work alone, 18,810 or 13.0 percent who car pooled, 543 or 0.4 percent used public transportation, 3,888 or 2.7 percent who walked to work, 1,522 or 1.0 percent of regional workers who used other means to work, and 3,584 or 2.5 percent who worked at home. These methods of commuting to work compare to the Texas statewide results by: car alone (79.3%), car pool (11.6%), public transportation (1.6%), walked (1.7%), other means (1.9%), and worked at home (3.9%). Employers by Employee Size Class. Employer contact information and employee size ranges are collected and updated by the InfoGroup, Inc. The most current release is a product called the Employer Database 2014 2nd Edition. This product shows that the area had approximately 2,861 establishments which employed 10 or more employees. Of these employers, approximately 0.2 percent employed over 1000 employees. 0.5 percent employed between approximately 500 and 999 employees, 7.2 percent employed between approximately 100 and 499 employees, 11.8 percent employed between 50 and 99 employees, 33.0 percent employed between 20 and 49 employees, and 47.2 percent employed between approximately 10 and 19 employees.

Top 10 Manufacturers for the 6 County Heart of Texas Region Source: Heart of Texas Workforce Solutions, 2016

1. Central Texas Iron Works 2. Corporate Graphics Intl 3. Fleetwood Homes 4. Frazier & Frazier Industries 5. Knife River Corp.

6. O-i 7. Packaging Corporation of America 8. Pilgrim's Pride Corp 9. Smead Manufacturing 10. Time Manufacturing Co.

Top 19 Employers for the Waco MSA Source: greater Waco Chamber, 2015 1. Baylor University 3,204 2. Waco ISD 2,401 3. Providence Healthcare Network 2,385 4. Baylor Scott & White Hillcrest 2,295

Medical Center 5. L-3 Platform Integration 1,850 6. City of Waco 1,516 7. H-E-B (all locations) 1,500 8. Midway ISD 1,350 9. Wal-Mart Stores 1,098 10. Sanderson Farms Inc. 1,041

11. McLennan County 949 12. Examination Management

Services, Inc. (EMSI) 850 13. McLennan Community College 837 14. Aramark 810 15. Veterans Administration 800

Medical Center 16. Texas State Technical 768

College-Waco 17. Mars Chocolate 700 18. Allergan 675



Day Care Facilities. The total number of licensed day care facilities were 176 with a total capacity of 13,393. Link to http://www.dfps.state.tx.us/About_DFPS/Data_Books_and_Annual_Reports/2012/ county_charts.asp for further information. INCOME Personal Income. According to the most recent data released by the BEA 2011, the Heart of Texas's total personal income, excluding farm, was $11,677,407,000 which represented an increase of $435,317,000 when compared to the 2010 total personal income, excluding farm, of $ 11,242,090,000. For Statewide personal income, the total of $965,236,295,000 for 2010 and $1,030,749,973,000 for the year 2011, shows an increase of $65,513,678,000. This indicates that the Heart of Texas Region has a personal income showing a rate change of 3.9 percent compared to the statewide income at a rate change of 6.8 percent for the same period. Income from all government and government enterprises for the area was a total of $1,452,133,000 for the year 2011. This was a decrease of -0.1 percent from the 2010 figure of $1,452,932,000. Texas statewide had an increase of 1.8 percent for government income. Military income, excluding federal civilian income, for 2011 was $44,278,000 compared to $45,593,000 in 2010 for the study area. This was a decrease of -2.9 percent compared to a statewide change of no change percent for the same period. For further information link to: http://www.bea.gov/bea/regional/reis. Per Capita Income. Total personal income is a widely used measure of regional economic health while per capita income is generally used to compare the relative well-being of residents across areas (not accounting for differences in area cost of living). The per capita personal income for 2011 was $33,158 in the Heart of Texas Region while Texas statewide had a per capita income of $40,270. For more information on this data, please go to http://www.bea.gov/bea/regional/ reis. Per Capita Income. Total personal income is a widely used measure of regional economic health while per capita income is generally used to compare the relative well-being of residents across areas (not accounting for differences in area cost of living). The per capita personal income for 2011 was $33,158 in Heart of Texas while Texas statewide had a per capita income of $40,270. For more information on this data, please go to http://www.bea.gov/bea/regional/ reis. Government Transfer Payments: The Heart of Texas Region received over $2,707,510,000 in transfer of payments in FY2011 which reflected a $7,659 per capita transfer payment compared to the Texas per capita payment of $6,249. Transfer payments include the total amount of government allocations to people who qualify for income assistance. This consists largely of supplemental security income payments, family assistance, general assistance payments, food stamp payments, and other assistance payments, including emergency assistance. For more information on this data, please go to http://www.bea.gov/bea/regional/reis. Residence Adjustment: Some areas function as major employment centers and others serve as "bedroom communities". This means that residents may work in one region but live, pay taxes and spend most of their income in their resident region. The degree to which a regional area serves as a bedroom community can be measured by a "residence adjustment" to the area personal income. The residence adjustment in the Heart of Texas Region was $336,753 in 2010. By 2011 the adjustment represented a decrease to $278,374. A negative number implies that workers commute into the region to earn income but do not reside there. Growth over time of negative residence adjustments generally implies an eroding tax base for the region. Similarly, a positive figure implies that on balance the region exports jobs and income to residents of other regions. For more information on this data, please go to

http://www.dfps.state.tx.us/About_DFPS/Data_Books_and_Annual_Reports/2012/%20county_charts.asp

http://www.dfps.state.tx.us/About_DFPS/Data_Books_and_Annual_Reports/2012/%20county_charts.asp

http://www.bea.gov/bea/regional/reis

http://www.bea.gov/bea/regional/%20reis

http://www.bea.gov/bea/regional/%20reis



HOTEDD Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy 2015-2020 47

http://www.bea.gov/bea/regional/reis. Average Weekly Wage: TWC reported an average weekly wage during 1st quarter 2013 for all covered wages and salaried employment in the Heart of Texas Region to be $749.70. Average weekly wages for 1st quarter 2014 was $772.45, an increase of 3.0 percent. This is compared to an increase of 4.6 percent statewide for the same period of time. The Texas statewide average weekly wage in the 1st quarter of 2014 was $1,062.65. These wage data are the result of the reported quarterly wages and salaries paid by employers divided by 13 weeks. For the most current information, link to: http://www.tracer2.com/cgi/dataanalysis/AreaSelection.asp?tableName=Industry Personal Income by Place of Residence: Personal income by place of residence, based on the 2011 Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) estimates was roughly $54,316 for the Heart of Texas Region. This compares to $70,777 statewide. This figure is much higher than the per capita income level because it includes all wage earners living within a single household. Also, income data from BEA will be different than income data from other agencies due to that fact the BEA includes other sources of income such as farm wages, dividends, interest, rent and transfer payments. For more information on this data, please go to http://www.bea.gov/bea/regional/reis. Poverty Population: The U.S. Department of Census estimated a 2011 poverty population for the Heart of Texas Region for people of all ages at 66,846 persons. That figure represents 20.3 percent of the non-institutional population compared to a Texas percentage of 17.0 percent for people of all ages. The estimated number of people under the age of 18 in the study area in poverty was 23,295 in 2011. This figure was 7.1 percent of all people under 18 in the study area compared to Texas statewide which was 6.7 percent of all people under 18 as estimated in 2011. According to the 2011 Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates of the Census Bureau, the number of families living below poverty status in 2011 were 11,737 which was 17.6 percent of all families in the study area. This compared to 19.5 percent of all families statewide living in poverty status in 2011. The total number of individuals living below poverty status was 34,981 in 2011 which was 10.0 percent of all individuals in the study area. This compared to 7.1 percent of all individuals living below poverty status statewide. For the most recent Poverty information, see: http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/saipe/county.html . Gross Retail Sales: Income can be viewed in several ways and under different definitions. Per capita income tends to have a direct relationship with the growth of gross sales and most service sector industries in an area. Gross sales for the Region estimated by the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts were $1,099,659,102 in the 1st quarter 2013 which represented a decrease of -0.8 percent to $1,091,032,282.00 by the 1st quarter 2014. The statewide change for the same period was an increase of 5.3 percent in gross sales. The total number of reporting outlets for the same period was 3,395 in the 1st quarter 2013 and 3,235 in the 1st quarter 2014. This Region had a decrease of -4.7 percent in the study area compared to the statewide change for the same period of a decrease of -2.4 percent. For the most recent Gross Retail Sales information, please see: http://www.window.state.tx.us/taxinfo/sales/.


http://www.tracer2.com/cgi/dataanalysis/AreaSelection.asp?tableName=Industry


http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/saipe/county.html

http://www.window.state.tx.us/taxinfo/sales/



HOUSING Stakeholders assert that the cities and counties in the Heart of Texas Region are good places to live: residents feel safe, know their neighbors and the other folks in town, often live within walking distance to schools or businesses, and report that overall folks of all races and backgrounds have access to housing, jobs, and other opportunities. Housing needs to be of decent quality and range of affordability. Neighborhoods need to be safe and traversable by foot. Communities need to be places where opportunities exist and a person working hard is able to better himself or herself, and local economies need to be strong enough to support jobs and services. Some of the challenges are cultural. While tremendous progress has been made and stakeholder reports were overall positive, racism and racial discrimination are still felt in the Region to varying degrees, and must continue to be taken seriously and deliberately addressed in order for communities to see the kind of engagement and advancement opportunities recommended elsewhere in the Regional Strategies. While it is encouraging and communities should feel proud of stakeholders’ reports that for the most part all races have equal access to housing choices, it is sobering that there was also great agreement that housing choice was sharply limited by other factors. Folks around the Region identified great need for quality housing of all varieties, but especially affordable housing. Private sector housing in the affordable range was all too often substandard, subsidized housing was full, and even market-rate housing was not seen as plentiful, particularly for families needing multiple bedrooms. Perhaps the greatest challenges identified in the Region, however, are both the communities’ and residents’ financial limitations. While racial segregation of neighborhoods is waning, poorer neighborhoods generally had lower quality infrastructure and code enforcement issues that communities are struggling to address because of fiscal constraints. Similarly residents themselves reported that while access to opportunities exist across racial lines, those opportunities are relatively few and more jobs, training, and other opportunities would be needed in order for more residents to improve themselves and their families’ circumstances. Bright spots certainly exist. Some communities reported almost no racial bias. Other communities cited community work, such as joint community planning processes, as making strides in bringing people together. Towns are making progress in cleaning up, improving code enforcement and providing services to poorer areas, while still other areas are seeing greater economic opportunities overall. Household Units and Size: The total number of housing units in 2011 in the Heart of Texas Region according the Census was 147,502 with an average household size of 2.7 persons. The average household size for Texas was 2.9 persons for the same period. The home ownership rate for this area was 65.2 percent compared to Texas statewide which had a rate of 64.5 percent. While in Texas, the percent of households with persons under 18 years of age in 2000 was 30.7 percent, this study area had a percent of 29.1. The percent of households with persons 65 years of age or older was 14.9 percent in Texas statewide while 21.3 percent of the Heart of Texas Region had households with individuals 65 years of age and older. Types of Structures: While Texas had approximately 79.4 percent of the housing units in the category of one detached structures in 2010 according to the Census, the study area had approximately 77.6



