Document alpinecountyca_gov_doc_ca9fc45a74

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE COUNTY OF ALPINE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA Community Development Conference Room 50 Diamond Valley Road, Markleeville, CA 96120 AGENDA TUESDAY, March 12, 2019 1:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Economic Development Advisory Committee will be held on Tuesday, March 12, 2019 in the Alpine County Community Development Conference Room, 50 Diamond Valley Road, Markleeville, California. The public is encouraged to attend committee meetings. Public comment periods: Matters under the jurisdiction of the Committee, and not on the posted agenda, may be addressed by the general public at the beginning of the regular agenda under Oral Communication – General Public Comment. However, California law prohibits the Committee from taking action on any matter which is not on the posted agenda unless it is determined to be an emergency by the Committee. Any member of the audience desiring to address the Committee on a matter on the agenda: Please request to speak at the time the item is announced by the Committee Chair. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ORAL COMMUNICATION – GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT 2.1. This portion of the meeting is an opportunity for members of the public to address the Committee on subjects relating to economic development. 3. MINUTES 3.1. Request approval of regular meeting minutes of November 13, 2018. 4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 4.1. Bear Valley Business Association update – Terry Woodrow 4.2. Alpine County Chamber of Commerce update – Karrie Baker 4.3. Heritage Tourism Committee update – Tom Sweeney 4.4. Discussion: photo opportunities in Alpine County, to attract visitors-Tom Sweeney 5. NEW BUSINESS 5.1. Election of Officers: Chair and Vice-Chair – Kris Hartnett ---PAGE BREAK--- 5.2. Tahoe Mountain lab: Presentation form Jamie Orr, Founder/Director of Tahoe Mountain Lab in South Lake Tahoe will discuss the concept of the business - Nicole Williamson & Karrie Baker 5.3. Discussion and possible action to recommend that the Board of Supervisors apply to the Economic Development Authority for a grant to complete a Comprehensive Economic Development Study for Alpine County - Grant Funding for Economic Development Plans – Brian Peters & Kris Hartnett 5.4. Discussion and possible action to recommend that the Board of Supervisors contract a half-time Economic Development Officer for two years. – David Griffith 6. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 6.3. 2018 Alpine County Economic and Demographic Profile- Produced by the Center for Economic Development (CED), in partnership with Rural County Representatives of California (RCRC) - Brian Peters 7. OTHER BUSINESS 8. NEXT MEETING The next regular meeting was set for May 21, 2019 at 1:30 p.m. 9. ADJOURNMENT The Committee will adjourn to the next scheduled meeting in the Alpine County Community Development Conference Room, 50 Diamond Valley Road, Markleeville, California. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- 50 Diamond Valley Road, Markleeville, CA 96120 (530) 694-2140 / Fax (530) 694-2149 www.alpinecountyca.gov Brian Peters, Director COUNTY OF ALPINE Community Development Memo To: Economic Development Advisory Committee From: Brian Peters Date: Meeting of March 12, 2019 Re: Discussion and possible action to recommend that the Board of Supervisors apply to the Economic Development Authority for a grant to complete a Comprehensive Economic Development Study for Alpine County - Grant Funding for Economic Development Plans Background At your last meeting on November 13, 2018 Melinda Matson from the U.S. Economic Development Agency (EDA) presented information on an EDA grant program that could be used to create an economic development plan for Alpine County known as a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy or “CEDS.” Alpine County is included in the CENTRAL SIERRA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 2017-2022 COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC 2017 DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY, most often referred to as the “Central Sierra CEDS.” The District is a a five county Economic Development District that serves the Counties of Alpine, Amador, Calaveras, Mariposa and Tuolumne along with the Cities of Sonora and Angels Camp. The Alpine County Economic Development Advisory Committee (EDAC) has been discussing the merits of creating a more specific economic development strategy or plan that might be able to better focus on economic issues in Alpine County that are different than the larger Central Sierra region. Examples of CEDS and other Economic Development Plans A complete copy of the Central Sierra CEDS is included in the meeting packet. Melinda Matson sent staff CEDS examples for Humboldt County (CA) and the Dry Creek Rancheria. Staff searched for single county or individual community CEDS or economic development plans and has collected examples from the following: ---PAGE BREAK--- Humboldt County CEDS Dry Creek Rancheria CEDS City of Bishop Economic Development Element Lassen County CEDS Mono County Economic Development Strategy Teton County ID Economic Development Plan Note that not all of these documents are CEDS. In the meeting packet we have included selected sections from all the example documents to give you a sense of the approaches and issues covered. The full documents are available from Community Development if committee members are interested. You can also access them on the web (you might have to copy and paste some of these into your browser): Humboldt County CEDS: Dry Creek Rancheria CEDS: CEDS-Report-PUBLIC-COMMENT-DRAFT.pdf City of Bishop Economic Development Plan: content/uploads/2013/04/2015_Draft_Economic_Development_Element_Update.pdf Lassen County CEDS: http://www.lassencounty.org/sites/default/files/images/2012%20Lassen%20County%20CEDS%2 0Plan_FINAL.pdf Mono County Economic Development Plan: _mono_basin/meeting/12237/mono_county_finalv3_7_1_13.pdf Teton County Idaho Economic Development Plan: http://www.driggsidaho.org/use_images/archive/TetonCountyEconomicDevelopmentPlanFINAL5 -24-13.pdf The last one listed – Teton County Idaho – is included because the community has some similarity to Alpine County. It is a rural area with small communities that were founded on agriculture and natural resources that has more recently seen growth in an emerging tourism/recreation business sector, second homes and bedroom community in close proximity to premier outoor recreation destinations. Teton County Idaho is close to Jackson Hole, Grand Teton National Park and Yellowstone National Park. The Grand Targhee ski resort is just 12 miles from Driggs Idaho which is the largest town in the county. Melinda Matson did mention Del Norte County recently receiving a grant to create a CEDS. We searched this information and it appears that the community is in the process of working on the CEDS and there are no draft documents available at this time that we could find. Other rural counties in California most similar to Alpine – Modoc, Sierra, Siskiyou Trinity – are included in a ---PAGE BREAK--- regional CEDS and do not have their own county-specific plan. The Mono County plan listed above is not a CEDS. Funding Sources EDA Planning and Local Technical Assistance Programs This is the funding program that Melinda Matson summarized at the November 13 2018 EDAC meeting. A portion of this program is specific to creating a CEDS. Grants are “over the counter” in that there is no specific application deadline. Funds for remain available until they are completely allocated to projects. The average size of a Planning grant has been approximately $70,000, and grants generally range from $40,000 to $200,000. Melinda Matson estimated the cost of Del Norte County’s CEDS to be approximately $100,000. Awards under EDA’s Planning and Local Technical Assistance programs will demonstrate the probability of effecting positive economic development impacts within distressed regions and help promote regional economic resiliency. Meeting specific distress criteria is not a prerequisite for funding under this grant program. The level of economic distress in the community is used to determine the local cash match requirement for the grant. Generally, the amount of an EDA award may not exceed 50 percent of the total cost of the project. This may be increased to 80 percent if all of the economic distress factors are present in the community. Here is the table from the grant program guidelines that shows the maximum grant award: ---PAGE BREAK--- Initial review is that Alpine County might qualify for 60% funding/40% local match. Our 24-month unemployment rate is estimated at between 5% and The national unemployment rate during this same period was approximately Unemployment would have to exceed 7% to be at least 175% of the national average. Our county per capita income is currently estimated at $62,375. The national per capita income is currently estimated at $48,150. In kind contribution for the local match can be considered. In kind typically means the value of local staff time spent on the project. Community Development Block Grant Planning and Technical Assistance Grants This grant program is administered through the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). It may be possible to use these funds to create a local economic development plan. Funding is allocated on an annual basis. The program is intended to target low and moderate income households and must be responsive to national objectives that address the targeted population. Planning projects funded by this grant must show a connection to actions that will lead to measurable job creation or other economic benefits to the targeted population. Funding up to $100,000 per jurisdiction is possible. The minimum local match is 5% in cash. Higher local matches increase the competitiveness of the application. The current year applications were due on February 26, 2019. USDA Rural Development Grants This is an extensive grant program administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). There are multiple types of grants within this program, including grants that might fund economic development plans. Staff recently searched the information available and did not fund any categories for economic development plans that are currently funded or available. US Environmental Protection Agency At the Committee’s meeting in August 2018, Larry Cope from the Tuolumne County Economic Development Authority provided information on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) resources to support rural development. The EPA has grant programs for water quality protection and other environmental issues, but does not appear to have any grant programs that would fund an economic development plan. Rural Community Assistance Corporation (RCAC) The RCAC based in West Sacramento is a non-governmental non-profit agency that provides economic development assistance to rural communities. They do not offer grant programs for economic development plans. ---PAGE BREAK--- 1 CENTRAL SIERRA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 2017-2022 CEDS COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY 2017 ---PAGE BREAK--- 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction & Executive Summary Introduction Approach Background & Existing Conditions CSEDD Vision Economic Development Strategy & Components Impacts on Local Community & Economy Background & Existing Conditions CSEDD Background Existing Conditions Industry Clusters Industry Growth Electricity Generation Capacity Demographic Trends Education Trends Housing Trends Labor Trends Broadband Availability Environmental Trends Vision Statement Economic Development Strategy & Components Approach/ Process Strategies, Projects, and Initiatives Implementation Agenda & Evaluation Framework Implementation Schedules Organizational Structure Appendix Survey Results SBA Worksheet Photo Credits Public Comments 4 5 6 7 8 13 15 14 17 24 25 25 26 28 32 3 33 34 35 43 44 53 57 56 64 29 29 30 31 65 66 ---PAGE BREAK--- 3 INTRODUCTION & EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ---PAGE BREAK--- 4 INTRODUCTION In 1976, the Central Sierra Economic Development District (CSEDD) was formed as a Joint Powers Authority (JPA), and established as an EDA-recognized economic development district. The CSEDD region encompasses the four counties of Alpine, Calaveras, Mariposa, and Tuolumne and includes the cities of Angels Camp and Sonora. The Central Sierra Economic Development District’s vision is to be an economic development resource to its member entities as well as a leader in communications between local counties and state or federal governments. The Central Sierra Economic Development District partnered with the Center for Economic Development at California State University, Chico (a competitively awarded EDA