Economic & Workforce Development

County Leaders’ PerspectiveA Preliminary Report

Rocco J. DiVeronica Stephen J. Acquario

President Executive Director

Economic & Workforce Development

County Leaders’ PerspectiveA Preliminary Report

Presented by:

Jeff Osinski and

Isabelle Andrews

NYSAC

The County Economic & Workforce Development Survey

• A joint undertaking of NYSAC & the Dennis A. Pelletier County Government Institute, Inc.

• Funded in part, through a grant from the NYSDOL

• Designed to obtain County Leader’s reaction on issues affecting economic & workforce development

About the Survey…

• Survey conducted during the Summer of 2006

• 56 of the 57 counties outside NYC responded

• Survey sent to:– County Executives– Board of Supervisors or Legislative Chairs– County Administrators and Managers

Why the Survey?

• Jobs and the economy are your top priorities• NYSAC committed to assisting local economic

growth• Obtain background information on county

organizational structure• Pelletier Institute Sessions on Growth Issues• Technical Resource Materials to Assist Counties

Most Important Issues Affecting Local Economic Development

1. Cost of doing business in New York State. (70% of respondents)

2. State and local taxes

3. Availability of a skilled workforce

4. Keeping young college graduates

Less Important Issues

• Population loss

• State employer regulations

• Aging of our current workforce

• Access to developable land

County Advantages

• Quality of life

• Quality education infrastructure

• Economic and workforce development programs

• Road and highway systems

Counties Challenges

• Cost of utilities (70% of respondents)

• Access to mass transportation

• Availability of local sewer and water infrastructure

Counties advantages to attracting and maintaining a skilled workforce• Quality of life

• Quality of local schools

• Quality of local health care

• Availability of affordable housing

County challenges in attracting and maintaining a qualified workforce

• Availability of jobs

• Strength of business community

• Availability of affordable housing (downstate primarily, some upstate too. )

Recent Newspaper Headlines Back-Up Your Concerns

BSR offers incentives to attract workersPress and Sun Bulletin, Binghamton, NY. September 7, 2006

The Age Wave: America's Retiring WorkforceMetLife Study Finds Employers/Employees Worry about

Aging Workforce and Retirement Security, but Few Take Steps to Address Situation

Business Wire, Inc., February 28, 2006

Flight of Young Adults Is Causing Alarm UpstateThe New York Times, June 13, 2006

More Newspaper Headlines

Knock knockNo Joke: Job opportunities for skilled workers are

right at the door.Albany Times Union, June 5, 2006

Skilled Workers can get lost in immigration fight

Rochester Democrat and Chronicle June 16, 2006

Jobs and Property taxes concern votersAlbany Times Union, March 2, 2006

Lead Responsibility for Economic Development

• County department 31%

• IDA 31%

• Economic development corp 24%

• Private organization 3%

• Other 11%

Economic Development Services & Programs

• Counties provide numerous services to encourage investment & job creation

• Site location assistance, revolving loan fund, tourism promotion and revenue bond financing (IDAs) most frequently mentioned

• Alternative financing methods, research & development assistance, and export development are less frequently provided

Industrial Development Agencies

• All responding Counties have a countywide IDA

• 59% have only 1 functional IDA in County

• 24 counties have more than 1 IDA

• Counties with more than 1 IDA– 65% do not have uniform PILOT policies– 35% have standard procedures

IDA Cooperation

Always8%

Usually21%

Sometimes46%

Never25%

Always

Usually

Sometimes

Never

Who Serves on Countywide IDA Boards?

• Business Leaders 100%• Community Representatives 76%• Elected Officials 67%• Financial Institutions 47% • Organized Labor 22%• Educational agencies 15%• Business Organizations 11%• Environmental Organizations 2%• Other 2%

Economic & Workforce Development Planning

• 33 counties (61%) responding have countywide economic development plan

• 35 counties (63%) indicated that there was a regional development plan

• 93% indicated coordination between economic development and workforce planning efforts

Participants in Countywide Plan Development

• County elected 89 %• IDAs 83%• Chamber of Commerce 81%• Colleges & Universities 61%• Banks 58%• Community groups 53%• Major employers 50%• Private citizens 39%• Labor unions 22%

Lead Responsibility for Workforce Development

• Workforce Investment Board 52%

• County Department 43%

• Not for Profit 3%

• Other 2%

Workforce Development Services & Programs

• Significant number of WD agencies are still attached to Social Services oversight

• Some confusion about Workforce Development– Who is in charge? WIB or County Department– Services Provided (social or economic development

program?)