percent. Mobile homes in the area made up 11.7 percent when compared to a statewide percentage of 9.2 percent. More recently built housing structures in the area shows new development has taken place in the Region. The total number of new housing structures built between 2000 and 2010 was 19,706 or 13.4 percent in Heart of Texas compared to 20.6 percent statewide. Owner and Renter Occupied: According to the 2010 Census, the percent of owner-occupied units with a value of $100,000 or greater in the Heart of Texas Region was 47.1 percent compared to 62.8 percent for the State. The percent of renter-occupied units with rent values of $500 per month or greater was 74.8 percent as compared to the Texas percentage of 82.9 percent. For this area, the total number of renter-occupied housing units was 43,341 which represented 34.8 percent of all occupied housing units in 2010. This compares to a Texas statewide percentage of 35.5 percent for the same period.



0.2% 0.0% 0.5% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0%18.0% 12.2%

29.2%19.4% 23.4%

5.9%

3.8% 10.0%

4.2%6.6% 6.5%

23.6%

78.0% 77.9%66.1% 73.8% 70.0% 70.4%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


T Y P E S O F H O U S I N G U N I T S I N T H E H O T C O G R E G I O N

Single-unit structures

Multi-unit structure

Mobile homes

Boat, RV, van, etc

31.5%

32.5%

26.1%

29.9%

29.1%

29.6%

11.9%

15.4%

11.5%

14.5%

15.4%

12.2%

38.0%

43.0%

38.7%

43.7%

43.5%

54.6%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Bosque

Falls

Freestone

Hill

Limestone

McLennan

O C C U PA N T S W I T H H O U S I N G B U R D E N I N T H E H O T C O G R E G I O N

Owners with mortgage

Owners without mortgage

Renters



EDUCATION Enrollment: School enrollment data from the 2008-2012 American Community Survey, Bureau of the Census showed that there were 99,133 persons in the population who were 3 years of age and older and enrolled in school in the study area during the census collection period. Of this population, the following table shows a breakdown of what types of schools persons were enrolled compared to similar statewide information:

NUMBER AND PERCENT OF SCHOOL ENROLLMENT BY TYPE OF SCHOOL BY REGION AND STATE

TYPE OF SCHOOL COUNT REGION PERCENT

STATEWIDE PERCENT

NURSERY SCHOOL OR PRESCHOOL 5,275 5.3 6.2 KINDERGARTEN 5,234 5.3 5.7

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (GRADES 1-8) 37,874 38.2 42.8 HIGH SCHOOL (GRADES 9-12) 18,931 19.1 21.0

COLLEGE OR GRADUATE SCHOOL 31,819 32.1 24.3 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2008-2012 American Community Survey

Educational Attainment: The total number of persons 25 years of age or older who responded to the level of educational attainment question during the 2008-2012 American Community Survey, Bureau of the Census was 219,425. Of those persons, the following presents a table on various levels of educational attainment for this Region compared to statewide percentages:

NUMBER AND PERCENT OF EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT BY REGION AND BY STATE

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT COUNT REGION PERCENT

STATEWIDE PERCENT

LESS THAN 9TH GRADE 17,274 7.9 9.7 9TH TO 12TH GRADE, NO DIPLOMA 24,855 11.3 9.6

H.S. GRADUATE (INC. EQUIV.) 66,141 30.1 25.3 SOME COLLEGE, NO DEGREE 51,447 23.4 22.8

ASSOCIATE DEGREE 18,028 8.2 6.4 BACHELOR'S DEGREE 27,987 12.8 17.5

GRADUATE OR PROF. DEGREE 13,530 6.2 8.7 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2008-2012 American Community Survey

Another useful grouping of these statistics shows that the percent of high school graduates or higher was 80.7 percent for the area compared to 80.7 percent for Texas. Also, the percent with Bachelor's degree or higher was 18.9 percent as compared to 26.2 percent for Texas.



TRANSPORTATION Across Texas and the United States, the increasing need for public and human services transportation continues to outstrip the funding available. Those individuals hit hardest by decreased funding are the transportation disadvantaged, those with limited transportation options due to disabilities, age, or income. HOTEDD supports the efforts of The Heart of Texas Council of Governments and its pursuit of planning and operational funding to increase the availability of public transit by implementing performance measures to evaluate effectiveness of service delivery. Since the 2011 adoption of the Heart of Texas Regionally Coordinated Transportation Plan, significant changes have occurred to the public transportation system that have had a negative effect on services to the Heart of Texas Region. At the time the 2011 plan was adopted, it was envisioned that vehicle maintenance and dispatch would be consolidated for the Region and be handled by the urban transit district in Waco (Waco Transit Service, or WTS.) The actual transportation services themselves were operated by four subcontractors, working under HOTCOG’s Rural Transit District (HOTRTD) direction and using HOTRTD’s rolling stock of vehicles. Over the past three years, that picture has changed dramatically. • HOTRTD no longer employs subcontractors but has taken the rural transit services in-house. • The centralized dispatch planned in the Transportation Plan was implemented, and has not been successful. • McLennan County, the largest of the counties served by has pulled out of the Rural Transit District, with the have the effect of drastically reducing funding to the rural district and therefore cutting transportation services. At the industrial level, the EDD and regional partners have been reviewing an initiative aimed at helping develop high-speed rail access to the area, which would link the Region with the State’s three largest metropolitan areas. Additionally, the Limestone County airport has just completed a significant expansion. The lighted runway is now 80 feet wide and 5,002 feet in length. This provides insured lands of most business class jets. Additionally, the airport boasts a new terminal and A/P service center.



ENVIRONMENT The Heart of Texas Region has shown significant advances in the realm of environmental awareness by its public and economic development agencies. Showcase LEED buildings have been constructed by the Greater Waco Chamber of Commerce and McLennan Community College that boast such features as recycled building materials and green roofs. Solid Waste reduction programs offered by the Heart of Texas Council of Governments have seen strong participation. Additionally, with the continued attainment status of its air quality, ongoing efforts to maintain its wetlands, and its plentiful supply of clean drinking water, the Region rates favorably among citizens, business and visitors alike. Of all of the environmental challenges facing the Region, air quality, has grown as a local issue and will become an even greater priority, especially if the standard for ground-level ozone is lowered from the current level of 75 parts per billion.

WATER As in most of Texas, the Heart of Texas Region is placing increasing emphasis on water management and drought Preparedness. Recent planning efforts as documented in the 2015 Heart of Texas Efficient Towns and Counties Co-op report entitled Efficient Towns and Counties Roadmap: Strategies for a Strong and Healthy Region, Counties and Towns, describe water management strategies including:

• PLANNING • Each entity should have a plan that identifies specific, quantifiable 5– and 10–year

targets for water savings. Plan should be based on the individual community’s characteristics such as

population, water supply, cost, and expected demand changes; and should be updated annually

• DEMAND MANAGEMENT TOOLS

o Increasing water rates for higher amounts (i.e. more for the 3rd extra 1000 than for the second)

o Limits on lawn watering and car--washing to certain days o Preferences for drip--type irrigation, water catchment systems and water–conserving

plumbing fixtures

• INFRASTRUCTURE o Management of municipal water distribution infrastructure, loss management and leak

control



Water supply varies throughout the Region, but overall, and at this time, there is an abundance of this important resource especially in McLennan County. For the rural counties, a summary is presented in the chart above by county of the total municipal and non-municipal water demands, compared to their available current water supplies and their resulting water surplus or need by decade. The water surpluses or needs shown for each of the participants are developed using growth projections that are based on trends between 2000 and 2010 and do not show high growth rates. If communities begin to experience higher economic and population growth, then water demands will increase and indicated water surpluses may not be adequate to meet the demand. The chart illustrates, water availability varies greatly in the Region, and counties with existing shortfalls are projected to grow further behind in the coming decades. As is projected for Texas as a whole, it is reasonable to assume that the growth projected for Bosque and Limestone Counties will be arrested by the lack of water. In other words, if the growth in population projected by current data would create such a huge water shortage as illustrated in the graph, it is reasonable to assume that the growth would not happen. Instead that growth would funnel toward other destinations where the water supply could accommodate it.



SURVEY OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT RESOURCES IN THE HEART OF TEXAS REGION Area economic development resources continue to grow and strengthen. Thanks to a number of economic and community development related efforts that have taken place in the last 5 years, including this most current CEDS process, a renewed and energized commitment to collaboration, sharing resources, realizing efficiencies and reducing redundancy has taken hold and is flourishing. The following is a list of organizations and projects, in addition to the Heart of Texas Economic Development District, that contribute to the strengthening fabric of economic development in the Heart of Texas region. ORGANIZATIONS

The Greater Waco Chamber of Commerce. The Greater Waco Chamber of Commerce serves as the lead economic development agency for Waco and McLennan County.