University Center) to create a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy for the CSEDD region. CSU, Chico worked with CSEDD to identify key stakeholders and formed a CEDS planning committee. Upon gathering community members, county officials, and private stakeholders from all four counties, CSU, Chico completed stakeholder interviews, hosted three community meetings and conducted a SWOT analysis in Sonora. This document is the culmination of those efforts and is the five-year road map promoting economic vitality within the CSEDD region. By focusing on eight key regional objectives including workforce development, business resiliency, infrastructure, and disaster planning, this economic development plan will create a stronger, more resilient region, able to withstand both economic and natural disaster disruptions. This document outlines the region’s goals and objectives and their associated implementation agenda, and performance measures. Tuolumne Mariposa Alpine Calaveras CSEDD County Boundaries CSEDD County Boundaries Major Highways Other Highways Freeways National Forest or Park State Park Markleeville Sonora Angels Camp Mariposa ---PAGE BREAK--- 5 CSEDD APPROACH AND DEVELOPMENT Development of the CEDS Committee The CSEDD strategy committee was chosen by members on the CSEDD board. Each CSEDD board member identified a community member who was not currently associated with the CSEDD. Individuals from county governments, non-profits, community organizations, and private entities were selected from each of the four counties to participate on the strategy committee, in addition to three current CSEDD board members. Community Feedback & Input CSU, Chico’s Center for Economic Development constructed an 18 question survey about the current and future needs of the region. The survey focused on barriers to economic development, business needs, previous economic development projects in the region, and building regional economic resilience. The survey was created in Constant Contact by the Center for Economic Development and a live link was provided to the CEDS planning committee and the CSEDD board. The survey link was sent out to CSEDD contacts, a press release was sent to local radio and media outlets, and the survey was hosted on the CSEDD and CED website. A total of 17 responses were received. A summarized copy of the survey results can be found in the Appendix of this document. To gain additional community feedback, representatives from the Center for Economic Development (CED) led three community town hall meetings within the CSEDD region. The results of the community survey were compiled and analyzed, and the key findings were presented to attendees at each meeting. Meetings took place in Angel’s Camp, Markleeville, and Mariposa and were two hours long. The key findings were discussed on both a regional and community level. During these discussions, community members addressed further key issues that were not originally identified in the survey results. All of the feedback received from both the community survey and meetings were compiled along with regional economic and demographic data collected by CED staff. These findings were used as an integral part of the CEDS strategy committee’s SWOT analysis. The results helped committee members better understand and address the needs of the region and identify the objectives and goals incorporated within this comprehensive economic development strategy. THE APPROACH KEY FINDINGS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 THERE IS A LACK OF JOB OPPORTUNITIES WITHIN THE REGION. THERE IS A SHORTAGE OF SKILLED LABOR WITHIN THE REGION. LOCAL ZONING AND PERMITTING IS HINDERING GROWTH. THERE ARE SOME COUNTIES NOT COLLECTING TOT FROM AIRBNB TYPE VACATION RENTALS. INFRASTRUCTURE INCLUDING BROADBAND IS LACKING WITHIN THE REGION. VISITORS’ SERVICES ARE INADEQUATE AND IN WRONG LOCATIONS. EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES ARE NOT BEING UTILIZED. ONE-DAY SHIPPING IS NOT AVAILABLE WITHIN THE CSEDD REGION. ---PAGE BREAK--- 6 SUMMARY OF CURRENT CONDITIONS IN THE CSEDD REGION ST RE N GT H S W EA KN ES SE S OP P OR T UN IT ES T HR EA TS The region’s airports are lacking in infrastructure which is causing slower shipping and delivery services. Improving Airport Infrastructure Advanced Visitors’ Services Capitalization of Educational Resources Collecting TOT Revenues Coordinated Marketing Efforts SWOT ANALYSIS Abundance of Natural Resources The region has an abundance of natural resources including water, logging, and clean air. Community Involvement The region has an actively involved community who are involved in regional planning efforts. Recreation & Tourism The region is located in an area with plenty of recreational opportunities including Yosemite Park, and Calaveras Big Trees Park. Historic Appeal & Downtowns The region’s mining history and historic downtown buildings brings tourists and visitors into the region. Healthcare Industry The region has a vital healthcare industry employing many residents and providing the region access to health services. . Affordable Housing Due to permitting regulations and the increase of vacation rentals, there is a lack of affordable housing throughout the region. Shortage of Skilled Workforce Business owners and community members agreed there is a shortage of skilled labor in the region. Aging and Inadequate Infrastructure In some areas of the region, there aren’t sewer or water lines available, and in many others they are severely aged. Distance to Markets There are two main transportation issues in the region: there aren’t any large markets within the region, and some highways are closed in winter months. Lack of Economic Diversity The region’s economic base is primarily based on the tourism and healthcare industry. The region is located near many tourist attractions and have many recreational opportunities within the region; however, the visitors’ center available are outdated and in wrong locations. The region needs to focus on marketing each county’s attractions throughout the entire region, and not just their own to build tourism and revenue for the entire district. The region has many educational resources available to its residents but yet there is still a shortage of educated and skilled workers. Capitalizing on resources will help build a stronger workforce. Only 2 counties in the region have plans in place to collect TOT from vacation rentals. Vocal Minority & Environmental Perception The vocal minority and the environmental perception within the region can hinder growth and slow permitting processes. Federal & State Government Natural Disasters & Drought Global Competitive Market Recession Because a large portion of the region is managed by state or federal government, possible changes in land management or cuts in funding may have a large impact on the region. Wildfires and drought are large threats to the region as it impacts residents, tourism, and natural resources As the world economy continues to grow, and internet access is readily available, local businesses may have trouble competing in a global market. Because the region’s economy is primarily recreation based, a recession can be detrimental to the local economy. ---PAGE BREAK--- 7 CSEDD REGIONAL VISION The vision for the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) is to guide CSEDD staff and community leaders as they focus their efforts on enhancing economic prosperity over the next five to ten years. By harnessing regional assets, community leaders will build upon existing programs and infrastructure to improve business resiliency, workforce development, advanced visitors services, and infrastructure improvements. The vision of the CSEDD is to be recognized as an economic development resource by its member entities, and community partners. CSEDD strives to become a proactive partner in project review and facilitation, identifying funding sources, assisting with grant applications, and in creating a network for shared communications between elected officials and staffs, the private sector, nonprofits, local economic development corporations, other local governments such as independent special districts and JPAs, and state and federal partners. ---PAGE BREAK--- 8 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES AND COMPONENTS Objective One: Enhance visitors’ services within the CSEDD region Objective Two: Build a skilled workforce within the CSEDD region Objective Three: Promote and develop community and business resiliency within the CSEDD region Objective Four: Promote coordinated marketing efforts throughout the CSEDD region Objective Five: Promote regional infrastructure improvements Objective Six: Expand upon existing business retention and expansion programs Objective Seven: Create a uniform Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) collection plan for vacation rentals across the entire region Objective Eight: Improve regional airport infrastructure to support faster shipping & delivery services ---PAGE BREAK--- 9 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES Enhancing visitor services throughout the region was identified in the SWOT analysis as a major opportunity for the region. Three of the six, non- governmental sectors with the highest location quotients in the region are all tourism-related and tourism was brought up in all three community meetings. With its vast public lands, outdoor recreation opportunities, and Yosemite National Park, the four county region has been tourist dependent for decades and will continue to be in the foreseeable future. The CSEDD region is in a unique position to capitalize on multi-county visitors. Unlike many California counties, most visitors are not just coming to the region to go to a specific location. There are a few exceptions such as Alpine County ski and fishing opportunities that are sole destinations but for the most part, even visitors to Yosemite stay or visit other parts of the region. Because of this multi-destination advantage, it is imperative that groups throughout the region work together to optimize visitor services and cross promote resources throughout the region. By enhancing visitors’ services, economic developers in the CSEDD are aiming to create a value-add proposition for would be travelers even in tough economic times. By setting themselves apart from other, less traveler friendly regions the regional economy would become more resilient. Objective One: Enhance visitors’ services within the CSEDD region. Action Item: Develop a regional tourism partnership organization Action Item: The CSEDD will review current visitors’ services, including location and identify more effective locations for visitors’ services Action Item: The CSEDD will successfully move at least one visitor service center to an optimal location Objective Two: Build a skilled workforce within the CSEDD region. Action Item: Increase school dual enrollment of the Columbia College CTE High School Articulation program Action Item: Enhanced partnerships between CSEDD staff and board members and the Mother Lode Work Force Investment Board (WIB) Action Item: Promote the Columbia College Water Resource Management program Action Item: Establish high school off campus tech center and innovation lab in Calaveras County Building a skilled workforce was identified in the community survey and all three of the community meetings as being one of the most important issues facing the region today. This is an important issue for two distinct reasons. First, the community members surveyed felt that the business community does not have access to a skilled workforce to fulfil its needs. Second, the “brain drain” throughout the region is one of the worst in the State. All four counties in the region have had negative net migration for over a decade. Opportunities have to exist or young professionals will have no reason to stay in the area. Workforce development is one or several necessary tools for solving both problems. The CTE High School Articulation program offers a unique opportunity for high school students to receive college credits. Columbia College Career Technical Education (CTE) collaborates with local and regional high school programs to develop articulation agreements, including alignment of course skills and concepts, the possibility of advanced placement, and credit by examination options. The goal of this action item is to have over 200 high school students enrolled in the region with three counties (Alpine County does not have a high school) having at least two high schools with CTE agreements in place by 2019. In addition, Columbia Community College offers a program in Water Resource Management, leading to a career in in water treatment, water distribution, wastewater management, groundwater management, and much more. CSEDD board members will being promoting the program for Columbia College at ---PAGE BREAK--- 10 Objective Four: Promote coordinated marketing efforts throughout the CSEDD region. Action