HomeMy WebLinkAboutEconomic Advisory Commission - Minutes - 01/20/2016MINUTES
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
ECONOMIC ADVISORY COMMISSION
Date: Wednesday, January 20, 2016
Location: CIC Room, City Hall, 300 Laporte Ave.
Time: 11:00am–1:30pm
For Reference
Wade Troxell, Mayor & Council Liaison
Josh Birks, Staff Liaison 221-6324
Dianne Tjalkens, Minutes 221-6734
Commission Members Present Commission Members Absent
Sam Solt, Chair Linda Stanley
Glen Colton
Denny Otsuga (via phone)
Ted Settle
Kristin Owens
Alan Curtis
Ann Hutchison
Staff Present Staff Absent
Josh Birks, Economic Health Director
Dianne Tjalkens, Admin/Board Support
Sam Houghteling, Industry Cluster Coordinator
Lisa Rosintoski, Utilities Customer Connections Manager
Pete Iengo, Program Coordinator
Travis Paige, Community Engagement Manager
Randy Reuscher, Utility Rate Analyst
Katie Ricketts, Economic Health Analyst
Wade Troxell, Mayor
Guests
Dale Adamy, citizen
Adrian Garcia, Coloradoan
Meeting called to order at 11:04am
Review and Approval of Minutes:
Ted moved and Glen seconded a motion to approve the November minutes as presented.
Motion passed unanimously, 5-0-0.
Ted moved and Kristin seconded a motion to approve the December minutes as presented.
Motion passed unanimously, 5-0-0.
Ann arrived after vote.
Introduction of New Member—Alan Curtis is a program manager at Rocky Mountain Innosphere.
Completed undergrad degree in health care economics. At Innosphere has plugged into local economy.
1 | Page
Interested in managed growth. Good perspective to bring as employee in innovation economy, young
person, and student.
Agenda Review—Being more proactive on agenda items to get traction and make choices on specific
topics. Each month will have information/discussion on growth topic. Goal is to create a white paper with
summary recommendations to Council.
• Trying to find a way to capture growth related discussions when members are absent—either with
audio or video for key meetings.
Public Comment—Dale Adamy suggests Annual Report include public comment and agenda items
commented on. It is a document for the public as well as the commission and Council.
Commission Member/Staff Updates—
Glen: State giving tax breaks for bringing jobs into the state. Wonders at purpose of the program as
growth is fast already. Have issues with affordability. People are not looking for call center jobs. Will
attract people into community, increase rate of growth, increase pressure on affordable housing. Why
pour gasoline on fire with state program? Counter to sustainability in the community. Also received
email—University of Washington did study on Seattle—its local agriculture can only produce up to 4%
of food for the city. To be local and sustainable would need to annex 50 mile radius around city. Fort
Collins is nowhere close to being able to provide food for all residents. Glen will provide article to
commission.
Ted: Working on application for Innovation and Economic Prosperity Designation with CSU.
AGENDA ITEM 1— Recommendation: 2015 Annual Report
Josh reviewed the document.
Discussion/Q & A:
• Distributing materials via email does not work well for Sam. Would like a portal.
o Dianne will contact IT to look into public FTP. City does not use Drop Box for security
reasons.
• Document of motions and voting, does not include full scope of work.
o Purpose is to document actions taken. Minutes are available online. Historically only
capturing highlights.
• Is it important to make note of other important work that was done around creating definition of
economic health.
o Critical to this year.
o Also need to continually make people aware of that definition.
o Josh provides this definition to all speakers. Process improvement made in 2015.
• Would it add value to list all the groups/departments that presented to EAC? Spend a lot of time
listening and providing input.
o Agree that good idea.
o Put summary at the beginning, followed by motions (detail).
ACTION ITEMS: Josh will add definition of Economic Health, correct spelling of Kristin’s name,
change Denny to Denichiro, and add summary of presenters. Will send revised Annual Report in next
packet, along with link.