Professional Economic Developers, Economic or Industrial Development Corporations, and Chambers of Commerce. Until recently, the region was home to several professional economic developers. The past three years have seen the retirement and/or termination of experienced professionals who have been replaced by those with minimal traditional ED experience. Many are local folks with transferable skill sets transitioning from other fields. Cost savings and lack of trust for “professional” and “outsiders” seem to be driving this trend. Currently the cities of Bellmead, Clifton, Fairfield, Groesbeck, Hillsboro, Lorena, Teague, Meridian, McGregor, Mexia, Moody, and Waco have an EDC or IDC with paid economic development staff serving as the Executive Director of these organizations. A few small cities have EDC’s but do not have paid staff. McLennan County has retained the Greater Waco Chamber of Commerce to serve as the county’s professional economic developer. The McLennan County cities of Bellmead, Hewitt, Lacey-Lakeview, Lorena, Mart, McGregor, Moody, and West have Chambers of Commerce in varying states of functionality, as do the Bosque County cities of Clifton, Cranfills Gap, and Meridian; the Falls County cities of Marlin and Rosebud; the Freestone County cities of Fairfield and Teague; the Hill County cities of Hillsboro, Itasca and Whitney; and the Limestone County cities of Groesbeck, Kosse, Mexia and Thornton.

Area Economic Development Council (AEDC) of McLennan County. Members of the Area Economic Development Council (AEDC) of McLennan County include economic development representatives from each city including but not limited to EDC Directors and staff, Chamber Directors and staff, City staff, and staff from regional agencies. The group meets monthly.

U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) Small Business Development Centers (SBDC’s). There are two SBDCs serving the Heart of Texas region. The first can be found at McLennan Community College in Waco. The second, housed at Navarro College has two satellite locations in Mexia (Limestone County) and Fairfield (Freestone County). Both have been recognized for service excellence.



PROGRAMS, STUDIES & PROJECTS EDA funded Upjohn Institute 2014 Study for the City of Waco (Poverty Alleviation Economic

Development Recommendations). o Thanks to a grant from the Austin Regional Office of EDA, the City of Waco engaged the

W.E. Upjohn Institute for Unemployment Research to create a plan for the city to reduce poverty, increase labor force participation, and increase area income. This plan shed new light on existing programs encouraging their enhancement/expansion, and recommended additional strategies and economic development approaches to remediate generational poverty—a condition that stifles economic growth in the entire region but particularly in the counties of Falls, Hill, Limestone and McLennan. The plan was adopted by the City of Waco in the Summer of 2014. (See http://www. prosperwaco.org/wp-content/uploads/Upjohn-Report-May-2014.pdf).

The Prosper Waco Initiative.

o Launched in February 2015, in response to a number of needs, and as a response to the EDA funded Upjohn Institute Study for the City of Waco (Poverty Alleviation Economic Development Recommendations), Prosper Waco is an innovative approach to community work that consolidates and builds upon the efforts of existing nonprofits and community leaders to measurably improve the lives of the people of the Greater Waco community. This collective impact model brings together key leaders and organizations in the areas of education, health and financial security to comprehensively (1) identify and quantify challenges facing our community, (2) articulate a shared vision, (3) establish measurable goals, (4) facilitate implementation of strategies to address each challenge, (5) monitor progress against each goal, (6) share data and resources necessary to accomplish our collective goals, and (7) engage a broad spectrum of community partners, including recipients of services, in the design of its work.

o By encouraging collective impact strategies among leaders in city and county government, businesses, non-profits, healthcare, education, social services, foundations and churches, Prosper Waco intends to build on and steadily increase the effectiveness of current efforts that address community challenges. The strategy is to raise awareness among all members of the community, focus alignment of mutually reinforcing activities for more effective outcomes, and increase levels of engagement of individuals and organizations to bring about measurable and sustainable change in citizens’ health, education and financial security. (See http://www.prosperwaco.org/wp-content/uploads/Upjohn-Report-May-2014.pdf).

The Heart of Texas Efficient Towns and Counties Co-op (HOTETC). o As the first decade of the 2000’s drew to a close, communities throughout the Heart of

Texas region were experiencing common but serious challenges. These towns, which range from a few hundred to just over 8,000 in population, were experiencing slow or flat growth, fewer grant dollars, rising costs and increasing challenges with water/sewer and other systems. County governments were also concerned about these issues, not only in the towns but also in the unincorporated areas, and the rural water supply systems. These common issues and the need to seek solutions brought conversations, particularly at the regional level with the Heart of Texas Council of Governments. While some needs were immediate and practical – such as improved knowledge and management of water and sewer systems – other concerns were technical and required

http://www.prosperwaco.org/wp-content/uploads/Upjohn-Report-May-2014.pdf




research, and still others were subjective and cultural in nature. In 2011 the region agreed to pursue technical information, cultural inquiry and practical tools, and began formation of the Heart of Texas Efficient Towns and Counties Co-op (HOTETC).

o In 2012, the Co-op secured a federal planning grant anchored by locally-raised matching funds, and staffed the effort primarily using regional staff and contractors, and supplemented with expertise from technical consultants. Compared to a more turn-key, consultant-driven approach, this method cost less, strengthened local resources that could be tapped again over time, and leveraged deep familiarity with the region, its communities, and its people. The most important results included: significant increase in regional awareness and the importance of collaboration for realizing efficiencies at the community/individual citizen level, as well as an increased awareness of the challenges rural communities face and the choices they have in front of them in relationship to economic and community development matters. (See hoteddtx.com).

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS

1. HOTEDD and the McLennan County Small Business Development Center collaborate on service delivery to rural areas.

2. HOTEDD and the Navarro College Small Business Development Center collaborate on service delivery to rural areas. Specifically, the Navarro College SBDC is operating business counseling sites in Limestone and Freestone Counties.

3. HOTEDD and the Sam Houston State University Center for Rural Studies (Huntsville, TX) are

engaged in a number of projects that include economic development and small business/innovation and community development planning training for municipal staff and citizens of rural communities.

4. HOTEDD and HOTCOG have partnered with the Texas Governor’s Office and the University

of San Antonio (UTSA) SBDC Rural Business Program to bring the Texas Rural Challenge to the Heart of Texas Region from 2014-2019. This 3-day event takes place each June at the Waco Convention Center and brings over 400 economic development professional from rural and urban settings, from throughout Texas and the United States for two days of training, presentations, discussions, data collection, competitions and awards.

5. HOTEDD and the Texas Film Commission and the Texas Motion Picture Association are

working together to help the Heart of Texas region become the MOST film friendly region in the State of Texas by working to help every city in the region become officially “film friendly certified”.

6. HOTEDD and the Pioneers Youth Leadership Foundation are working together to help

youth in rural Texas develop into ethical leaders who are: 1) engaged in leading and building sustainable communities, and 2) possess at least a modicum of training and experience, a basic knowledge of resources available, and the support network needed to be positive agents of change. Pioneers Youth Leadership Foundation programs combine high



school curriculum and lesson plans with events outside the school setting in a learning-through action leadership and community engagement program. The program is fully funded by the foundation and is offered to students at all high schools in Texas at zero cost to the school or the students.

7. HOTEDD and Greater Waco Chamber are discussing a partnership and possible joint

application with EDA to conduct a feasibility study to market the Heart of Texas as a Veteran’s Live/Work/Play hub.

8. In May of 2015, the HOTETC Steering Committee voted not to disband at the conclusion of

the HUD Sustainable Communities grant work, but to continue to function as the lead regional community and economic development organization for the region.



DISASTER AND ECONOMIC INCIDENT PREPAREDNESS + ECONOMIC RESILIENCE IN THE HEART OF TEXAS REGION

DISASTER RELIEF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLANNING Whether a purely economic disruption, a natural or man-made disaster, unexpected shocks can severely affect a local economy. With the goal of mitigating the effects of economic incidents and supporting long-term recovery efforts, the Heart of Texas Economic Development District represents EDA as a community’s resource for disaster relief economic development planning and economic resilience planning. In addition, the EDD, and its regional partner the Heart of Texas Council of Governments, provide an important backbone of communication and other resources in the event of trouble. Guided by the work of the Rural Policy Research Institute (RUPRI) and the National Association of Development organizations (NADO), the HOTEDD Board of Directors and elected officials in the Heart of Texas region, recognize that the federal government cannot and should not assume full responsibility for achieving national and regional economic resilience. Indeed in these times of severe fiscal restrain engaging all resources and talents of regions and communities is the way to proceed. “There has to be an integration of responses and resources to support those areas that have inherent vulnerabilities and minimal capacity, especially across rural America” (RUPRI, 2012). The goal of HOTEDD is to assist in the building the economic resilience capacity of our communities, counties and region—specifically, to drive and support preparedness, response, and recovery efforts in line with each entities own vision for the future. ECONOMIC DISRUPTION

Economic Disruptions, whether due to closures, industry shocks, or larger-economy issues such as recession, inspire responses as follows:

1. The affected local jurisdiction(s) are always in charge.

2. Subject-matter experts form the second line of response, such as Workforce Solutions of the Heart of Texas holding job fairs, development of training programs for dislocated workers, etc.

3. HOTEDD supports local jurisdictions with data, technical assistance, identifying funding streams, and the brokering of supportive partnerships with outside agencies and regional partners such as other employers, real estate brokers, etc.

DISASTER PREPAREDNESS

The Heart of Texas Council of Governments Emergency Preparedness Team serves the Heart of Texas region with coordinated planning, drills, training, communication, and communications infrastructure.

As in the event of economic disruption, disasters create situations in which:

“When tragedy struck in

West, HOTCOG’s emergency preparedness team was there to help – and later,

HOTEDD and HOTCOG staff navigated the sea of

disaster funding to ensure we were able to recover economically as well as

physically.”

- Tommy Muska, Mayor City of West, Texas, May 2014



1. The affected local jurisdiction is always in charge.

2. Subject-matter experts – in this case, emergency preparedness staff, response teams, and nonprofits or charities who can respond to victims – form the second wave.

3. HOTEDD moves quickly to support the local jurisdictions and elected officials with technical assistance, training, and the brokering of supportive partnerships with outside agencies and regional partners such as other employers, real estate brokers, etc.