Item: Promote a coordinated marketing plan throughout the region Action Item: Ensure all three counties within the GCVA are voting members of the association Action Item: Partner with regional leaders to cross-train employees Currently, there are different groups in each of the four CSEDD counties working on visitor attraction. As discussed in Objective One, many visitors to the area are regional visitors, not single destination visitors which means the four counties in the district need to work together to cross promote the region. The Gold Country Visitors’ Association (GCVA) in conjunction with Visit California is the primary group coordinating a regional marketing effort. Unfortunately, the GCVA does not include the high Sierra in its region. Currently Tuolumne and Calaveras County Visitor Bureaus are members. Essentially half of the CSEDD region is without an organized marketing effort, including all of Alpine County. Under the leadership of the CSEDD board, it will be the responsibility of the partner organization formed in Objective One to complete a multi-county strategic marketing plan. The plan will include cross-promotional items for all regional visitors’ centers, connecting with Visit California, and a plan that includes out-reach to national and international visitors to California. The simplest, yet most important, step in organizing a coordinated marketing effort is to cross-train employees and volunteers at all visitors’ centers and chambers of commerce about regional efforts. The staff at the Alpine Chamber of Commerce or the Tuolumne County Visitors Bureau need to know what activities are available in Mariposa or Calaveras County and vice versa. This is especially important as many people enter and exit Yosemite NP at different entrances. Objective Three: Promote and develop community and business resiliency within the CSEDD region. Action Item: Develop a long-term permanent response recovery strategic plan to replace the existing preliminary plan Action Item: Development of Calaveras County Chamber of Commerce Butte Fire Recovery Center Action Item: Development of Tuolumne County Disaster and Business Resiliency Center When compared to other regions, the CSEDD region has many outside threats to the health of its business climate. The region is in a constant threat of fire danger, and is currently locked in a prolonged drought. In addition, government furloughs and prolonged recession have historically taken tolls on the region’s important tourism industry, so it is imperative that local leaders be prepared to deal with human caused threats. Objectives 1 and 6 are to address the human caused threats while this objective is meant to address natural disasters. Fire danger and drought were far and away the two largest issues identified at the community meetings and the two seemingly go hand in hand. Both the Butte and Rim fires in the past several years have devastated the region, displacing hundreds of residents and destroying home-based businesses. It is the goal of the CSEDD and its partner organizations to reduce the short-term stress and the long-term economic effects on the business community due to the inevitable natural disasters. The CEDS planning committee has developed a preliminary plan for business disaster response and economic resilience. However, the dedicated staff time necessary to develop a permanent, long-term disaster response plan was not available at this time. The long-term plan will include a process for monitoring and addressing business needs, assigning staff from each county communication responsibilities, developing a revolving a loan fund for insurance gap funding, and connecting displaced businesses and employees with resiliency centers. the local level and expects Columbia College will see a 10 percent increase in program enrollment by fall 2020 as a result. During the SWOT analysis, it was determined that Mother Lode WIB is an excellent resource for local businesses and job seekers; however, it was agreed that it is currently being underutilized. As a result, the CEDS planning committee has determined that it is the responsibility of each of the CSEDD participating members to increase their WIB referrals which are currently very low. ---PAGE BREAK--- 11 Objective Six: Expand upon existing business retention and expansion programs Action Item: Seek State and Federal funding to provide broadband service to underserved and unserved communities Action Item: Seek funding for non-highway road construction improvements to increase access to markets Action Item: Phoenix Lake dredging project for sustainable water storage Action Item: Seek funding for water and waste water treatment facility construction and expansion Action Item: Seek funding for the Sierra Rail Expansion Action Item: Encourage PG&E to expand natural gas infrastructure from San Andreas Objective Five: Promote regional infrastructure improvements During the SWOT analysis, the weakness that was identified as being in most need of attention was infrastructure. While several types of infrastructure were identified as being an issue throughout the region, the three largest identified issues were water storage security, lacking sewer line development, and broadband infrastructure. Upon the completion of the six outlined action items, regional businesses will benefit tremendously as access to markets, water and sewer capacity, and broadband all improve. Action Item: Expand upon existing business retention and expansion programs Action Item: AgPlus EDA Technical Assistance Action Item: Obtain funding to further expand the BRE programs Action Item: Provide ESRI Business Analyst support services Business retention and expansion programs are some of the most important tools available to economic developers. Business attraction is a negative sum game as multiple regions compete for the same businesses that are interested in relocating. Communities are forced to offer more and more economic incentives and most just end up wasting scarce resources with little or no benefit. Additionally, high job growth often accompanies businesses in expansion mode, especially second stage companies. It is much easier to retain a business than it is to attract a new one, as the owner and employees are already routed in the community. In partnership with the Alliance Small Business Development Center (SBDC), CSEDD has been awarded a $50,000 grant from USDA Rural Development to expand current business retention and expansion efforts into underserved communities. By partnering with CSEDD, the chambers, and local government, the needs of local small businesses will be assessed and met. Qualified local consultants will be used whenever possible including current SBDC consultants from San Joaquin and Stanislaus Counties. When needed regional consultants will be recruited to meet business needs where ever local consultant expertise is not available. CSEDD staff will identify clients and provide referrals to Alliance SBDC and will work in conjunction with Alliance SBDC to offer business trainings in the underserved high Sierra region. Furthermore, the CSEDD has entered into a partnership with the EDA University Center, CSU, Chico to provide local businesses with business assistance by utilizing ESRI’s Business Analyst. CSEDD staff will make mapping and data requests on an as-needed basis and will remain the single point of contact with the business. In 2015, the CSEDD partnered with CSU, Fresno, CSU, Chico, and Valley Vision to submit an IMCP designation proposal for food and beverage manufacturing. The designation, known as AgPlus, was awarded in July of 2015 and lasts through at least June of 2017. The federal and subsequent non-federal matching funds will be used to coordinate and develop projects within the region that address components of the AgPlus implementation strategy. Action Item: Create a simple plan for Alpine and Calaveras counties to adopt Action Item: Adopt a plan at the county level Objective Seven: Create a uniform Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) collection plan for vacation rentals across the entire region Vacation rentals have skyrocketed throughout the CSEDD region. TOT is vital to many counties throughout California but is especially important to the CSEDD region as tourism is one of the region’s most important sectors. Mariposa, Alpine and Tuolumne counties have seen dramatic increases in former long-term rentals being converted to AirBnB type vacation rentals over the past five years. Rentals are popping up seemingly everywhere whether or not the property is permitted or zoned for vacation rentals. Unfortunately, due to staff constraints and lacking a plan, Alpine and Calaveras counties have yet to begin collecting TOT on these types of properties. As hotel and motel nights slow, and the pressure for business ---PAGE BREAK--- 12 Action Item: Access current infrastructure and identify gaps to be filled Action Item: Foster relationships with local shipping centers Action Item: With the help of local shipping company representatives, create a plan to address the necessary infrastructure improvements Action Item: Seek and obtain private and grant funding for necessary improvements Air transportation is a huge barrier to entry (weakness) identified in the SWOT analysis. Businesses located in the CSEDD region have little to no access to one- day or overnight shipping options. This negatively affects the service industry, retailers, and producers. Over the next five years, the CSEDD will partner with the Tuolumne County Airports Department to ensure the proper infrastructure is developed to bring small cargo planes to the region. While the Columbia Regional Airport is located in Tuolumne County, the benefits of having daily cargo planes flying in and out of the County are tremendous and felt region wide. With assistance from the CSEDD, the Tuolumne County Airports Department (TCAD) will create an asset inventory of current airport amenities. The inventory will also identify infrastructure gaps that may be keeping cargo planes from utilizing the facility. Upon completion, members of the TCAD and the CSEDD will share the report with local representatives from FedEx and UPS. Starting immediately, CSEDD representatives will build a relationship with the local representatives from the major companies to help further define what is needed at the airport to develop a shipping contract. Partners will create a strategic plan to make the Columbia Regional Airport attractable for FedEx or UPS to begin making cargo flights in at least once or twice per day. Objective Eight: Improve regional airport infrastructure for faster shipping and delivery services. and visitor services increase, CSEDD must assist Calaveras and Alpine counties by helping them create a plan to start collecting revenue within the next year. CSEDD board members will work together to create a simple plan for Alpine and Calaveras counties to start collecting TOT on internet-booked vacation rentals. Partners will explore what is currently working and what is not working in Mariposa and Tuolumne counties, keeping in mind that very little staff time can be dedicated to the monitoring of rentals that do not self-report. ---PAGE BREAK--- IMPACTS ON LOCAL COMMUNITY AND ECONOMY 1 2 3 4 5 INCREASE VISITOR SPENDING WITHIN THE ENTIRE CSEDD REGION. INCREASE BUSINESS PRODUCTIVITY AND REACH WITH FASTER SHIPPING & DELIVERY METHODS. INCREASE BUSINESS PRODUCTIVITY WITH ACCESS TO BROADBAND THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE REGION. REDUCE THE IMPACTS OF NATURAL DISASTERS BY CREATING AN ECONOMIC RESILIENCE RESPONSIVE PLAN. ENCOURAGE PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT WITH IMPROVED WATER & SEWER SYSTEMS. 