AGENDA ITEM 2— Innovation Economy – Asset Map—Sam Houghteling
Innovation was named a Council priority last May. Smithsonian opened exhibit on Fort Collins
innovation. Moving forward from there. CSU is pursuing innovation and economic prosperity
designation. Intersection of talent, innovation and place. Mapping assets. CSU is doing same. Leveraging
resources and aligning CSU, City, and partnering stakeholders. In process of stakeholder engagement,
final results in May. Will submit IEP/IAM improvement process in May. Many City investments have
created foundation for innovation. Working on triple helix approach (municipal, community, and
university), supporting clusters, and focusing on creative class (cultivating skilled workforce).
2 | Page
Opportunities for improvement: intentional focus on startups and stronger ties to State/Federal programs.
Performance metrics have been developed. Have been performing well in tech startups and new
businesses; not doing as well in retention. Also have steady decline in utility patents per capita (looking
into this further), though overall number has remained same population growth. Looking at collaborative
decision making models—other communities have integrated government, university, and community
actors into autonomous entities to manage and foster innovation. Finalizing stakeholder engagement over
next two months, writing narratives, self-assessment, and improvement plan. Council in May 2016.
Sectors would like to see more focus on? Well positioned to emphasize innovation in community and
region?
Discussion/Q & A:
• Amazed at how many clusters there are.
o History is industry cluster strategy was around innovation and diversification. Greater
stability in economy when it is diversified. Ex: were heavily reliant on tech, and had
negative results when industry had a downturn. Are there more to look at?
o Economy of Fort Collins is diverse and excellent.
Play significantly in a number of industries. But when look at occupations
available, there is less diversity. Ex: lots of electrical engineers in many of these
industries. If diversification is objective, need to look through other lenses as
well—jobs available, income levels, etc.
• Collaborative model—in Asia was impressive how well private enterprise and government
worked together. Goal of full employment. If want to compete on international stage, must
collaborate.
• Be careful about putting cause and effect on genesis of timeline. Continuum is serendipitous. HP
and OtterBox were serendipitous.
o And yet, no other community can share this story.
o HP is in Fort Collins because people who made decision wanted to live here.
o What these meant for local workforce—talent in community—was ability to develop
skills and move into other companies or start new companies. Have seen more
development in these spaces because of them being here.
Foundational pillars.
Did the City invest in those?
• Listed separately.
Impact on workforce—Anheuser-Busch pulled a whole segment of employees
out of poverty and into the middle class.
o Advanced Energy is another story to include.
They wanted to live here too.
• Comment on electrical engineers being a foundation. Data on what is skill set in community? Can
base economy on kind of education. Would be different if all art majors.
o Study includes info on education, employment and occupation. When employer comes to
town use data to know if have skilled employees.
• Sectors will go away in next evolution—should be looking at technology and skill set.
o People who do the jobs are the foundational pillars of the clusters. They are portable.
Another way to think about what is driving those clusters.
• Missing from Venn diagram is access to capital. Startup companies are having difficult time even
identifying where to go to gain capital. Cluster concept does not scale down well. When apply to
smaller community, divide up resources in artificial ways. Cluster is not one purpose vehicle, but
trying to diversify or getting attention to diversification. That part has been done really well.
o Innosphere works with early stage companies. Screens 150 startups each year for
funding/assistance. Look at where there is most activity and what sectors are most
successful. Bioscience and hardware/software are able to access capital easier. In
previous years clean tech and water were able to access funding better. Creative cluster is
being built quickly by other organization. Foundational pillars in Fort Collins lead to spin
offs. 50% of applications have gained core competencies in Fort Collins. Access to
capital—2015 was great year for Innosphere. Capital is there, but have to know where to
go to find it.
o Will IEP certification help with that? Will it gain more capital, be a true partnership?
3 | Page
Accessing capital is not purpose. Can add value in way university connects with
industry. Bureaucratic nature of large institutions. Opportunity to refine internal
processes to have better customer service.
Real value is self-reflection required to apply. Designation is nice to have.
In ideal world this is step one. Looking at gaps, opportunities, and coming
together with community to chart a new course.
• What is goal? If want to become Silicon Valley or Austin will grow population faster. Record
number of people in poverty, stresses on infrastructure (I-25 and schools), affordable housing
issues. We are doing very well in this area. Afraid we might achieve our goals. Clusters are
backward looking. Be careful where headed and what it will do to the community. Recognize all
the other issues that come with being a fast growing economy.