ECONOMIC RESILIENCE PLANNING

Recently, HOTEDD has become more proactive in regard to enhancing its own economic resilience planning and that of the communities and counties. To that charge, HOTEDD has begun an active dialogue with the Heart of Texas Emergency Preparedness and Homeland Security Division of the Heart of Texas Council of Governments and serves in an advisory capacity in regard to economic recovery and, more recently, resilience strategies. In order to successfully advise the Heart of Texas Emergency Preparedness and Homeland Security Division in these matters, it is important to understand that each county and city within the region has a state approved emergency management plan at the intermediate planning standard level or higher. Each of these plans address disaster recovery, including essential service and infrastructure restoration, and economic recovery. It is not an insignificant point that these plans are protected due to the sensitive nature of the information contained within and thus cannot be provided as an appendix to this CEDS. Specific information related to each community may be requested from the respective county’s Emergency Management Coordinator (EMC). Thus while the Heart of Texas Emergency Preparedness and Homeland Security Division of the Heart of Texas Council of Governments serves as the regional coordinator of emergency preparedness and planning activities, and HOTEDD serves as the regional coordinator of economic recovery and resilience strategies and activities, both are required to default to the county plan first and foremost when assisting an impacted jurisdiction. Once deemed safe, HOTEDD can activate economic recovery assistance.

HOTEDD is committed to making economic resilience planning a focal point for 2017-2018. According to NADO (June, 2015), “while there is no universal blueprint for building regional economic resilience” economic development organizations “should develop goals, strategies, and actions that can mitigate the effects of an economic incident and support long-term recovery efforts.” NADO also provides the following guidance in building a regional economic resilience plan which HOTEDD intends to follow:

1. Identify persistent economic challenges or deficiencies: What are the region’s economic “weak spots” (i.e., vulnerabilities)? Is there a specific asset deficiency (e.g., poorly educated workforce, excessive dependency on a single employer or industry, lack of transportation access/options, low levels of broadband availability and/or adoption, impediments hindering a firm's ability to gain access to the financial resources required to advance its business, major employers located in vulnerable areas)? Has a “planning horizon” been established (e.g., 10 to 15 years) for assessing economic vulnerabilities?

2. Prepare for disruptions by identifying “early-warning” tools: Does the region have an “anticipatory focus” that will help it react quickly when confronted with potential disruptions and challenges? Do community economic development profess-ionals work with their local/regional emergency managers to address the risks identified through hazard mitigation planning? Do community leaders employ mechanisms (e.g.,



scorecards, state of the region reports, economic dashboards) that offer a regularly updated assessment of the regional economy?

3. Build mechanisms that create flexibility: Do the local governments have detailed and tested disaster response and recovery plans? Do the local governments and major employers have access to “surge” capital/credit resources? Does the region have a good handle on its assets to help identify emerging economic sectors that may lead to a diversified economic base? Has the region established mechanisms to realign and retrain its workforce post-disruption?

4. Promote a positive vision for the region: Is the messaging about the region’s assets and opportunities positive (to encourage investments in both times of tranquility and disruption)? Do stakeholders understand that actions that build resilience are good for the regional economy whether or not an economic shock occurs, and have they reached consensus on a set of actions they can take proactively? Are economic shocks used as an opportunity to “re-vision” (i.e., reassess) the region’s economy?



HOTEDD CEDS EVALUATION FRAMEWORK The following performance measures will be used to evaluate the HOTEDD’s implementation of the Heart of Texas 2015-2020 CEDS. PERFORMANCE MEASURES The Heart of Texas Economic Development District will report CEDS performance measures on the GPRA form submitted to the EDA and will provide these figures on the HOTEDD website, www.hoteddtx.com. These measures include:

• Number of jobs created or retained in the region

• Amount of private investment in the region

• Number of business formations and expansions in the region Additionally, the Heart of Texas Economic Development District will provide the following performance measures on the HOTEDD website, www.hoteddtx.com.

• Regional median income • Number of people receiving job training in the region

• Business starts

• Percentage of regional population reporting as self-employed

• HOTEDD Rural Small Business Revolving Loan Fund Annual Report of Performance: businesses

affected, jobs created/retained

• Number of requests for economic development-related assistance

• Number of visitors to the www.hoteddtx.com website

http://www.hoteddtx.com/



Dorthy Jackson

Regional Services and Economic

Development Manager

Heart of Texas Council of Governments

Opportunity Zones



HISTORY OF OPPORTUNITY ZONES: Opportunity Zones were conceived as an innovative approach to spurring long-term private sector investments in low-income communities nationwide.

The concept was originally introduced in a 2015 paper, “Unlocking Private Capital to Facilitate Economic Growth in Distressed Areas,” to help address the persistent poverty and uneven recovery that left too many American communities behind. The idea has since been championed by a wide-ranging coalition of investors, entrepreneurs, community developers, economists, and other stakeholders.

WHAT ARE OPPORTUNITY ZONES?

Opportunity Zones are low income census tracts nominated by governors and certified by the U.S. Department of the Treasury into which investors can now put capital to work financing new projects and enterprises in exchange for certain federal capital gains tax advantages. The country now has over 8,700 Opportunity Zones in every state and territory.

WHAT ARE OPPORTUNITY FUNDS?

Opportunity Funds are new private sector investment vehicles that invest at least 90 percent of their capital in qualifying assets in Opportunity Zones. U.S.

https://eig.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Unlocking-Private-Capital-to-Facilitate-Growth.pdf

https://eig.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Unlocking-Private-Capital-to-Facilitate-Growth.pdf

https://eig.org/news/opportunity-zones-tapping-6-trillion-market



investors currently hold trillions of dollars in unrealized capital gains in stocks and mutual funds alone— a significant untapped resource for economic development. Funds will enable a broad array of investors to pool their resources in Opportunity Zones, increasing the scale of investments going to underserved areas.

WHAT ARE THE INCENTIVES THAT ENCOURAGE LONG-TERM INVESTMENT IN LOW INCOME COMMUNITIES?

Opportunity Zones offer investors the following incentives for putting their capital to work in low-income communities:

• A temporary tax deferral for capital gains reinvested in an Opportunity Fund. The deferred gain must be recognized on the earlier of the date on which the opportunity zone investment is sold or December 31, 2026.

• A step-up in basis for capital gains reinvested in an Opportunity Fund. The basis of the original investment is increased by 10% if the investment in the qualified opportunity zone fund is held by the taxpayer for at least 5 years, and by an additional 5% if held for at least 7 years, excluding up to 15% of the original gain from taxation.

• A permanent exclusion from taxable income of capital gains from the sale or exchange of an investment in a qualified opportunity zone fund, if the investment is held for at least 10 years. (Note: this exclusion applies to the gains accrued from an investment in an Opportunity Fund, not the original gains).

https://eig.org/news/opportunity-zones-tapping-6-trillion-market

https://eig.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Opportunity-Zones-Fact-Sheet.pdf



The Heart of Texas Region has 11 Opportunity Zones. The zones are in

Bosque, Falls, Hill, Limestone, & McLennan Counties.

MAPS OF OPPORTUNITY ZONES:

McLennan County McLennan County has five opportunity zones. City of Waco has three opportunity zones. Cities of Hallsburg, Mart, Riesel and West are within or partially within opportunity zones.



Hill County Hill County has two opportunity zones with one that covers all of the City’s of Itasca and Covington. The City of Hillsboro is partially covered in opportunity zone.

Falls County Falls County has one opportunity zone that is includes part of the City of Marlin



Limestone County Has two opportunity zones that includes part of the City of Mexia and all of the City of Groesbeck

Bosque County Has one opportunity zone that includes the City of Meridian.



Heart of Texas Region Contact Dorthy Jackson for more information about the opportunity zone areas within the HOTCOG region at [email protected] or call 254-292-1800.

mailto:[email protected]



APPENDICES



APPENDIX A: HEART OF TEXAS REGIONAL SWOT ANALYSIS (STRENGTHS, WEAKNESSES, OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS) Analysis of the region’s five rural counties using traditional metrics – housing starts, business starts, permits issued, etc. – has proven problematic due to the incomplete and inconsistent gathering of these figures across the region. Even census information is self-contradictory, with the summary files and updates found in American FactFinder showing a very different picture than data from Quick Facts sheets elsewhere on the Census site. The analysis below is the result of reviewing the data that is consistent, as well as gathering input from the observations of CEDS planning process participants. HEART OF TEXAS REGIONAL STRENGTHS: COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES The following list represents the current distinctive economic strong points of the region. It is by no means an exhaustive list, but represents the strengths most frequently recognized by stakeholders and professional economic developers. This list is in no particular order--the items that appear earlier on the list are not necessarily “stronger strengths” than those that follow. Quality of Life for Citizens o Relatively low cost of living o Relatively low housing costs o Clean water and clean air o Award winning school districts o Diverse population and culture o Diverse and abundant outdoor recreation opportunities

and extreme sports hub o Access to hospitals and high quality medical care (the

center of the region is the medical epicenter of the region)

o Four higher education institutions and Baylor Research & Innovation Collaborative (BRIC) Research Campus

o Agricultural assets; and strong regional commitment to local foods and Farmers Markets

o Tourism opportunities o Sense of community in small towns o Community and regional planning and cooperation:

HOTEDD CEDS, Heart of Texas Efficient Towns & Counties Co-op (HOTETC), EDA funded Upjohn Institute 2014 Study for the City of Waco (Poverty Alleviation Economic Development Recommendations)/Prosper Waco Initiative

o Strong local foods movement o Strong regional disaster preparedness and coordination

Quality of Life for Businesses of All Sizes

o Strong State economy and strong and diverse regional economy

o Location in the center of the state between DFW, Austin, Houston, San Antonio; abundant interstates, highways and rail. Within two hours of 20 million people.

o Diverse population and culture o Abundant workforce and relatively low labor costs o Abundant water and natural resources o Ozone attainment region o Four higher education Institutions, also Baylor Research

and Innovation Collaborative (BRIC) Research Campus o Agricultural assets and strong regional commitment to

local foods and farmers markets o Abundant tourism opportunities o Strong regional disaster preparedness and coordination



HEART OF TEXAS REGIONAL WEAKNESSES: COMPETITIVE DISADVANTAGES

Region, County & Community Level

o Economic development entities: more competitive than collaborative

o Awareness/knowledge/ understanding of economic development processes are limited and/or incorrect

o Change resistant culture, especially in rural communities

o Not thinking regionally o Rural vs. urban problems

AND Rural vs. urban solutions

o Planning in general and economic resilience planning at the local level is lacking

o Transfer of wealth out of the rural areas

o Public transportation challenges of a mainly rural region

o Generational poverty; high rates of poverty throughout the region (a condition that stifles economic growth in the entire region)

o Need for leadership development and increased participation in smaller communities

Quality of Life for Citizens

o In small counties and communities community development is economic development

o Generational poverty o Low wages o Lack of an accessible

pathway for economically disadvantaged residents toward full-time, permanent employment

o Dearth of affordable, quality housing in rural communities

o Low home ownership o Some lower performing

school districts o Health care in rural

communities is limited and in some non-existent

o Transportation challenges of a rural region: distances to employment and healthcare are long—reliance on personal transportation; limited public transportation/need more public transportation within/between communities, the chance for significant improvement is limited.

o Rural communities: lack of a diverse economy, few jobs.