6 7 8 9 10 INCREASE JOB GROWTH BY PROMOTING BUSINESS RETENTION AND EXPANSION THROUGH BRE PROGRAMS. INCREASE TAX REVENUES THROUGH COLLECTION OF TOT IN ALL FOUR COUNTIES. DEVELOP A MORE EDUCATED AND PRODUCTIVE WORKFORCE. INCREASE BUSINESS RESILIENCY. PROMOTE EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT BY INVESTING IN SUSTAINABLE WATER STORAGE. ---PAGE BREAK--- 14 BACKGROUND & EXISTING CONDITIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- 15 BACKGROUND INFORMATION About the CSEDD District The Central Sierra Economic Development District (CSEDD) has been the Central Sierra region’s EDA-recognized economic development district for over forty years. Formed as a Joint Powers Authority in 1976, CSEDD’s original member entities included Alpine, Amador, Calaveras, and Tuolumne counties as well as the cities of Sonora, Angels Camp, Jackson, Sutter Creek, Amador City, Ione, and Plymouth. Mariposa County was ratified into the District in November 2011. CSEDD’s board was comprised of both public and private sector members. An elected official from each county’s Board of Supervisors and an alternate were appointed for a one-year term; one City Council member and an alternate are appointed from Sonora and Angels Camp; and one 5-Cities representative and alternate was appointed on behalf of Amador County’s incorporated cities. Per the JPA, during a Mayor’s Conference at the beginning of each calendar year, five mayors select their 5-Cities representative and alternate. With 10 available private sector Citizen Members positions, only two were filled as of June 30, 2011. In early 2011, it came to the CSEDD board’s attention that its entire district’s staff, including its Executive Director, would need to be laid off due to financial difficulties with the entity of employment, the Central Sierra Planning Council (CSPC), whose board is comprised of the same elected officials as CSEDD. Immediate dissolution of the CSEDD was discussed. An interim solution was reached with the Tuolumne County Economic Development Authority (TCEDA) taking over management for one year starting July 1, 2011. TCEDA’s staff of two agreed to finish the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) annual update by its deadline, prepare three years of final grant reports still outstanding to bring the District back into EDA compliance, apply for the next Partnership Planning Grant and, if awarded, research, compile, write and submit a new five-year CEDS by the end of their contract on June 30, 2012. TCEDA completed the ratification of Mariposa County, attended the Mayor’s Conference selection meeting, completed the CEDS annual update and final reports by deadline, and was awarded an EDA planning grant #07-83-06806, and produced the 2012-2017 CEDS per contract agreement. Six new private sector Citizen Members were appointed by their respective counties, and together, a strengthened and more diverse CSEDD private/public board became the CEDS Committee to develop a new regional economic development strategy. Starting on July 1, 2012, TCEDA was awarded a competitive two-year management contract to assist CSEDD manage and implement their regional vision, goals, and objectives. The 2012 CEDS was a work-in- progress, and served as a guide for future communications, cooperation, and planning for the five-county region. A five-year CEDS with annual updates was required to qualify for assistance from the U.S. Department of Commerce for Economic Development Administration (EDA) funding. Development and implementation of a five-year CEDS required a new appraisal of each member entity’s needs, abilities, financing options, and project readiness, coalescing the region as a whole. With rapid and intense input and discussion from public/private CSEDD board members, regional economic development professionals, commercial and industrial developers, nonprofits, public utilities, public works departments, other community partners and interested residents; a regional economic development strategy and plan emerged. The 2012 CEDS was a better reflection of new and ongoing rural priorities, challenges and opportunities facing our five counties and seven cities, their businesses, visitors, and residents. On February 5, 2014 Amador County chose to leave the CSEDD. The CSEDD Joint Power Authority agreement at that time required all cities within Amador County to leave the district also. Since that time the CSEDD Joint Power Authority agreement has been amended to allow cities to join themselves without requiring the county to be part of the district. On April 17, 2014 the CSEDD board extended its contract with the TCEDA for three years. The current contract will end on June 30, 2017. Starting on January 1, 2016 the CSEDD board started its update to the five-year CEDS. In June of 2016, the CSEDD partnered with the Center for Economic Development at CSU, Chico to assist in the formation of the CEDS. The new five-year CEDS was approved by the CSEDD Board on November 17, 2016. The CEDS was circulated for public review between October 10, 2016 and November 9, 2016. The public comments can be found in the appendix of this document. ---PAGE BREAK--- 16 About Alpine County Alpine County is the smallest county by population in the State of California. There are no incorporated cities in the county. The county seat is Markleeville. Alpine County is located in the Sierra Nevada between Lake Tahoe and Stanislaus National Forest. Alpine County was created on March 16, 1864 during a silver boom in the wake of the nearby Comstock Lode discovery. It was named due to its resemblance to the Swiss Alps. The county was formed from parts of Amador, Calaveras, El Dorado, Mono and Tuolumne Counties. At its formation, the county had a population of about 11,000 with its county seat in Silver Mountain City. By 1868 however, the local silver mines had proven unfruitful, and the population fell to about 1,200. The county seat was moved to Markleeville in 1875. After the silver rush, Alpine County’s economy consisted almost entirely of farming, ranching, and logging. By the 1920s, the population had fallen to just 200 people. With the construction of the Bear Valley and Kirkwood ski resorts in the late 1960s, the population increased to the present level. The population at the 2010 Census was 1,175 and has increased to 1,202 in the most recent estimates (2014). According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the county has a total area of 743 square miles (1,920 km), of which 738 square miles (1,910 km) is land and 4.8 square miles (12 km) is water. The federal government owns about 96% of Alpine County, the highest percentage in California. About Tuolumne County Tuolumne County is located in the Sierra Nevada of the U.S. state of California. The northern half of Yosemite National Park is located in the eastern part of the county. The City of Sonora is the county’s only incorporated city, and Sonora is the county seat. Tuolumne County was one of the original counties of California, created in 1850 at the time of statehood. Prior to statehood, it had been referred to as Oro County. Parts of the county were given to Stanislaus County in 1854 and to Alpine County in 1864. According to the 2000 census, the county has a total area of 2,274 square miles (5,890 km), of which 2,221 square miles (5,750 km) is land and 54 square miles (140 km) is water. A California Department of Forestry document reports Tuolumne County’s 1,030,812 acres (4,171.55 km2) include federal lands such as Yosemite National Park, Stanislaus National Forest, Bureau of Land Management lands, and Native American reservations. The population at the 2010 Census was 55,365 and has decreased to 54,347 in the most recent estimates (2014). About Mariposa County Mariposa County is located in the western foothills of the Sierra Nevada in the U.S. state of California. It lies north of Fresno, east of Merced, and southeast of Stockton. The county seat is Mariposa. The county’s eastern half is the central portion of Yosemite National Park. There are no incorporated cities in Mariposa County; however, there are three communities recognized as census-designated places for statistical purposes. Mariposa County was one of the original counties of California, created at the time of statehood in 1850. While it began as the state’s largest county, over time territory that was once part of Mariposa was ceded to twelve other counties: Fresno, Inyo, Kern, Kings, Los Angeles, Madera, Merced, Mono, San Benito, San Bernardino, San Luis Obispo, and Tulare. Thus, Mariposa County is known as the “Mother of Counties”. According to the 2000 census, the county has a total area of 1,463 square miles (3,790 km), of which 1,449 square miles (3,750 km) is land and 14 square miles (40 km) is water. The population at the 2010 Census was 18,251 and has decreased to 17,946 in the most recent estimates (2014). About Calaveras County Calaveras County is located in the Gold Country of the State of California. The county seat is San Andreas. The City of Angels, locally referred to as Angels Camp, is the only incorporated city. Calaveras Big Trees State Park, a preserve of Giant Sequoia trees, is located in the county several miles east of the town of Arnold on State Highway 4. The uncommon gold telluride mineral calaverite was discovered in the county in 1861. Mark Twain set his story, “The Celebrated Jumping Frog of Calaveras County”, in the County. Each year, the county hosts a fair and Jumping Frog Jubilee, featuring a frog-jumping contest, to celebrate the association with Twain’s story. Calaveras County was one of the original counties of the state of California, created in1850 at the time of admission to the Union. Parts of the county’s territory were reassigned to Amador County in 1854 and to Alpine County in 1864. The county’s geography includes beautiful landmarks, rolling hills, and giant valleys. According to the 2010 census, the county has a total area of 1,037 square miles (2,690 km), of which 1,020 square miles (2,600 km) is land and 17 square miles (40 km) is water. The population at the 2010 Census was 45,578 and has decreased to 44,921 in the most recent estimates (2014). ---PAGE BREAK--- 17 EXISTING CONDITIONS Summary of the CSEDD Region The four counties of the Central Sierra Economic Development District region are blessed with abundant natural assets but continue to face many challenges common to rural areas throughout the American West. One prominent challenge is difficult market access due to distance from interstate highways, ports, and rail facilities. The following sections describe the CSEDD’s physical setting and infrastructure access connecting the region to outside markets. Physical Setting The four counties that comprise the CSEDD region include some of the most dramatic terrain in the American West. The CSEDD region straddles the Sierra Nevada mountain range with Calaveras, Tuolumne, and Mariposa counties on the western slope oriented toward the San Joaquin Valley and Alpine County on the eastern slope oriented toward Nevada’s Carson Valley. Many of the region’s modern communities trace their roots to California’s gold rush era, with much of today’s population clustered along the same waterways and small valleys in the Sierra foothills that were once dominated by placer mining in the early years of the gold rush. The rugged topography between these foothill and ravine areas translates into winding and often slow-moving routes connecting the area’s most densely populated communities. The crest of the Sierra presents another impediment to transportation, with winter weather often leading to pass closures. As home to many important state and federal reservoir projects like New Melones Lake and Lake McClure, the foothill areas of the CSEDD offer many outdoor activities such as fishing and recreational boating opportunities. Higher elevation areas of the CSEDD feature abundant timber resources and dramatic alpine landscapes often framed by exposed granite batholiths as found in Yosemite Valley. Highway and Rail Access State and county highways are the economic backbone that connect communities throughout the CSEDD region’s 5,500 square miles of rugged terrain to state and national markets. California State Route 49 serves as the vital north-south artery for foothill communities in Calaveras, Tuolumne, and Mariposa counties. Six east-west state highways provide connections to the San Joaquin Valley: Routes 12, 4, and 26 link Calaveras County to Stockton, Routes 108, 120, and 132 link Tuolumne County to Modesto, and Route 140 connects Mariposa County to Merced. Of these east-west state highways, only three crest the Sierra to provide eastward transportation connections: Highway 4 (Ebbetts Pass), Highway 108 (Carson Pass), and Highway 120 (Tioga Pass), although these passes are subject to seasonal closures. State Routes 120, 140, and 41 are important gateway routes for visitors to Yosemite National Park. A single rail connection to outside markets is provided by the Sierra Northern Railway, which operates a 48-mile line connecting Sonora in Tuolumne County to Union Pacific’s mainline San Joaquin Valley route in Oakdale. The Union Pacific main line connects with port facilities including the Port of Stockton and the Port of Oakland. While Sierra Northern line does provide freight service for the lumber industry and other business in East Sonora’s industrial zones, the railway’s tight geometries and resulting speed restriction of 5 mph for much of its length preclude the line from being used extensively for commercial shipping. Telecommunications Access Communities within the Central Sierra Economic Development District region are served by a handful of last-mile broadband service providers offering direct subscriber line, coaxial cable, and fixed wireless services. Direct subscriber lines are wired connections which generally meet the minimum definitions for “broadband service” as defined by the California Public Utilities Commission. Direct subscriber line service providers include AT&T throughout much of the region, along with smaller service providers with smaller focus region including Sierra Tel Internet, CALTEL Connections, Volcano Communications Group, Frontier Communications, and TDS Telecom. Coaxial