• Most counties involved in developing the workforce plan for their area.(13% not involved)

• Mix of programs provided fairly standard

Administrative Reporting Relationships

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Economic Development

Workforce Development

Administrative Reporting Relationships

47%

53%

Identical

Different

Legislative Oversight

• 43 counties indicated that economic & workforce development Programs have legislative oversight committees

• Economic development generally overseen by economic development & planning committee

• 48% of counties indicate workforce development overseen by Social Services or Education Committee

Legislative Oversight Committee

30%

70%

Identical

Different

Workforce Development Legislative Oversight

34%

30%

8%

14%

14%

Social Services

Econ Develop & Planning

Budget/Operation

Education/Labor/Youth

Other

Reporting

• Most ED and WD agencies report at least quarterly to the county chief elected official

• Most County Leaders found the reports to be very valuable

• Most agencies report to the public on an annual basis.

Frequency of Economic Development Reports

19

12

17

12

12

28

7

6

29

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Monthly

Quarterly

Annually

Public

Legislative Body

Chief Elected Official

Value of Economic Development Reports

1 1

18

25

11

Not Valuable

Slightly Valuable

Valuable

Very Valuable

Extremely Valuable

Workforce Report Frequency

16

14

15

16

8

20

6

10

23

0 5 10 15 20 25

Monthly

Quarterly

Annually

Public

Legislative Body

Chief Elected Official

Value of Workforce Reports

2 2

18

18

9

Not Valuable

Slighly Valuable

Valuable

Very Valuable

Extremely Valuable

Initial Insights

• Differing lines of authority within counties for workforce and economic development.

• Workforce development overseen by Social Services in a large number of counties.

• Decision makers receive different types & levels of information at different frequency

• Planning & development efforts do not always include significant actors

Facts to Consider US Bureau of Census Estimates

• 26 Counties have lost population since the 2000 Census

• 10 additional counties grew at a projected rate of 1% or less during 2000 – 2005

• Projected retirement in Upstate Counties significantly above the national average

• New York will have fewer working adults per older adult than the national average

U.S. Census Bureau Estimates of County Population Decline 2000 – 2005

Projected SMSA Retirement Rates2002-2012

U.S. Bureau of the Census, Federal Reserve Bank of New York Estimates

• Binghamton 16.4• Rochester 16.4• Utica 16.2• Buffalo 15.9• Albany 15.6• Syracuse 15.0• Upstate New York 15.7• United States 15.1

Working-Age Adults Per Older AdultU.S. and Upstate New York

5.3

4.7

2.8

4.8

4

2.5

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

1970 2000 2030

United States

Upstate New York

Some questions……….

• Does your current structure for workforce and economic development make sense?

• Do you get the information you need (but only the information you need) to make informed decisions?

• Are you involving all of the right people?• Are you building on your strengths?• Can you address your challenges?• Can you learn from other counties?

What do you think?

Next steps for NYSAC…

• Compile a final survey report showing regional results

• Conduct follow-up interviews for more detailed insight

• Identify county technical assistance needs

• Prepare briefing & policy reports on issue areas identified by counties

The Pelletier InstituteA Partnership of NYSAC & Cornell University

“Fostering informed, constructive and civil dialogue on the challenges we face.”

• Policy Forums on regional and local economic development issues

• Expand opportunities to exchange ideas, issues and best practices.

• Provide access to customized technical assistance

• Pelletier accredited sessions at NYSAC conferences.

For more information, contact:

Jeff Osinski, Director of Research (josinski@nysac.org)

Isabelle Andrews, Project Director (iandrews@nysac.org)

(518) 465-1473