Quality of Life for Businesses of All Sizes o In small counties and

communities community development is economic development • Crumbling infrastructure;

every dollar is fought for; citizens unwilling to raise taxes to pay for postponed improvements and systems continue to decline

o When it comes to economic development cities, chambers of commerce and EDC’s/IDC’s are change resistant and competitive vs. adopting methods that work and are collaborative • OLD/Urbanish: attract

from outside, elephant hunting/bigger is better, incentives and subsidies, build it and they will come, compete for deals

• NEW/Rural-appropriate: retain/expand existing businesses; entrepreneur-ship (grow jobs here); attract and develop talent; workforce development; public/private partnerships; cooperate for synergy

o Lack of trained workforce, work ethic and readiness

o Missing skill sets o Low educational attainment

levels o Aging population in rural

areas o Outmigration of young

professionals, brain drain o Dearth of affordable,

quality housing in rural communities

o Higher poverty and its inherent issues and domino effect



HEART OF TEXAS REGIONAL OPPORTUNITIES: CHANCES OR OCCASIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT AND PROGRESS AT THE REGIONAL, COUNTY AND COMMUNITY LEVELS

The following list represents key qualities or occasions that exist in the region that may be harnessed or otherwise utilized to promote or facilitate economic progress in the region. It is by no means an exhaustive list, but represents the opportunities most frequently recognized by stakeholders and professional economic developers. This list is in no particular order--the items that appear earlier on the list do not indicate a greater chance for success.

1. Strategic location (Region). The Heart of Texas region is closely-situated to the metropolises of Dallas/Fort Worth (60 miles), Houston (90 miles), Austin (90 miles), and San Antonio (150 miles.) These Texas MSAs include three of the largest in the nation, and together comprise upwards of 20 million people.

2. Ample space for industrial and other development (Region). Land is plentiful, inexpensive, and generally well-served by highway access. Population projections for the State as a whole are expected to bring millions of people to the triangle formed by Houston, Dallas, and San Antonio: the Heart of Texas region sits in the middle of this expansion ground and is ripe for development.

3. Accessible and robust transportation channels (Region). Existing rail service travels through or near almost every community in the region, while busy Interstates 35 and 45 connect the region to the 20 million people within 100 miles of its boundaries.

4. Growing strength of Waco and the Waco MSA—McLennan County. Waco has seen tremendous cultural growth, such as the robust investment in its historic downtown area. Mixed-use development continues in the built environment, while family-friendly activities lure crowds downtown after hours and sustainable development practices are modeled in prominent buildings. The goal of a billion-dollar decade of downtown investment seems attainable, and such public and private commitments are changing Waco’s built environment in striking and positive ways.

5. Growing strength of some rural communities (Hill, Limestone, and Bosque Counties). Some of the region’s rural communities are experiencing job and population growth, attracting industry, and strengthening as smaller commercial centers for their rural neighbors. Such development combats spatial disbursement and transportation barriers and allows for diversification of some rural economies.

6. Workforce education and training network (McLennan County). Greater Waco boasts two community colleges and one research university supplying a pipeline of skilled, certified, and/or degreed graduates. With the trend toward greater skill requirements for employees, the region has partners in place that could help provide needed skill sets.

7. Electrical plants (McLennan, Limestone, Freestone). The region is home to at least five power plants, with at least two more permitted to be built. These provide ample power for future development needs.

8. Strong health care, aerospace and logistics distribution sectors/clusters are growing (Region).

9. Affordable tax rates and cost of living (Region). It is very affordable to live in the Heart of Texas Region, own a spacious home in a safe neighborhood, live within 30 minutes of employment, commercial, and cultural amenities, and enjoy a clean and varied natural environment. The quality and affordability of each of these elements makes the Heart of Texas lifestyle among the best in America, as evidenced by Hewitt being named one of America’s ten most livable cities.

10. Available and growing health care network (Region). In a region already well-served by high-quality medical care, recent expansions and mergers have ensured the rapid growth in available facilities, jobs, and care providers to citizens of the Region.

11. Tourism destinations (Region). Attractions include Richland-Chambers Reservoir and Fairfield Lake State Park, Lake Whitney, Lakes Limestone and Mexia, Falls on the Brazos, Lake Waco, and numerous other parks, museums, and historic attractions.



HEART OF TEXAS REGIONAL OPPORTUNITIES: CHANCES OR OCCASIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT AND PROGRESS AT THE REGIONAL, COUNTY & COMMUNITY LEVELS (continued)

12. Good corporate and community relationships (Region). A large number of locally-owned businesses in the MSA combined with the close ties that bind longtime neighbors in Waco as well as the rural communities have contributed to a sense of civic involvement and commitment on behalf of the region’s business community. With few exceptions, local governments also enjoy and reciprocate positive relationships.

13. Existing economic development organizations (Region, especially McLennan County). The local educational institutions, Workforce Solutions of the Heart of Texas, Small Business Development Center, local communities and EDC’s/IDC’s, Chambers of Commerce, and other partners provide a wide variety of resources and a wealth of expertise.

14. Numerous amenities (Region). Greater Waco boasts the nation’s second-largest city park, a growing zoo, symphony, museums, and many other cultural attractions, while the rural communities boast individual charm and inimitable personalities, walkable communities, and rich heritage. Several extreme and unique sports and recreation opportunities including cable water skiing/surfing, BMX Motocross, Extreme Mudding and Equestrian Dressage have regional and national hubs draw thousands of enthusiasts to locations throughout the region.

15. Improving regional image (Region). Popular TV shows (Ex. Fixer Upper with Chip & Joanna Gaines) showcasing Waco and the Heart of Texas region; Baylor University and stadium complex growth, down-town Waco and Brazos River corridor redevelopment. Additionally, smaller communities are attracting investment and tourism with restorations of historic downtowns, adding farmers markets and other family friendly amenities.

16. Rising importance of lignite coal (Limestone, Freestone). Advances in chemical processes have rendered a coal-to-oil process more realistic, and this potential use for the lignite coal found in the eastern part of the region could bring about great advances for the region and the Texas economy and aligning the region with the State goal of developing advances in the energy industry cluster.

17. Partnership with Baylor University (McLennan). The University’s collaborative partnership, formalized through joint funding with the TSTC System and the cities of Waco and Bellmead, has created a high technology research, workforce development/training and industry solutions center. A business start-up center within the 300,000 s.f. facility will foster high technology spin-off businesses, thereby increasing local and regional wage scales.

18. Creation of a University Center at McLennan Community College in Waco. This opportunity through MCC allows students to pursue undergraduate and graduate degrees from Tarleton State University, the University of Texas Medical Branch/Galveston, The University of Texas at Rio Grand Valley, Midwestern State University, Texas Tech University, and Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, without leaving the region.

19. Economically-resilient employers (McLennan, Limestone, Falls, Freestone). The area is fortunate to include some government and other non-market-driven employers, such as the VA Hospital, the Mexia State School, the TDCJ Boyd Prison Unit, and the TDCJ Hobby Prison Unit. While they may contribute to depressed wage rates, they also maintain fairly steady employment levels despite recession pressures.

20. Increasingly sophisticated support for small business (Region). Examples include the Heart of Texas Economic Development District Revolving Loan Fund, growing understanding of small business support, retention and growth within Chambers of Commerce and EDC’s.

21. Art galleries, shops and the artistic communities in Bosque, Freestone, and McLennan counties, as well as a newly-endowed art museum in Fairfield and artist communities in Clifton contribute to the region.

22. Overall moderate population growth in the majority of the region (Region).

23. Successful industrial base (McLennan, Hill, Limestone, Freestone).

24. Oil and natural gas (Limestone, Freestone).

25. Regional economic development marketing efforts beginning: Heart of Texas Economic Development District and the Greater Waco Chamber, Waco Convention and Visitor’s Bureau.



HEART OF TEXAS REGIONAL THREATS: CHANCES OR OCCASIONS FOR NEGATIVE IMPACTS ON THE REGION/REGIONAL DECLINE The following list represents potential negative trends this CEDS is meant to address. This list is in no particular order; the items that appear earlier on the list do not indicate a greater perceived threat level.

1. Persistent low wages (Region). Wages in the Heart of Texas Region continue to lag the state and national averages, with only two counties reporting wages higher than 70% of the state average.

2. Underdeveloped workforce (Region). Limited access (transportation and distance issues) to jobs and job training has left many of the region’s communities with few development options. While the Waco MSA is generally well-served by training opportunities and has a much more skilled workforce, unmet demand persists for several skill sets.

3. Population decline (Rural Counties). A decline in population is the result of an aging population in rural counties coupled with outmigration of citizens under 35 years of age has numerous negative impacts including limited workforce and declining tax rolls.

4. Transportation barriers (Region). The distance from major employers, the distance from the metropolitan area (Waco), and the rising costs of transportation have increased the barriers for rural and sub-urban populations. Additionally, those within the metropolitan area have limited means and/options. Both the lack of internet access and the demographics of these populations indicate they have less access to distance-learning or –employment options.

5. Inadequate quantity and quality of housing (Region). Not only in the rural areas, but in the central metropolitan portion of the region as well, declines in property values and in population have rendered a portion of the built environment in unsalvageable. The low staff capacity of the region’s communities assures that code enforcement is an idea, not a practice.

6. Lack of employment opportunities/Lack of industry (Region, especially rural). In areas where these conditions exist, the vicious cycle of industries and employers leaving rural communities with individuals and families following suit, youth leaving due to lack of education and employment options, etc. takes the typical toll—depressed economy, housing values decrease, shrinking populations, decreasing tax rolls, blight, infrastructure decline…

7. The need for, and cost of, infrastructure improvements to accommodate growth (Region). Wider high ways and roads are needed. Well-paved streets, water and sewer capacity are on the decline.