cable is another wired connection technology that generally enables much higher download and upload speeds. Comcast is the franchisee for cable services for the vast majority of the developed areas within the four counties of the CSEDD region. Finally, fixed wireless services offer connectivity by broadcasting signals to a fixed receiver in a consumer’s home or business. This technology can offer moderately fast service to harder-to-reach locations, but price and reliability may be lower than traditional wired technologies. There are many service providers offering fixed wireless connections in much of the CSEDD region, including Volcano Wireless, Conifer Communications, and unwired Broadband, Inc. County Alpine 743 1,202 Calaveras 1,037 44,921 Mariposa 1,449 17,946 Tuolumne 2,274 54,347 CSEDD Region 5,503 118,416 County Size & Population 2010 Area Square Miles Source: U.S. Census Bureau County Square Mileage (2010) & U.S. Census Bureau ACS 2014, 5-year estimates (2016) 2014 Population ---PAGE BREAK--- 18 CSEDD WEAKNESSES, OPPORTUNITIES, & THREATS S W WEAKNESSES O OPPORTUNITIES T THREATS • Abundance of Natural Resources • Extensive Community Involvement • Many Recreational Opportunities • Access to Educational Institutions • IMCP AgPlus • Historic Appeal & Downtowns • Vital Tourism Industry • Regional Stability • Entertainment including Black Oak Casino • Strong Medical Facilities and Healthcare Industry • Wine Industry • Lack of Affordable Housing • Shortage of Skilled & Educated Workforce • Aging and Inadequate Infrastructure • Lack of Economic Diversity Infrastructure • Distance to Markets • Lack of Natural Gas Lines • Poor Cell Service • Sporadic Broadband Services • Poor Public Transportation • Vacancy of Commercial Properties-some counties have too many vacant; others not enough • Inadequate visitors’ centers • Shortage of living-wage jobs • Slow shipping & delivery services • Improving Airport Infrastructure • Advanced Visitors’ Services • Regional Coordinated Marketing Efforts • Capitalization of Educational Resources • Collection of TOT Revenues from AirBnB type rentals • Build Healthcare Services for senior and aging population • Quality K-12 education for attracting families • Promote business training centers • Expand Community College Opportunities • Vocal Minority & Environmental Perception • Federal & State Government • Natural Disasters • Drought • Global Competitive Market • Recession • Marijuana Industry • Reduction of Healthcare Services ---PAGE BREAK--- 19 TOP After reviewing all the weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of the CSEDD region, community members and stakeholders identified the most important results of the region. While the CSEDD region has a variety of the following were determined to be the most important and unique to the region: Abundance of Natural Resources The CSEDD has an abundance of natural resources located in and around the region. Some of these include water, forest lands including logging, clean air, energy generation, and mineral extraction. The CSEDD region has been able to utilize these resources in a way that promotes sustainable forest practices and maximizes the benefits of the region’s resources. In addition to the market value of these goods, the many lakes, forest lands, and natural resources are amenities to local residents and tourists. Recreation & Tourism All four counties within the CSEDD are primarily rural in nature, and consist of several recreation sites including Grover Hat Springs, Calaveras Big Trees, Columbia State Historic Park, Yosemite National Park, and four national forests providing recreational activities like camping, hunting, fishing, and skiing. Many tourists travel to the region, spending money and renting vacation homes. In addition to the natural recreation within the region, the region has many local wineries attracting tourists to the area. 1. ABUNDANCE OF NATURAL RESOURCES 2. RECREATION & TOURISM 3. EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES 4. HISTORIC APPEAL & DOWNTOWNS 5. COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Educational Resources The CSEDD has several different educational resources available close to or within the district. The first is UC Merced which is the newest University in California with a special mission to increase the number of high-school students attending college within its region. UC Merced serves as a major base for advanced research and focuses on sustainable design and construction. The second is the Innovation Lab and Maker Space located in Sonora. The Innovation Lab is a place where businesses and non-profits can intermix and exchange ideas to make their communities a better place. The Innovation Lab is equipped with equipment and meeting spaces for businesses to be successful. In addition, Mother Lode job training is also a valuable educational resource to the workforce within the CSEDD region. Mother Lode provides job-seekers with resources for finding work as well as on-the-job training. Historic Appeal & Downtowns The communities within the CSEDD region have a rich historical past that can still be seen today. The region includes remnants of gold mining and an old-west atmosphere. Also located within the region is the Mark Twain Cabin which is a California Historical Landmark and is also where Mark Twain wrote the short story The Celebrated Jumping Frog of Calaveras County, still celebrated today in Calaveras County’s Fair and Jumping Frog Jubilee which has grown to over 45,000 attendees annually. The rich history and historic appeal is a vital aspect that brings tourists and visitors into the region. Community Involvement The community members within the CSEDD region are actively involved and are passionate about the well-being and growth of the region. Community members are engaged in new planning efforts and are part of decision making processes. Community involvement is a very important aspect of economic development planning because it helps generate ideas for projects and their implementation. The community knows what they want their community to be and actively voice their opinions. ---PAGE BREAK--- 20 TOP WEAKNESSES This section discusses the current weaknesses within the CSEDD region. The weaknesses were decided by broad community and stakeholder participation, and the following were determined as the top weaknesses in the region: Shortage of Affordable Housing Throughout the entire CSEDD region there is a lack of affordable housing with some counties far worse than others. Mariposa and Alpine counties are high tourism areas, and with the ease of use of sites like AirBnB, many long-term rental homes are being converted to vacation homes. This is leaving a shortage of available affordable homes for residents and the region’s workforce. In addition, due to the inadequate sewer and water infrastructure as well as local permitting and regulations, new housing developments are currently not being built. Local permitting requirements are also a large concern to local business owners who struggle to create or expand their opperations. Local Zoning & Permitting In addition to hindering housing development, local permitting requirements are a huge concern to local business owners who struggle to create or expand their operations. The California State Code of Regulations coupled with local zoning and permitting regulations can sometimes place unneccessary cost burdens on local citizens. Navigating around these regulatory obstacles has been expressed by citizens and businesses as a hurdle to development. Government authorities need to reassess regulations and decide which laws are neccessary. However, local governments and authorities can sieze the opportunity to 1. SHORTAGE OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING 2. AGING & INADEQUATE INFRASTRUCTURE 3. DISTANCE TO MARKETS 4. LACK OF ECONOMIC DIVERSITY 5. LACK OF EDUCATED & SKILLED WORKFORCE 6. LOCAL PERMITTING & ZONING better understand which regulations are causing the largest regional impact and create strategies to lessen the regulatory burden. Aging & Inadequate Infrastructure Infrastructure within the CSEDD region is either inadequate or aging. In some areas, the lack of water and sewer lines have hindered development especially within the residential sector. In addition, the current water and sewer lines are aging and cannot handle more units on the systems. Furthermore, broadband infrastructure is not complete within the entire region. While some areas of the district have broadband access, some blocks or areas are without coverage. The region needs infrastructure improvement for a strong broadband backbone throughout the region. Lastly, natural gas lines are only available to San Andreas and leave the rest of the region underserved. Distance to Markets The Central Sierra Economic Development District is located geographically in an area with two main issues for transportation. First, there aren’t any large markets located within the CSEDD region, and second, the majority of the district is connected by a series of high alpine highways reaching elevations of over 8,700 feet. In many areas of the region, seasonal conditions cause main highways to be closed during the winter. Due to snow conditions, highway 4, the main highway connecting Bear Valley and Markleeville in Alpine County, is closed every winter at Ebbetts Pass, significantly increasing commute and transportation times. A person trying to get from Bear Valley to Reno in the winter will expect an additional two hours to their drive time than they would in the summer months. Other winter road closures include the highway 108 pass near Donnell Lake and part of highway 89 in Alpine County, as well as highway 120 in Tuolumne County. The distance to markets also impacts the availability and speed of shipping. Throughout the CSEDD region, one-day shipping is not available. Because of the distance to markets and inadequate road conditions, one-day shipping would only be possible through air transportation. Unfortunately, current airport infrastructure is lacking and cannot accommodate one-day shipping. Lack of Economic Diversity The CSEDD region’s economic base is primarily dependent on tourism. While the many tourism opportunities is a great strength of the region, in the event ---PAGE BREAK--- 21 of another recession or natural disaster, a decline in tourism may lead to a more significant impact on the region’s economy. Another industry sector that accounts for a large portion of the region’s economy is the healthcare industry. While the healthcare industry is currently strong, it requires a continued base of patients. The CSEDD region has continued to see a declining population over the past decade, if this continues, it could have an impact on the region’s healthcare industry. A small number of economic base industries leave the region susceptible to both man-made and natural disruptions. Lack of Educated & Skilled Workforce In the community feedback, business owners and community members stated that one of the key barriers to economic development and reason for business failures is the lack of qualified, educated, and skilled workers. The CSEDD region has experienced a teenage brain drain. Between 2009 and 2014, the number of residents between the ages of 10 and 24 years old decreased by 14 percent. In addition, between 2005 and 2014, the number of high-school graduates eligible for UC or CSU entrance was far below that of the California average. ---PAGE BREAK--- 22 TOP OPPORTUNITIES This section focuses on the potential opportunities the CSEDD region can use to build a more prosperous and economically resilient region. After utilizing community and stakeholder input, the top five opportunities facing the CSEDD region are: Advanced Visitors’ Services As one of the region’s top tourism brings many visitors to the CSEDD region. However, the region is lacking in advanced visitors’ services to direct travelers to local attractions or recreation sites. In addition, without advanced visitors’ services within the region, communities are missing out on the chance to get through-travelers to stop and potentially spend money. There are currently visitors’ services within the CSEDD region, but many are located in dated sites where new highway improvements have diverted visitors away from the services. Improving current visitors’ services or promoting new ones could bring more visitor spending within the CSEDD region. Coordinated Marketing Efforts With the vast abundance of natural resources and recreation opportunities within the CSEDD region, each county promotes their own community resources, but does not promote the resources of the region. Coordinating marketing efforts for these resources and cross-training employees regionally is an opportunity to promote inter-county spending by visitors. Capitalization of Educational Resources The CSEDD region has several educational resources available to its residents. UC Merced, Mother Lode job training, and Innovation Lab