• “Asset Map” but not seeing any actual maps. Where does this fit with mapping North College.
o In North College had talked about innovation corridor—working on a plan for
redevelopment potential. Timing with application process. Have looked at what other
places do, literature review, metrics. Now engaged in process of feedback and
stakeholder engagement, understanding business perspective. Once data collected, will
create asset and liability map.
o North College URA branding space going away?
Downtown Plan has 14 subareas. One is innovation district, which is same area
that was being looked at previously.
AGENDA ITEM 3— Utilities Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Recommendations —
Lisa Rosintoski & Randy Reuscher
In 2004 started looking at tiered rate structures and Council asked how it would affect low income
citizens. Started Payment Assistance Fund (PAF) as result. Later, developed medical assistance program.
In 2014 completed comprehensive evaluation of low income assistance programs. Included nonprofits
and other key stakeholders. In 2015 put together implementation strategy. Recommendation is to launch
components in 2016, with income qualified rate effective in 2017. Looked at demographics, qualifications
for assistance, conditions, barriers, etc. Conditions of low income are either temporary or ongoing.
Barriers include location of trust, convenience, and transportation. Utility role is in rates, funding,
efficiency and conservation education, and administration. Gaps are in rate structure for ongoing low
income and in ability for PAF to meet need. Have average of $35K donations for PAF annually, but need
regularly exceeds that. Have a need to create more alliances and donation support for PAF—Energy
Outreach Colorado can provide matching funds. Working to do better donation solicitation, and more
work on state and county resources. For ongoing need, looking at income qualified rate (IQR). Also
looking at low income solar and direct installs. Direct installs can impact renters—changing light bulbs
and adding low flow fixtures and toilets. With IQR can determine specific group to reach out to with
education. Going to Council to request unclaimed funds be transferred to PAF. Ordinance required to
implement IQR. Medical assistance program could phase out and fold into IQR.
IQR: Using census track data to target about 9000 households at 165% FPL and below; households that
make ~$33K and below. Comparing average customer’s percent income spent on water, wastewater and
electricity to low income person’s percent of income on same. Idea is to create a discount that equalizes
the percentage of income spent on these utilities. Customers must meet qualifications. If reached full
enrollment, would see 1.2% overall rate increase. Work session in February.
Discussion/Q & A:
• Source of funding is from other rate payers?
o Would be an increase to other rate payers, or from other funding sources.
o Unclaimed funds could roll into IQR.
o Good model.
• Specific recommendations?
o Implement portfolio with integrated service model. Utility’s role would be ongoing and
temporary assistance, with efficiency and conservation education.
Exciting to see work is being moved forward in logical manner.
4 | Page
• How does program intersect with sales tax rebate program that has been sorely underutilized?
Opportunity for two City programs to collaborate to get better use of both programs?
o As organization need to understand how supporting individuals through general fund and
utility fund. Aspiration is to have one place to qualify and get all programs. Looking at
Parks and Recreation and City rebates.
o Ideally one stop shop, places throughout community in nonprofits, churches, etc. one
avenue to get help?
Correct.
Sensitive to general fund versus utility fund, but want convenience for customer.
• Shifting funds from vacant accounts? How much? Where would it go?
o It has stayed in same place for 10 years. Put the money to higher and better use. Before
any noticing, estimate about $400K. If put robust crediting processes in place, could have
about $15K per year that would go to PAF.
AGENDA ITEM 4— Historic Growth Rates & Patterns—Katie Ricketts
Looking at growth rates, demographic changes, impacts on standard of living, poverty, inequality, etc. Per
decade rate of population growth has actually gone down as city gets larger. Aggregate growth continues
going up. Around 20% rate of growth per decade. Age demographics for county include projection for
2030 of 25% youth, 25% young adults, 33% experienced working age, and 17% seniors. Seeing faster
growth in senior population. Fort Collins is tracking patters of Colorado and US for employment, seeing
less unemployment. Unemployment rate is at about ~5%. Low unemployment has repercussions in
movement, underemployment, inability to accelerate careers, etc. Census data on industry categories
shows 18/20 having expansion in Fort Collins over last 10 years. Construction and manufacturing have
done less well. Wage growth is on the rise, with persistent gap between male and female wage (~38%).