8. Low staff levels for administration and economic development (Region). The relatively low tax bases and population levels in the rural areas ensure that staffing levels are kept at a minimum and existing staff must routinely cover content from many disciplines and areas. This makes it impractical to expect advances in economic development from communities without paid economic development professionals, as time and money for training and innovation is a luxury.

9. Lack of communication/coordination among economic developers (Bosque, Falls, Freestone, Hill, Limestone). The region’s professional economic developers often wear many hats and cover many functional areas. They stay so busy that, as one said recently, “I need a constant reminder” that there are outside resources that can be brought to bear. McLennan County has a network coordinated by the Waco Chamber that ameliorates this issue there.

10. Deteriorating infrastructure (Region). Too few staff members are making decisions against a backdrop of municipal infrastructure that is fast decaying. The lack of upkeep funds may mean service interruptions for existing consumers and may be far from up to the ability to provide new capacity for an industrial prospect.

11. Limited industrial rail service (Region). The bureaucratic difficulty of achieving the placement of a rail spur has finally been matched by the spiraling price of installation.

12. Lack of economic diversity and resilience (Region). Small counties and communities are hit hard when one business goes down due to economic, manmade or natural disasters.



HEART OF TEXAS REGIONAL THREATS: CHANCES OR OCCASIONS FOR NEGATIVE IMPACTS ON THE REGION/REGIONAL DECLINE (continued)

13. Potential highway and high speed rail development programs could have significant effects (Hill, McLennan). The promise or threat of these projects has many parts of the region scrambling to organize and fearing for the future.

14. Water quantity and quality are low (Hill, Falls). Due to both the inadequacy of existing physical infrastructure, such as lakes, and the drop in aquifers, municipalities and rural water supply corporations have had seriously to review their ability to provide water. At the same time, deteriorations in treatment and distribution systems have made it harder to deliver clean water even when raw supplies are sufficient.

15. Lack of access to capital (Region). While within the Waco MSA a large number of locally-owned banks compete for business, it is difficult for would-be entrepreneurs and existing business owners to find financing both in Waco and throughout the region. Additionally, there is a very low usage of USDA and SBA loan products in the region.

16. Poverty (Region). Poverty unchecked demoralizes, dispirits and disheartens individuals and families; disembowels communities; severely weakens counties, and operates as the ultimate impairer of the economic potential of regions.

17. Difficulty in promoting tourism to the region (Parts of all counties). The region’s dispersed geography separates areas of interest, and aside from the lakes, the individual rural communities’ attractions are generally not numerous enough to attract much overnight visitation.

18. Drought.



APPENDIX B: COUNTY ANALYSIS BOSQUE COUNTY

Bosque County Summary: economically stable; concentrated in tourism and agriculture; in need of industrial development • Demographics

o Mostly Anglo, some Hispanic, few African-American and Asian o Older

• Economy

o Forecast is slow growth, bout expected to greatly exceed predictions o Proximity to DFW Metroplex o High median wage o Strong local small business climate

• Sources of economic growth

o Tourism and weekend-home economies from beautiful scenery

o Arts community and wineries

• Sources of economic challenge o Low industrial base o No population centers

• Needs o Housing o community development o workforce development

o infrastructure o water supply

o transportation enhancements o improved internet access

• FAQS (Source U.S. Census Bureau, 2013 ACS 5-year estimates and 2016 estimates)

o Median Household Income: $45,419 o Median Age: 46.3 vs. Texas Median Age: 34.2 vs. United States Median Age: 37.7 o Percent of working-age civilians in labor force: 54.4% o Student to teacher ratio: 10.88 (or 11 to 1) Source: National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of

Data (representative of 2013-2104 school year) o Child Poverty Rate: 24.8% o Percent of students eligible for free/reduced price lunch: 65.75%

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

Bosque County Population over time



Source: StatsAmerica

APPENDIX B: COUNTY ANALYSIS BOSQUE COUNTY (continued)

Source: U.S. Census, 2013 ACS 5-year estimates


Under 18, 22.2%

18 to 24, 6.9%

25 to 44, 19.8%45 to 64, 29.1%

65 and over, 22.0%

A G E D I S T R I B U T I O N I N B O S Q U E C O U N T Y

80.2%

16.3%

1.5% 2.0%

61.5%22.1%

13.8%2.6%

44.8%

37.9%

11.5%

5.8%

C O U N T Y, R E G I O N , A N D S TAT E R A C E D E M O G R A P H I C S F O R B O S Q U E C O U N T Y

White, Non-Hispanic

White, Hispanic

Black Non-Hispanic

All other races






Boat, RV, van, etc,

0.2%Mobile homes, 18.0%

Multi-unit structure, 3.8%

Single-unit structures, 78.0%

T Y P E S O F H O U S I N G U N I T S I N B O S Q U E C O U N T Y

31.5%

11.9%

38.0%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%



Renters

O C C U PA N T S W I T H H O U S I N G B U R D E N C O S T I N B O S Q U E C O U N T Y






0123456789

10

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

Bosque County Unemployment Rate

18.0%

34.2%

26.5%

5.9%10.7%

4.8%

18.8%

25.3%22.7%

6.5%

17.7%

8.9%

0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%40%

Less than HS HSDiploma/GED

Some College AssociateDegree

Bachelor's orHigher

Graduate orProfessional

Degree

H I G H E S T AT TA I N E D E D U C AT I O N L E V E L F O R B O S Q U E C O U N T Y

County State






72.1%

17.2%10.5%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Private wage and salary workers Federal, state, or localgovernment workers

Self-employed workers in ownnot incorporated business

B O S Q U E C O U N T Y C L A S S O F W O R K E R S

30.3%

21.3% 20.3%

12.4%15.7%

0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%

Management,business, science, and

arts occupations

Service occupations Sales and officeoccupations

Natural resources,construction, and

maintenanceoccupations

Production,transportation, and

material movingoccupations

B O S Q U E C O U N T Y O C C U PAT I O N S





$28,646

$55,260

$37,961

$30,955

$29,479

$19,154

$39,750

$45,625

$43,083

$31,552

$12,885

$41,875

$0

$22,414

$39,034

$27,191

$8,750

$11,563

$20,000

$32,105

$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000

Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting

Mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction

Construction

Manufacturing

Wholesale trade

Retail trade

Transportation and warehousing

Utilities

Information

Finance and insurance

Real estate and rental and leasing

Professional, scientific, and technical services

Management of companies and enterprises

Administrative and support and waste managementservices

Educational services

Health care and social assistance

Arts, entertainment, and recreation

Accommodation and food services

Other services, except public administration

Public administration

M E D I A N E A R N I N G S BY I N D U S T RY F O R B O S Q U E C O U N T Y



APPENDIX C: COUNTY ANALYSIS FALLS COUNTY

Falls County Summary: Economically challenged with opportunities for development

• Demographics o Plurality of ethnicities with Hispanic largest, followed by Anglo and African-American o U-shaped age distribution, with more older and younger

• Economy

o Forecast is population loss, but some indicators suggest slow growth will occur o Sources of Economic Challenge

post-agricultural economy with relatively low-skilled workforce and low median wage and without existing growth drivers

highest poverty rate in the region decaying infrastructure

• Needs

o blight remediation o infrastructure o community development

o workforce development o improved internet access


o Median Household Income: $38,547 o Median Age: 39.3 vs. Texas Median Age: 34.2 vs. United States Median Age: 37.7 o Percent of working-age civilians in labor force: 48.5% o Student to teacher ratio: 11.15 (or 12 to 1) Source: National Center for Education Statistics, Common

Core of Data (representative of 2013-2104 school year) o Child Poverty Rate: 38.4% o Percent of students eligible for free/reduced price lunch: 76%


16,00016,50017,00017,50018,00018,50019,000

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

Falls County Total Population over time



APPENDIX C: COUNTY ANALYSIS FALLS COUNTY (continued)



Under 18, 21.7%

18 to 24, 10.1%

25 to 44, 25.3%

45 to 64, 26.8%

65 and over, 16.1%

A G E D I S T R I B U T I O N I N FA L L S C O U N T Y

52.3%

21.3%

24.3%2.1%

61.5%22.1%

13.8%2.6%

44.8%

37.9%

11.5%

5.8%

C O U N T Y, R E G I O N , A N D S TAT E R A C E D E M O G R A P H I C S F O R FA L L S C O U N T Y

White, Non-Hispanic

White, Hispanic

Black Non-Hispanic

All other races






Boat, RV, van, etc, 0.0%

Mobile homes, 12.2%



T Y P E S O F H O U S I N G U N I T S I N FA L L S C O U N T Y

32.5%

15.4%

43.0%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%



Renters

O C C U PA N T S W I T H H O U S I N G B U R D E N C O S T I N FA L L S C O U N T Y






0

2

4

6

8

10

12

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

Falls County Unemployment rate over time Unemployment Rate

25.7%

38.2%

21.4%

4.0%7.3%

3.5%

18.8%

25.3%22.7%

6.5%

17.7%

8.9%

0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%



Bachelor's orHigher


Degree

H I G H E S T AT TA I N E D E D U C AT I O N L E V E L F O R FA L L S C O U N T Y

County State






68.6%

23.8%

7.5%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Private wage and salaryworkers

Federal, state, or localgovernment workers


FA L L S C O U N T Y C L A S S O F W O R K E R S

24.6%22.2% 21.2%

15.5% 16.5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

Management,business, science,

and artsoccupations






FA L L S C O U N T Y O C C U PAT I O N S





$21,308

$54,432

$21,991

$23,216

$29,118

$16,941

$36,280

$61,705

$50,500

$33,333

$28,750

$29,464

$0

$18,688

$35,978

$20,979

$0

$7,346

$30,553

$32,267

$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000



Construction

Manufacturing

Wholesale trade

Retail trade


Utilities

Information





Administrative and support and wastemanagement services







M E D I A N E A R N I N G S BY I N D U S T RY F O R FA L L S C O U N T Y



APPENDIX D: COUNTY ANALYSIS FREESTONE COUNTY Freestone County Summary: Was Economically stable but due to being heavily concentrated in oil and gas, Freestone County has seen a downturn with closing of major coal plant, Big Brown. Population exodus if economy does not diversify.