are all educational 1. ADVANCED VISITORS’ SERVICES 2. COORDINATED MARKETING EFFORTS 3. CAPITALIZATION OF EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES 4. IMPROVING REGIONAL AIRPORTS 5. COLLECTION OF TOT resources the CSEDD region can utilize more effectively. In addition, Columbia Community College could be a potential partner to create a more educated and skilled workforce. Improving Regional Airports The airports within the CSEDD region are lacking in infrastructure which in turn is causing shipping and delivery services within the region to be inadequate. One-day shipping within the CSEDD region is not currently provided which is a hindrance for businesses and slows region productivity. Improving at least one regional airport to support one-day shipping and delivery services, could promote business growth and productivity. Collection of TOT With a large portion of the region’s available housing being used for vacation homes, the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) is import revenue to local county governments. As online vacation sites like AirBnB have increased in use and popularity, traditional forms of TOT collection are no longer adequate. Only two of the four counties within the CSEDD district currently collect TOT fees from vacation homes booked through online sites. The collection of this tax revenue is vital to the region. ---PAGE BREAK--- 23 TOP THREATS This section outlines the external threats that face the CSEDD region. Because threats are external, the CSEDD region can only prepare for these in the event they occur. The three top threats facing the region are federal and state government, the vocal minority and environmental perception, and natural disasters. Federal & State Government A large portion of the CSEDD district land is managed by federal and state governments, with national forest land management accounting for 32 percent of land in the CSEDD region. Local county governments cannot control the decisions and management of the federal and state lands. Therefore, this could be the top threat to the region. If state or federal funding to these lands change, like a decline in funds for trail maintenance or fish planting, a decline in tourism could have an impact on the local economy. Vocal Minority & Environmental Perception While the regional community involvement is a top strength of the CSEDD region, the vocal minority and environmental perception of some community members is a huge threat to the growth and development within the region. The vocal minority and the environmental perceptions can hinder building and industry plans and cause projects to become economically inviable. Natural Disasters The CSEDD region’s largest threat is the possibility of natural disasters like wildfires which the region has recently seen with the impacts Rim Fire. The Rim Fire burned over 250,000 acres including residential homes and local businesses and has had a significant impact on the local region. Some residents have decided to move to less-risky areas and insurance agencies are denying coverage for residences. Natural disasters are inevitable; however, preparing the region for them will reduce the future threat. 1. FEDERAL & STATE GOVERNMENT 2. VOCAL MINORITY & ENVIRONMENTAL PERCEPTION 3. NATURAL DISASTERS THE RIM FIRE The result of a hunter’s illegal fire, the Rim Fire started on October 24th, 2013 burning 257,314 acres and 112 structures in the Stanislaus National Forest, making it the most expensive fire on record in the Sierra Nevada Mountain Range. ---PAGE BREAK--- 24 CSEDD INDUSTRY CLUSTERS In 2014, there were seven industries region wide that had a location quotient (LQ) greater than one. Of those seven, three fall into the tourism cluster. Additionally, agriculture (farm employment) had the highest LQ of all sectors indicating its true importance to the region. Lastly, health care and social assistance is an emerging cluster in the region. With an aging population and out-migration of young working professionals, the need for expanded health care is growing each year. TOURISM Due to the fact that a large portion of rental housing in Tuolumne, Mariposa, and Alpine counties, are strictly vacation rentals, the real estate, and rental and leasing industry in being included in the tourism cluster. With a LQ of 4.7 in 2014 real estate is the industry in the region with the second highest LQ (down from scoring the highest at 5, in 2009). Accommodations and food service (LQ of 1.3) and arts, entertainment, and recreation (LQ of 2) rank as the 6th and 3rd highest industries respectively. Not only do the three industries making up this cluster compare favorably to the U.S. as a whole, they also make up a significant amount of the total employment within the region. Combined, the three sectors account of 20.8 percent of total regional employment. It is worth noting that between 2009 and 2014 there was virtually no change in the relative size of the cluster in the region as 20.9 percent of total regional employment came from the cluster in 2009. This measure demonstrates the long-term importance of the cluster but also shows the need for diversification of the economic base for increased economic resilience. AGRICULTURE While farm employment was only 2.6 percent of total regional employment in 2014, its LQ when compared to the national average was 5. Essentially, an employee in the CSEDD region was five time more likely than the average employee to depend on agriculture for their job. Not only did farm employment have the greatest LQ of any industry in the region, it has also seen the fastest growth in its LQ (12 percent). Farm employment in the region, over the five-year period, grew by 7 percent, out pacing California’s farm employment growth (6 percent) and the nation’s, nearly stagnant, employment decline in the sector(-0.1 percent growth). HEALTH CARE The health care and social assistance industry is the fastest growing industry in the CSEDD region. Due to data constraints, Mariposa County did not report health care employment in 2009, but when Mariposa County is factored out, the data shows that the industry grew 16.7 percent between 2009 and 2014. That job growth also accounted for a significant shift in the employment make-up of the region. In 2009, 9.3 percent of regional employment was from the sector. By 2014, that percentage had grown to 10.7. As of 2014, the LQ for the sector was still less than 1 (LQ of .89); however, health care is clearly an emerging industry cluster in the region. ---PAGE BREAK--- 25 INDUSTRY GROWTH Between 2009 and 2014, the CSEDD region saw an 11 percent increase in the manufacturing industry which was the largest sector growth in terms of jobs for the region and was much higher than in California which only increased by one percent. Retail trade and farm employment also experienced a large growth in the CSEDD district increasing in jobs by seven percent just above California. Over the same period, the accomodation and food services industry grew by six percent which was ten percent lower than in California. CSEDD California Industry 5-Yr Change 5-Yr Change Farm employment 1,223 1,314 7% 6% Forestry, fishing, and related activities n/a 17% Mining n/a 41% Utilities n/a Construction 4,022 3,493 -13% 6% Manufacturing 1,761 1,948 11% 1% Wholesale trade n/a 9% Retail trade 5,128 5,498 7% 6% Transportation and warehousing 783 751 15% Information 550 501 7% Finance and insurance 1,531 n/a 0% Real estate and rental and leasing 3,824 3,671 9% Professional, scientific, and technical services 2,727 n/a 11% Management of companies and enterprises n/a 13% Administrative and waste services n/a 19% Educational services 529 n/a 16% Health care and social assistance 5,069 n/a 32% Arts, entertainment, and recreation 1,565 1,456 14% Accommodation and food services 5,151 5,436 6% 16% Other services, except public administration 3,611 3,867 7% 13% Government and government enterprises 10,352 9,691 Sum of withheld values 8,264 7,599 0% Total Jobs 50,492 50,823 1% 10% 2009 CSEDD 2014 CSEDD Jobs by Industry, Central Sierra Economic Development District In accordance with the U.S. Department of Commerce, the Bureau of Economic Analysis will withhold industry information if it compromises the confidentiality of an individual firm. This is usually the case if there are very few firms in a particular market or if one firm has a large share of the market. Alpine County data is not reported in this table due to a large number of values. Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, 2009 & 2014 ELECTRICITY GENERATION CAPACITY Facility Type Biomass 33.16 2.1% 1.6% Coal 0 0.0% 0.2% Geothermal 0 0.0% 3.4% Hydro 1522.89 97.7% 17.7% Natural Gas 0 0.0% 58.6% Nuclear 0 0.0% 2.9% Oil 0 0.0% 0.4% Solar 3.3 0.2% 7.5% Wind 0 0.0% 7.5% Other 0 0.0% 0.0% *Data for Alpine County unavailable Source: The California Energy Commission Electricity Generation Capacity, CSEDD, 2014 Total Capacity Percent of Capacity (Megawatts) County California 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Biomass Coal Geother mal Hydro Natural Gas Nuclear Oil Solar Wind Other Electricity Generation Capacity, Licensed Power Plants Over 0.1 MW Capacity CSEDD California The chart below shows the electricity generation capacity for the Central Sierra Economic Development District. According to the California Energy Commission, in 2014, 98 percent of the electrical generation capacity in the region was from hydro power, two percent is from biomass, and less than one percent was from solar. It is also important to note that the region does not have natural gas electricity generation capacity, while 59 percent of the California average generation capacity comes from natural gas. ---PAGE BREAK--- 26 DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS Population Trends and Projections Current Population: According to the California Department of Finance, the current population within the CSEDD district has been declining every year between 2007 and 2016 while the population in California has grown by eight percent over the same time period. All counties across the CSEDD region have experienced negative growth According to the US Census Bureau, the two most populous counties within the CSEDD region are Tuolumne County (54,347) and Mariposa County (17,946). Alpine County has remained the smallest county in the CSEDD region and in California with only 1,202 permanent residents in 2014. The CSEDD region is comprised of rural counties with only two cities in the district. Angel’s Camp located in Calaveras County had 3,004 people and the city of Sonora had 4,423 people in 2014. Population Projections: Despite the past decade of population decline, the California Department of Finance projects an overall population growth within the CSEDD region of nine percent by 2025, and by 15 percent by CSEDD CSEDD California Year Population Percent Change Percent Change 2007 121,386 0.4% 0.8% 2008 121,377 0.0% 0.7% 2009 120,821 -0.5% 0.7% 2010 120,348 -0.4% 0.8% 2011 120,286 -0.1% 0.9% 2012 120,148 -0.1% 0.9% 2013 119,970 -0.1% 0.9% 2014 119,802 -0.1% 0.9% 2015 119,629 -0.1% 0.9% 2016 119,432 -0.2% 0.9% Total Population, Central Sierra Economic Development District Source: California Department of Finance Declining Population: Population within the Central Sierra Economic Development District has decreased by 1.6% between 2007 and 2016. Conversely, population within California has grown almost 8% over the same time period. 10 Years of Negative Growth: Over the past 10 years, all counties within the CSEDD have seen negative population growth on a county level. Projected Growth: Despite the recent decline in population, California Department of Finance projects a growth in population of 9% by 2025 within the CSEDD. 