Gap narrows for 20-29 year olds, but widens again for women at 35+. Time off during child bearing years
has significant impact on long term earning potential. Poverty in Larimer County is tracking US and
Colorado averages, but not much progress since 1970s. 45K people in Larimer below poverty level
(~$24K for family of 4). Single mothers of children under 18 comprise largest group of those in poverty.
Average home prices have gone up 42% over last 15 years. Hard costs and land prices have driven
increase. As less land is available puts pressure on market. People have argued that fees, taxes and profits
are problem, but fees have remained consistent percentage of overall cost and profit percentages have
gone down. Average rent in Fort Collins continues to increase—~$1250/mth. in 2015. Distressed
populations in housing are cost burdened (over 30% of income on housing), fixed income, in poverty,
first time homebuyers and mobile home residents. New pressures include land use, controlling sprawl,
resources, short term versus long term solutions, and waste and footprint issues. Opportunities include
urban density improvements, more efficient use of resources, ability to reach CAP goals, and more
diverse community.
Discussion/Q & A:
• Suggest including absolute population growth in presentation.
• Surprising that construction has not done as well with population growth.
o Building permit data would be good to show. Lower aggregate for new single family
homes. Peaked in 2000/01. Also know that had rise in oil and gas extraction after
recession, so workers migrated to other industry. Labor constriction.
o Bounce back—haven’t recovered. May see numbers rise.
Katie and Josh will look into this more.
• Issues on gender pay gap, suggest telling the whole story. Many reasons for income inequality.
o Impactful to talk about at local level when national issue?
o CSU is looking at pay rates for faculty and made major changes. Look at 1970 forward.
Possible to splice out by industry?
• Yes.
• Data by county could be very different than just Fort Collins.
o True. Using available data.
• Article on poverty in paper—city or county data?
o Will have to check.
5 | Page
• Cost is not price for housing. Price is market driven. More people moving into area.
o Profit has gone down.
o Demand is translated to land prices.
Need to keep concepts of price and demand separate.
o Data is average sales price of new construction in city. Break out is percentages of price.
When price falls below cost, people do not build. Here, translating what goes into
price.
o Fact that fees have stayed at 9% is surprising.
Actual amount has gone up, but percent is same.
City fees is not causing price of housing to go up.
Fee structure could be knob to use to control growth.
• Would like to see metrics on density and pressures on resources.
o Average density of community or parts of community.
Map areas open for higher densities. If projections are correct, where will new
residents live?
• What does it look like, too? We don’t know what is going to happen, but
if this data continues at this rate, what could it look like?
We are becoming a city. What kind of city are we becoming? Only way to
answer question is with metrics.
• Board might recommend metrics for EHO to monitor.
• If GMA is zoned correctly, as grow to projections, what does the city look like?
o City Plan looked at historic population growth rates and forecasts to determine when all
available land would be taken. If keep historic density, build out at 236K, if use highest
possible density have 255K population at build out. How you use land in that timeframe
is important.
o Use data to illustrate how population will be distributed and resources needed to service
them.
Would take a lot of assumptions about resources used annually. Ex: do people
continue to use water at current rates?
Have assumptions for redevelopment as well.
o As P&Z goes through exercises, they are allocating space. Implication should be
displayable.
Capacity and time. EHO would not do this, would work with Planning and GIS.
Cameron Gloss has build-out plan. Bringing presentation to EHO next month.
• Job and wage success versus actual prosperity. Colorado and Denver metro have been successful
in adding jobs, but prosperity has tanked. Wage/productivity-based. As see increasing percent of
service jobs, what does that do to prosperity of community members?
o Is there action to be taken in shaping the types of jobs we have? Call center jobs are not
what we need. However, landlords will rent space. Market will act with or without us.
Avoid outcomes we don’t want.
Smart growth.
o Interested in learning what populations are thriving and why.
Also wage gap between top wage earners and bottom wage earners.
• At some point need stable population. Cannot support more people with continued growth.
o As women’s wages go up, population goes down.
Closing Comments
Today was part one of seven part series on growth. Cameron will come next month to discuss projections.
Will hear from state demographer. Building foundation to talk about alternative paradigms such as smart
growth, managed growth, steady state economy. Will do benchmarking with other communities, then
build a constructive document.
Meeting Adjourned: 1:34pm
Next Meeting: February 17
6 | Page