• Demographics o Majority Anglo, some African-American, few Hispanic o Relatively evenly spaced in age

• Economy

o Forecast is reduction of growth, due to closing of major industry. o Sources of economic growth

I-45 oil and gas high median wage

Sources of economic challenge non-diversified economy no population centers City of Teague economically depressed

• Needs o industrial development o housing o next-level projects

o water supply o airport o improved internet access


o Median Household Income: $45,134 o Median Age: 41.4 vs. Texas Median Age: 34.2 vs. United States Median Age: 37.7 o Percent of working-age civilians in labor force: 54.2% o Student to teacher ratio: 11.86 (or 12 to 1) o Child Poverty Rate: 26.9% o Percent of students eligible for free/reduced price lunch: 51.2%


0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016

Freestone County Population Total over time



APPENDIX D: COUNTY ANALYSIS FREESTONE COUNTY (continued)



Under 18, 23.2%

18 to 24, 7.1%

25 to 44, 25.0%

45 to 64, 27.7%

65 and over, 17.0%

A G E D I S T R I B U T I O N F O R F R E E S TO N E C O U N T Y

68.2%

14.1%

16.2%1.5%

61.5%22.1%

13.8%2.6%

44.8%

37.9%

11.5%5.8%

C O U N T Y, R E G I O N , A N D S TAT E R A C E D E M O G R A P H I C S F O R F R E E S TO N E C O U N T Y

White, Non-Hispanic

White, Hispanic

Black Non-Hispanic

All other races






Boat, RV, van, etc,

0.5%

Mobile homes, 29.2%


Single-unit structures,

66.1%

T Y P E S O F H O U S I N G U N I T S I N F R E E S TO N E C O U N T Y

26.1%

11.5%

38.7%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%



Renters

O C C U PA N T S W I T H H O U S I N G B U R D E N C O S T I N F R E E S TO N E C O U N T Y






0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

Freestone County Unemployment Rate over time Unemployment Rate

21.2%

34.4%

25.2%

7.4% 8.6%3.1%

18.8%

25.3%22.7%

6.5%

17.7%

8.9%

0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%40%



Bachelor's orHigher


Degree

H I G H E S T AT TA I N E D E D U C AT I O N L E V E L F O R F R E E S TO N E C O U N T Y

County State






72.2%

19.2%

8.3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%



Self-employed workers inown not incorporated

business

F R E E S TO N E C O U N T Y C L A S S O F W O R K E R

27.9%

21.7%

17.2%19.0%

14.2%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%


and artsoccupations






F R E E S TO N E C O U N T Y O C C U PAT I O N S





$15,114

$58,689

$32,149

$42,313

$61,250

$23,211

$59,417

$68,235

$21,116

$48,438

$14,464

$31,719

$0

$26,071

$30,810

$24,776

$18,395

$11,324

$18,911

$35,104

$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000



Construction

Manufacturing

Wholesale trade

Retail trade


Utilities

Information












M E D I A N E A R N I N G BY I N D U S T RY F O R F R E E S TO N E C O U N T Y



APPENDIX E: COUNTY ANALYSIS HILL COUNTY

Summary: Economically stable and reasonably diversified but significant poverty.

• Demographics o Plurality of ethnicities with Anglo largest, followed by Hispanic and African-American o U-shaped age distribution, with more older and younger

• Economy

o Forecast is slow growth, but we believe will exceed predictions o Sources of economic growth:

Sizeable city: Hillsboro with industrial & retail sectors

Tourism & weekend home economies from lakes

Proximity to DFW-Metroplex

Good infrastructure Adequate water supply

o Sources of economic challenge: post-agricultural economy with

relatively low-skilled workforce and low median wage

• Needs o workforce development o community development o economic analysis

o catalyst projects o improved internet access




0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016

Hill County Population over time



APPENDIX E: COUNTY ANALYSIS HILL COUNTY (continued)



Under 18, 24.2%

18 to 24, 8.2%

25 to 44, 21.8%

45 to 64, 27.1%

65 and over, 18.8%

A G E D I S T R I B U T I O N F O R H I L L C O U N T Y

73.0%

18.7%

6.7%

1.6%

61.5%22.1%

13.8%2.6%

44.8%

37.9%

11.5%

5.8%

C O U N T Y, R E G I O N , A N D S TAT E R A C E D E M O G R A P H I C S F O R H I L L C O U N T Y

White, Non-Hispanic

White, Hispanic

Black Non-Hispanic

All other races







Mobile homes, 19.4%

Multi-unit structure, 6.6%Single-unit

structures, 73.8%

T Y P E S O F H O U S I N G U N I T S I N H I L L C O U N T Y

29.9%

14.5%

43.7%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%



Renters

O C C U PA N T S W I T H H O U S I N G B U R D E N C O S T I N H I L L C O U N T Y






0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

Hill County Unemployment Rate over time Unemployment Rate

21.3%

30.7%

25.3%

7.9%10.4%

4.4%

18.8%

25.3%22.7%

6.5%

17.7%

8.9%

0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%



Bachelor's orHigher


Degree

H I G H E S T AT TA I N E D E D U C AT I O N L E V E L F O R H I L L C O U N T Y

County State






74.9%

16.4%

8.5%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%




H I L L C O U N T Y C L A S S O F W O R K E R

26.0%

16.9%

26.2%

15.0% 16.0%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%


and artsoccupations






H I L L C O U N T Y O C C U PAT I O N S





$25,296

$48,839

$29,679

$37,145

$31,653

$20,612

$48,345

$44,737

$21,643

$31,645

$30,714

$43,482

$0

$25,000

$33,716

$23,875

$32,813

$14,219

$16,201

$33,063

$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000



Construction

Manufacturing

Wholesale trade

Retail trade


Utilities

Information












M E D I A N E A R N I N G S BY I N D U S T RY F O R H I L L C O U N T Y



APPENDIX F: COUNTY ANALYSIS LIMESTONE COUNTY

Limestone County Summary: Economically stable and reasonably diversified but significant poverty.


• Economy:

o Forecast is slow growth, but we believe will exceed predictions o Proximity to DFW Metroplex o Good infrastructure o Adequate water supply o Sources of economic growth:

Sizeable city: Mexia with industrial & retail sector


o Sources of economic challenge: post-agricultural economy with

relatively low-skilled workforce & low median wage

• Needs: o workforce development o community development o economic analysis





19,000

20,000

21,000

22,000

23,000

24,000

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

Limestone County Population over time



APPENDIX F: COUNTY ANALYSIS LIMESTONE COUNTY (continued)



Under 18, 23.4%

18 to 24, 8.3%

25 to 44, 25.3%

45 to 64, 26.8%

65 and over, 16.2%

A G E D I S T R I B U T I O N F O R L I M E S TO N E C O U N T Y

61.3%19.6%

17.4%1.7%

61.5%22.1%

13.8%2.6%

44.8%

37.9%

11.5%

5.8%

C O U N T Y, R E G I O N , A N D S TAT E R A C E D E M O G R A P H I C S F O R L I M E S TO N E C O U N T Y

White, Non-Hispanic

White, Hispanic

Black Non-Hispanic

All other races







Mobile homes, 23.4%



T Y P E S O F H O U S I N G U N I T S I N L I M E S TO N E C O U N T Y

29.1%

15.4%

43.5%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%



Renters

O C C U PA N T S W I T H H O U S I N G B U R D E N C O S T I N L I M E S TO N E C O U N T Y






0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

Limestone County Unemployment Rate over time Unemployment Rate

20.7%

37.7%

22.4%

6.8%9.2%

3.2%

18.8%

25.3%22.7%

6.5%

17.7%

8.9%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%



Bachelor's orHigher


Degree

H I G H E S T AT TA I N E D E D U C AT I O N L E V E L F O R L I M E S TO N E C O U N T Y

County State






62.2%

29.1%

8.0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%



Self-employed workers inown not incorporated

business

L I M E S TO N E C O U N T Y C L A S S O F W O R K E R S

29.4%

21.3% 19.4%14.0% 15.8%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%


and artsoccupations

Serviceoccupations

Sales and officeoccupations



Production,transportation,

and materialmoving

occupations

L I M E S TO N E C O U N T Y O C C U PAT I O N S





$16,619

$50,848

$41,290

$28,785

$33,074

$22,633

$35,288

$32,206

$26,563

$25,568

$30,500

$32,621

$0

$16,990

$26,743

$22,221

$0

$8,405

$24,538

$40,325

$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000



Construction

Manufacturing

Wholesale trade

Retail trade


Utilities

Information












M E D I A N E A R N I N G S BY I N D U S T RY F O R L I M E S TO N E C O U N T Y



APPENDIX G: COUNTY ANALYSIS MCLENNAN COUNTY

McLennan County Summary: Economically stable and reasonably diversified but significant poverty.