2050. Between 2016 and 2025, Mariposa County is projected to grow the fastest with a 13 percent increase. However, Calaveras County is projected to increase the most between 2016 and 2015, increasing by 12 percent by 2025 and an addition 23 percent by 2050. While all counties are projected to increase between 2016 and 2025, Alpine County is expected to decline by eight percent between 2025 and 2050. Information: According to ESRI’s Tapestry Segmentation Area Profiles, nearly 45 percent of the CSEDD district is comprised of Rural Resort Dwellers who are residents close to retirement who normally live in scenic rural areas. These individuals are primarily older, married couples with no children at home. These individuals like to spend their disposable income on their hobbies which include freshwater fishing, hunting, and In addition, 81.8 percent of these individuals are homeowners. The second largest segment of individuals within the CSEDD district are Senior Sun Seekers which account for 10.2 percent of the households in the region. These individuals are retired or are closely anticipating retirement. More than half of these households are currently receiving Social Security benefits. Many of these residents own seasonal homes, and live near areas where they can hunt, fish, or play bingo. ---PAGE BREAK--- 27 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% >5 5 to 14 15 to 19 20 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 59 60 to 69 70 to 84 85+ Age Distribution, Percent of Total Population CSEDD California White Black or African American American Indian and Alaska Native Asian Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Other Two or More Races CSEDD 86.1% 1.2% 1.7% 1.3% 0.3% 2.4% 7.1% California 58.7% 5.6% 0.7% 13.3% 0.4% 12.6% 8.8% 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0% Racial/Ethnic Background, Percent of Total Population Aging Population: Within the CSEDD, all age groups younger than 45 years are smaller in comparison to California. Conversely, all age groups older than 60 years are larger within the CSEDD in comparison to California. Teenage Brain Drain: Between 2009 and 2014, the number of residents younger than 5 years of age decreased by Over the same period, the number of residents between the ages of 10 and 24 years decreased by 14%. Lacking Diversity: 86% of CSEDD identified as white in 2014, 30% higher than the state as a whole. Racial and Ethnic Diversity: In 2014, the CSEDD region primarily consisted of white residents. According to the US Census Bureau’s 2014 American Community Survey five-year estimates, the CSEDD region was 86.1 percent white individuals which was 27.4 percent higher than that of California. The second largest racial/ethnic group in the district was the American Indian and Alaska Native population which accounted for 1.7 percent of the population. Many of these residents may be located in Tuolumne County and are a part of the Tuolumne Band of Me-Wuk Indians. Population by Age:The CSEDD region’s largest age group was individuals aged 45 to 59 years old, and the second largest age group were individuals aged 60 to 69 years old. The CSEDD district had more individuals aged 45 to 85 than California as a whole, and all age groups younger than 45 years old are smaller in the CSEDD region than in California. In addition, between 2009 and 2014, the number of residents between the ages of 10 and 24 years old, declined by 14 percent. This may be resulting in a regional “brain drain” where there is a large portion of college-aged students leaving the region in pursuit of education but cease to return after graduation. This often occurs in rural communities who are unable to maintain a sufficient amount of educated career positions and graduates who would have wanted to return to the region, must find work elsewhere. ---PAGE BREAK--- 28 EDUCATION TRENDS 2005-2006 2014-2015 Geography % Eligible % Eligible Percent Change Calaveras 34% 23% -32.4% Mariposa 18% 31% 72.2% Tuolumne 22% 25% 13.6% California 36% 43% 19.4% Graduates Eligible for U.C. and/or C.S.U. Entrance Source: California Department of Education *Note: Alpine County has maintained 0% eligibility since 2005. 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% 2005- 06 2006- 07 2007- 08 2008- 09 2009- 10 2010- 11 2011- 12 2012- 13 2013- 14 2014- 15 Graduates Eligible for U.C. and/or C.S.U. Entrance, All Graduates CSEDD California Lowering the Dropout Rate: The high school dropout rate has decreased by 53% within the CSEDD since the 2010-2011 school year. Fewer Dropouts Compared to California: The high school dropout rate for the 2014-2015 school year within the CSEDD was 1.2%, less than half of the California dropout rate for the same year Fewer Graduates Ready for College: Percentage of graduates eligible for U.C. and C.S.U. system entrance within the CSEDD decreased by 5% since the 2005- 2006 school year. In 2014, within the CSEDD region, 91 percent of the residents 25 years and older had a high school diploma, which was eight percent higher than in California. However, only 23 percent of residents the same age in the CSEDD region had a bachelor’s degree or higher which was seven percent lower than in California. The high school dropout rate in the CSEDD region fluctuated year-to-year between 2005 and 2014 but mostly remained at a lower rate than California. In recent years, the number of high school dropouts in the CSEDD region declined by 53 percent between 2010 and 2014. However, the number of high school graduates eligible for CSU or UC’s in the CSEDD district were below California between 2005 and 2014. In the 2014-2015 school year, California had 43 percent of graduates eligible for entrance to a UC or CSU system, while the CSEDD district on average only had 26 percent of students eligible, a total of 17 percent fewer eligible graduates. 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% 3.5% 4.0% 4.5% 2005- 06 2006- 07 2007- 08 2008- 09 2009- 10 2010- 11 2011- 12 2012- 13 2013- 14 2014- 15 High School Dropout Rate CSED District California ---PAGE BREAK--- 29 HOUSING TRENDS According to the American Community Survey’s 2014 5-year estimates, the CSEDD region has more owner-occupied units, and a higher percentage of newer housing units when compared to California and the United States as a whole. The majority of housing units in the CSEDD region were built between1970 and 2009. Seventy-four percent of housing units in the CSEDD region were owner-occupied compared to California which was only 55 percent and the United States which was 64 percent. However, in 2014, there weren’t any homes in the CSEDD region built after 2010, which was about half a percent lower than California and the United States. In addition, the CSEDD region had a higher rate of vacant housing units (32%) than in California and the United States The highest vacancy rate within the four counties in the CSEDD region was Alpine County with 79 percent of housing units classified as vacant; however, this was most likely due to the large number of vacation rentals within the County. Furthermore, the entire CSEDD region has a large number of housing units utilized as vacation homes which could be impacting the reported vacancy housing rates. LABOR TRENDS CSEDD CSEDD CSEDD California Year Labor Force Employment Unemployment Rate Unemployment Rate 2011 56,740 49,250 13.2% 11.8% 2012 56,060 49,440 11.8% 10.5% 2013 54,540 49,230 9.8% 8.9% 2014 50,620 46,350 8.4% 7.5% 2015 50,840 47,350 6.9% 6.2% Source: California Employment Development Department Employment, Central Sierra Economic Development District 0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% 14.0% 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Unemployment Rate, Annual, Not Seasonally Adjusted CSEDD California The CSEDD district experienced a decline in both their labor force and unemployment rate between 2011 and 2015. While the unemployment rate dropped between 2014 and 2015 by 1.5 percent, the number of employed residents still remains below what it was in 2011. Because the CSEDD district is heavily dependent on tourism, the labor force changes in size from the different seasons. During the summer, the labor force is generally higher as people move back into the labor force looking for work as the economy improves. In past years, labor force entrants were able to be hired fairly quickly; however, in recent years, many labor force entrants are not being hired as quickly than in prior years which has caused higher unemployment during the summer months. This indicates a change in the overall CSEDD economy as people who used to be hired are no longer able to. 1% 15% 14% 14% 16% 11% 11% 5% 13% 1% 12% 11% 15% 18% 14% 14% 6% 9% 0% 15% 16% 22% 21% 10% 7% 3% 6% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 2010 or Later 2000 to 2009 1990 to 1999 1980 to 1989 1970 to 1979 1960 to 1969 1950 to 1959 1940 to 1949 1939 or earlier Percent of Housing Units Built by Year, 2014 CSEDD California US ---PAGE BREAK--- 30 BROADBAND AVAILABILITY A region’s ability to have universal access to broadband is an important factor to its economic growth. Many rural communities face a digital divide where several rural communities still face slow or inaccessible internet in their community. Access to broadband offers many potential growth opportunities and can many enhance many regional services such as educational resources or business productivity. In the CSEDD region, some communities have access to broadband while others have little to no access. The map to the right shows the California Public Utilities Commission’s broadband availability data. The map shows the areas by census tract that are considered served, under-served, and un-served by broadband. As shown, there are census tracts where broadband is available but a nearby census tract are considered to be un-served. Communities within the Central Sierra Economic Development District region are served by a handful of last-mile broadband service providers offering direct subscriber line, coaxial cable, and fixed wireless services. Direct subscriber lines are wired connections which generally meet the minimum definitions for “broadband service” as defined by the California Public Utilities Commission. Direct subscriber line service providers include AT&T throughout much of the region, along with smaller service providers with smaller focus region including Sierra Tel Internet, CALTEL Connections, and TDS Telecom. Coaxial cable is another wired connection technology that generally enables much higher download and upload speeds. Comcast is the franchisee for cable services for the vast majority of the developed areas within the three counties of the CSEDD region. Finally, fixed wireless services offer connectivity by broadcasting signals to a fixed receiver in a consumer’s home or business. This technology can offer moderately fast service to harder-to-reach locations, but price and reliability may be lower than traditional wired technologies. There are many service providers offering fixed wireless connections in much of the CSEDD region, including Volcano Wireless, Conifer Communications, and unwired Broadband, Inc. Iÿ 395 Iÿ 99 £ ¤ 50 Alpine Calaveras Tuolumne Mariposa NEVADA Mono El Dorado Madera MERCED San Joaquin Stanislaus Fresno Broadband Service Served Under-served Un-served Freeways Major Highways Amador Source: California Public Utilities Commission County Alpine County Calaveras County Mariposa County Tuolumne County CSEDD Region 48% 31% 32% 30% 31% 8,666 Households Unserved 0 2,516 1,346 2,834 6,696 Households Underserved 237 3,432 1,128 3,869 22,156 49,232 260 12,938 5,219 15,453 33,870 Total Households (2010 Census) 497 18,886 7,693 Households Served Broadband Service, CSEDD, 2015 Source: California Public Utilities Commission, December 31, 2015 Percent of Households Underserved or Unserved ---PAGE BREAK--- 31 ENVIRONMENTAL TRENDS Average Precipitation According to the Western Regional Climate Center, between 1981 and 2010, the Central Sierra Economic Development District had on average six inches more precipitation than the California average. In addition, the region experienced on average 30 more inches of snow than the State average. Most of the snowfall occurred in Calaveras and Alpine County. However, because this data does represent the average from 1981 and 2010, rainfall and snowfall in more recent years may be less due to extensive periods of state-wide drought. Alpine Calaveras Tuolumne Mariposa CSEDD California County County County County Average Average Average July Maximum Temp. (deg.) 83.7 80.3 93.3 88.6 86.5 88.7 Average January Maximum Temp. (deg.) 43.6 43.9 55.5 47.9 47.7 51.4 Average July Minimum Temp. (deg.) 51.1 53.5 56.1 56.3 54.3 54.3 Average January Minimum Temp. (deg.) 21.3 28.6 32.1 28.6 27.7 31.4 Average July Precipitation (in.) 