• Economy

o Forecast is slow growth, but sources suggest will exceed predictions o Proximity to DFW Metroplex o Good infrastructure o Adequate water supply o Waco is growing, with nearly $1B invested in downtown in 10 years o Sources of economic growth:

Sizeable city: Waco with sizeable industrial & retail sectors


• Sources of economic challenge: post-agricultural economy with

relatively low-skilled workforce & low median wage

• Needs: o workforce development o community development



o Median Household Income: $44,246 o Median Age: 31.5 vs. Texas Median Age: 34.2 vs. United States Median Age: 37.7 o Percent of working-age civilians in labor force: 62% o Student to teacher ratio: 14.18 (or 15 to 1) o Child Poverty Rate: 26.5% o Percent of students eligible for free/reduced price lunch: 45.11%


050,000

100,000150,000200,000250,000300,000

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

McLennan County Population over time



APPENDIX G: COUNTY ANALYSIS MCLENNNAN COUNTY (continued)



Under 18, 25.2%

18 to 24, 14.5%

25 to 44, 24.2%

45 to 64, 23.4%

65 and over, 12.7%

A G E D I S T R I B U T I O N F O R M C L E N N A N C O U N T Y

58.5%24.0%

14.4%3.1%

61.5%22.1%

13.8%2.6%

44.8%

37.9%

11.5%

5.8%

C O U N T Y, R E G I O N , A N D S TAT E R A C E D E M O G R A P H I C S F O R M C L E N N A N C O U N T Y

White, Non-Hispanic

White, Hispanic

Black Non-Hispanic

All other races







Mobile homes, 5.9%

Multi-unit structure,

23.6%Single-unit structures, 70.4%

T Y P E S O F H O U S I N G U N I T S I N M C L E N N A N C O U N T Y

29.6%

12.2%

54.6%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%



Renters

O C C U PA N T S W I T H H O U S I N G B U R D E N C O S T I N M C L E N N A N C O U N T Y






0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

McLennan Couny Unemployment Rate over time

14.3%

18.8%

25.3%22.7%

6.5%

17.7%

8.9%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%



Bachelor's orHigher


Degree

H I G H E S T AT TA I N E D E D U C AT I O N L E V E L F O R M C L E N N A N C O U N T Y

County State






79.3%

14.6%

6.0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%




M C L E N N A N C O U N T Y C L A S S O F W O R K E R S

31.6%

18.7%

25.7%

10.3%

13.8%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%


and arts occupations






M C L E N N A N C O U N T Y O C C U PAT I O N S



APPENDIX G COUNTY ANALYSIS MCLENNNAN COUNTY (continued)


$25,734

$51,375

$29,281

$31,453

$36,607

$20,546

$41,969

$43,460

$31,997

$37,721

$19,891

$32,392

$110,285

$19,063

$30,453

$25,420

$12,009

$11,033

$19,389

$39,779

$0 $40,000 $80,000 $120,000



Construction

Manufacturing

Wholesale trade

Retail trade


Utilities

Information












M E D I A N E A R N I N G S BY I N D U S T RY F O R M C L E N N A N C O U N T Y



APPENDIX H HOTCEDS STRATEGY COMMITTEE & HOTEDD BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Leadership

Name Officer Position Term Sector(s) Represented

Russell Devorsky President 2011-present N/A

Bosque County

Damaris Neelley Vice Chair 2016-2017 Small Business, Housing, Agriculture

Don Pool, County Judge

Indefinite Workforce Development Board,

General Purpose Local Governments, Small Business

Calvin Rueter Immediate Chair 2016-2017 Special Districts

Falls County

Jay Elliott, County Judge Secretary/Treasure

Indefinite Workforce Development Board, General Purpose Local Governments

Matthew Wright

2017-2018 General Purpose Local Governments,

Non-profit Foundations, Small Business

Freestone County

Kevin Benedict

2016-2017 Small Business, Banking, Private Industry

Linda Grant, County Judge

Indefinite Workforce Development Board, General Purpose

Local Governments, Finance



Hill County Name Officer Position Term Sector(s) Represented

Jerry Barker 2017-2018 General Purpose Local Governments

Justin Lewis, County Judge


General Purpose Local Governments, Agriculture

Art Mann

2017-2018 Chambers, EDC’s, and Professional Economic Developers

Edith Omberg

2016-2017 General Purpose Local Governments

Limestone County

Daniel Burkeen, County Judge


General Purpose Local Governments

Ray O’Docharty

2017-2018 General Purpose Local Governments

Susan Cates

2016-2017 Chambers, EDC’s, and Professional Economic Developers

McLennan County

Michael Baldwin

2016-2017

Utilities

Scott Felton, County Judge

Indefinite Workforce Development Board, General Purpose Local Governments

Robert Hawkins

2016-2017 Labor, State of Texas Workforce, Minority Groups

Randy Riggs

2017-2018 General Purpose Local Governments, Finance, Small Bus.

Joe Rodriguez

2017-2018 Chambers, EDC’s, and Professional

Economic Developers, Minority Groups

Dick Van Dyke Chair 2016-2017 Chambers, EDC’s, and Professional Economic Developers

Adam Hutchison

2017-2018 Higher Education



APPENDIX I HOTEDD CEDS DEVELOPERS + CONTRIBUTORS HOTEDD CEDS STAFF ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Damaris Neelley, Chair Tommy Tucker, Past President Robert Hawkins, Chair Emeritus

DOCUMENT AUTHORS, CONTRIBUTORS & EDITORS

Dorthy Jackson, Regional and Economic Development Manager (Economic, Community and Environmental Planning & Development)—Heart of Texas Economic Development District and Heart of Council of Governments

Cheryl Hudec, Director—Texas Rural Innovators; Executive Director—Pioneers Youth Leadership Foundation

Falen Bohannon, Economic and Environmental Coordinator—Heart of Texas Council of Governments

GRAPHICS

Cheryl Hudec, Director—Texas Rural Innovators; Executive Director—Pioneers Youth Leadership Foundation (Revised 2017) Dorthy Jackson, Regional and Economic Development Manager (Economic, Community and Environmental Planning & Development)—Heart of Texas Economic Development District and Heart of Council of Governments ORGANIZATIONS/EXPERTS CONSULTED

• United States Economic Development Administration (EDA) o David Ives, Sustainability/Planning Coordinator for the U.S. Economic Development

Administration (EDA) • EDA Austin Area Regional Office

o Mark Peltzman, EDA Senior Program Specialist, Austin Area Regional Office-EDA • National Association of Development Organizations (NADO)

o Brian Kelsea, Economic Development Consultant o Brett Schwartz, Program Manager

• Waco Downtown Development Corporation o Megan Henderson, Executive Director

• Kisatchie-Delta Regional Planning & Development District o Heather Smoak-Urena, Director

• Southwestern Oklahoma Development Authority (SWODA) o Debora Glasgow, Executive Director



APPENDIX J LISTING OF PAST REPORTS & RESOURCES REVIEWED/CONSULTED

Please note that this is a list of primary sources and “influences” on this document and that it is far from a complete list of each and every source that in some way, shape, or form, influenced its creation. Countless documents, books, articles, websites, tools, meetings, webinars, trainings, conversations and experiences contributed both directly and indirectly to the creation of this document. HOTEDD would like to thank everyone and everything that contributed to its successful creation.



Heart of Texas Efficient Towns and Counties Co-op (HOTETC) Regional Plan for Sustainable Development o http://www.hoteddtx.com/hotetc.html, select tab Regional Plan for Sustainable Development

Heart of Texas Efficient Towns and Counties Co-op (HOTETC) Fair Housing Equity Assessment (FHEA) o http://www.hoteddtx.com/hotetc.html, select tab Regional Planning Tools and Information

Heart of Texas Regional Solid Waste Management Plan (HOTRSWMP 2014) o http://www.hoteddtx.com/assets/f-rswmp-111913.pdf

Prosper Waco Project: Poverty Alleviation Economic Development Recommendations

o http://www.prosperwaco.org/wp-content/uploads/Upjohn-Report-May-2014.pdf

Heart of Texas Economic Development District 2014 CEDS Update o Copies available at the Heart of Texas Economic Development District Headquarters, 1514 S. New Road, Waco, TX 76711 or via email request to

[email protected]

Helping Small Towns and Rural Areas Thrive. Presentation by Katherine Ange, Renaissance Planning Group, May 30, 2013, Vinton, TX.

Preparing for the Future: A Guide to Community Based Planning by Gene Theodori and published by the Southern Rural Development Center, April 2009.

Regional Resilience: Research and Policy Brief. Prepared by Brian Dabson, Colleen M. Heflin and Kathleen K. Miller and published by RUPRI Rural Futures Lab, Harry S. Truman School of Public Affairs, University of Missouri, February 2012.

Planning for a More Resilient Future: A Guide to Regional Approaches. Published by the National Association of Development Organizations (NADO), 2015.

Strong Economies, Resilient Counties: The Role of Counties in Economic Development by Emilia Istrate, Kavita Mak, and Anya Nowakowski. Published by the National Association of Counties (NACO) January, 2014.

Targeted Focus for Continued Growth by Kris Collins and appearing in the Waco Chamber and Business Quarterly, 3rd quarter 2015.

Small Business Growth Strategy for the HOTCOG Region. Report prepared by the Mike Barnes Group, January 2015.

http://www.hoteddtx.com/hotetc.html

http://www.hoteddtx.com/hotetc.html

http://www.hoteddtx.com/assets/f-rswmp-111913.pdf




APPENDIX J LISTING OF PAST REPORTS & RESOURCES REVIEWED/CONSULTED (continued)

Building Your Community’s Future through an Entrepreneurial World View. Presentation by Dell Gines, Senior Community Development Advisor of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, to the National Association of Development Organizations Rural Development Meeting, Omaha, NE, May 2014.

Supporting Rural Entrepreneurship: A Review of Conceptual Developments from Research to Practice by Michael W-P Fortunato published in the Community Development Journal, August 2014. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 15575330.2014.935795

The Community in Rural America by Kenneth P. Wilkinson. Published by the Social Ecology Press, 1999.

Transfer of Wealth in Rural America: Understanding the Potential, Realizing the Opportunity, Creating Wealth for the Future by Don Macke, Deborah Markley, Ahmet Binerer. Published by the RUPRI Center for Rural Entrepreneurship, 2011

Five Centers for Regional Innovation: Industry Clusters in Local Economic Research Foundation and Development. Report published in September 2015 by Capital Area Council of Governments, NADO and EDA)

Alabama Statewide Consolidated Comprehensive Economic Development Strategies: Planning for the Future. Prepared by Jon Stover. Published by the National Association of Development Organizations Research Foundation (NADO), September 2012.

Kisatchie-Delta Regional Planning & Development District CEDS o http://www.nado.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/LA-Kisatchie-Delta-Regional-Planning-Development-District-2014.pdf

Texoma Council of Governments (TCOG) CEDS o http://www.texoma.cog.tx.us/departments/planning-development/community-economic-development/texoma-economic-development-

district/comprehensive-economic-development-strategy/

Southwestern Oklahoma Development Authority (SWODA) CEDS o http://www.swoda.org/news/swodaceds

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/

http://www.nado.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/LA-Kisatchie-Delta-Regional-Planning-Development-District-2014.pdf

http://www.swoda.org/news/swodaceds

hoteddtx.comhoteddtx.com/assets/ceds-update-2019-with-opportunity-zones.pdf · heart of texas....

Documents