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.4 0.2 Average January Precipitation (in.) 2.4 9.9 6.6 6.7 6.4 5.4 Average Annual Precipitation (in.) 22.3 57.0 35.8 37.9 38.3 31.9 Average January Snowfall (in.) 19.9 23.0 0.0 12.3 13.8 3.9 Average Annual Snowfall (in.) 81.8 111.8 0.4 26.3 55.1 15.4 Climate Readings, CSEDD, 1981-2010 Source: Western Regional Climate Center 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 Alpine Calaveras Tuolumne Mariposa CSEDD California Average Annual Precipitation 1981-2010 Average Annual Average Precipitation 1981-2010 Average ---PAGE BREAK--- 32 The CSEDD will continue to lead meetings and maintain regular communication with the CEDS strategy committee members in order to gauge the progress and monitor completion of the implementation agenda. The CEDS strategy committee will meet annually, and CSEDD staff will regularly lead conference calls with the CEDS strategy committee to keep track of completion on a quarterly basis. While the CED has engaged public and stakeholder participation throughout the development and planning process of the comprehensive economic development plan, continued public and stakeholder participation will be important to the implementation of the strategic plan. The CSEDD board will continue to encourage stakeholder involvement through personal business visits, speaking events including Rotary and similar organizations, and continued interactions with Native American Indian tribes, government officials, and non-profit leaders. PUBLIC & STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT CSEDD VISION STATEMENT The CSEDD vision statement was developed through a process which utilized both stakeholder and community involvement. A meeting was held inviting the community to join the CSEDD board in creating a vision for the CSEDD. Board members and community members analyzed the objectives and goals of the CSEDD board and utilized them in developing a vision statement that would reflect the objectives of the board and the CSEDD region. The CEDS specific portion of the vision statement was created as an addendum to the original CSEDD vision statement to ensure maximum stakeholder engagement. Input from the individual community meetings were combined and the vision statement was amended using the goals and objectives identified in the CEDS planning process. The following vision statement was created: The vision for the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) is to guide CSEDD staff and community leaders as they focus their efforts over the next five to ten years on harnessing regional assets to enhance economic prosperity through business resiliency, workforce development, advanced visitors services, and infrastructure improvements. The vision of the CSEDD is to be recognized as an economic development resource by its member entities, and community partners. CSEDD strives to become a proactive partner in project review and facilitation, identifying funding sources, assisting with grant applications, and in creating a network for shared communications between elected officials and staffs, the private sector, nonprofits, local economic development corporations, other local governments such as independent special districts and JPAs, and state and federal partners. “ ” The CSEDD vision statement was created along with the 2012-2016 CSEDD CEDS and was circulated for public and community review during the 30-day public comment and review period of the strategic plan. The current vision, with the amendment was circulated during the most recent 30-day public comment period and at this time has yet to be objected to by local stakeholders and therefore has not changed. ---PAGE BREAK--- 33 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY & COMPONENTS ---PAGE BREAK--- 34 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES AND COMPONENTS Formation of the CEDS Strategy Committee The CEDS strategy committee was chosen by members on the CSEDD board. Each CSEDD board member identified a community member who was not currently associated with the CSEDD. Individuals from county governments, non- profits, community organizations, and private entities were selected from each of the four counties to participate on the strategy committee in addition to three current CSEDD board members. Community Involvement The CSU, Chico’s Center for Economic Development (CED) constructed an 18 question survey about the current and future needs of the region. The survey focused on barriers to economic development, business needs, previous economic development projects in the region, and building regional economic resilience. The survey was created in Constant Contact by the Center for Economic Development and a live link was provided to the CEDS committee and the CSEDD board. The survey link was sent out to the CSEDD contacts, a press release was sent to local radio and media outlets, and the survey was hosted on the CSEDD and CED website. A total of 17 responses were received, 14 from Tuolumne County and two from Calaveras County, and one from Alpine County. A summarized copy of the survey results can be found in the Appendix of this document. To gain additional community feedback, representatives from the Center for Economic Development (CED) led three community town hall meetings within the CSEDD region. Flyers announcing the meetings were sent out to regional stakeholders and community members, and a press release was sent to local radio and media outlets. The results of the community survey were compiled and analyzed, and the key findings were presented to attendees at each meeting. Meetings took place in Angel’s Camp, Markleeville, and Mariposa and were two hours long. The key findings were discussed on both a regional and community level. During these discussions, community members addressed further key issues that were not originally identified in the survey results. All of the feedback received from both the community survey and meetings were compiled along with regional economic and demographic data collected by CED staff. These findings were used as an integral part of the CEDS strategy committee’s SWOT analysis. The results helped committee members better understand and address the needs of the region and identify the objectives and goals incorporated within this comprehensive economic development strategy. THE APPROACH Formation of a Strategy Committee Community Involvement through Survey & Meetings SWOT Analysis & Input from Strategy Committee Draft CEDS Post for Public Comment and Review Incorporation of Public Comments & Finalization of CEDS ---PAGE BREAK--- 35 CSEDD OBJECTIVES Objective One: Enhance visitors’ services within the CSEDD region Objective Two: Build a skilled workforce within the CSEDD region Objective Three: Promote and develop business resiliency within the CSEDD region Objective Four: Promote coordinated marketing efforts throughout the CSEDD region Objective Five: Promote regional infrastructure improvements Objective Six: Expand upon existing community business retention and expansion programs Objective Seven: Create a uniform Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) collection plan for vacation rentals across the entire region Objective Eight: Improve regional airport infrastructure to support faster shipping & delivery services Objective One: Promote advanced visitors’ services within the CSEDD region. Enhancing visitor services throughout the region was identified in the SWOT analysis as a major opportunity for the region. Additionally, three of the six non- government sectors with the highest location quotients in the region are all tourism related and tourism was brought up in all three community meetings due to its level of importance. With its vast public lands, outdoor recreation opportunities, and Yosemite National Park (NP), the four-county region has been tourist dependent for decades and will continue to be in the foreseeable future. The region contains the crown jewel of the Sierra Nevada Mountain Range, Yosemite National Park, countless hiking and backpacking opportunities, numerous lakes, world class fishing, and multiple ski resorts. Additionally, in the lower elevations, agri-tourism has begun expanding as the wine industry flourishes. The CSEDD region is in a unique position to capitalize on multi-county visitors. Unlike many California counties, most visitors are not just coming to the region to go to a specific location. There are a few exceptions such as Alpine County ski and fishing opportunities that are sole destinations, but for the most part, even visitors to Yosemite stay or visit other parts of the region. Because of this multi-destination advantage, it is imperative that groups throughout the region work together to optimize visitor services and cross-promote resources throughout the region. Due to the inherent risks associated with a tourism based economy, (natural disaster, recession, changes in government policy affecting public lands, etc.) it is imperative that the local leaders capitalize on the economic benefit of tourism during peak times. Also, by enhancing visitors’ services, economic developers in the CSEDD are aiming to create a value add proposition for would be travelers even in tough economic times. By setting themselves apart from other, less traveler friendly regions, the regional economy would become more resilient. To accomplish this objective the CEDS strategy committee has identified three action items to be completed within the next five years. Action Item: Develop a regional tourism partnership organization. Currently, each of the four counties coordinates their own visitor services efforts which has made it so offering the best visitor experience has become inefficient. The CSEDD board and its staff will be responsible for facilitating partnerships between Mariposa County Chamber of Commerce, Tuolumne County Visitors Bureau, Gold Country Visitors Association, Alpine County, and Calaveras County. By the end of 2017, a minimum of eight independent organizations will have formed a partnership. ---PAGE BREAK--- 36 Action Item: Increase school dual enrollment of the Columbia College CTE High School Articulation program The CTE High School Articulation program offers a unique opportunity for high school students to receive college credits. Columbia College Career Technical Education (CTE) collaborates with local and regional high school programs to develop articulation agreements. Resulting agreements include alignment of course skills and concepts, the possibility of advanced placement, and credit by examination options. The goal of this action item is to have over 200 high school students enrolled in the region with three counties (Alpine County does not have a high school but they attend high school in Calaveras County and Douglas County, Nevada) having at least two high schools with CTE agreements in place by 2019. The program is expected to have a 90 percent success rate of students either continuing their education in the technical field of their choice or landing a technical job upon program completion. Action Item: Enhanced partnerships between CSEDD staff and board members, the Mother Lode Work Force Investment Board (WIB) During the SWOT analysis, it was determined that Mother Lode WIB is an excellent resource for local businesses and job seekers. Unfortunately, it was also brought up in the SWOT that the WIB’s services are underutilized. As a result, the CEDS planning committee has determined that it is the respon­ sibility of each of the CSEDD participating members to increase their WIB referrals which are currently very low. The individual county members will re­ port back to CSEDD staff their number of referrals each year and CSEDD will monitor progress. The identified goal is that by 2018 referrals from CSEDD and its partner organizations and member counties will be at least 50 per year and will increase to 150 by 2021. As a result of the increased referrals partners are expecting an increase in WIB trainings of 10%. Action Item: Promote the Columbia College Water Resource Management program The necessity to manage water resources effectively has created an increasing number of job opportunities. There are currently over 30 water districts in the CSEDD region and over 20 waste water treatment facilities. Many of the plant operators running these facilities and districts are nearing retirement age and Columbia College offers a program in Water Resource Management, leading to a career in water treatment, water distribution, wastewater management, and groundwater management. The program will provide an opportunity to succeed in water resource management through the development of Action Item: Review current visitors’ services and identify new locations. Currently there are three visitor centers, outside of Yosemite Park, in the four- county region. Unfortunately, the current visitor centers are not in locations that take pressure off of Yosemite NP traffic and are not in locations where visitors can walk around local shops and restaurants. By the second quarter in 2019, the partnership formed in action item one will have reviewed the efficiency and the economic impact of each of the current visitor centers and will make recommendations to the individual counties about the optimized location of either a new or a relocated visitor center. Along with the recommendation, a preliminary business plan will be provided. Action Item: Successfully move or open one or two visitor service centers in optimal locations. One of the major opportunities identified in the SWOT analysis was the potential relocation or opening of a new visitor center. During the follow-up meetings, members of the CEDS planning committee came to the agreement that a new center location located in a down town business district would have two benefits. With more amenities near the center, people will stay in town longer which will increase revenue and sales tax revenue at local retail shops and restaurants. The number of travelers with disposable income being drawn to local business districts will become a significant economic driver. Additionally, by giving travelers a more attractive place to stop, they will likely stay longer which will ease traffic at peak times going into Yosemite NP. The lessened traffic will increase the attractiveness of the NP which should in turn increase visitors. Objective Two: Build a skilled workforce within the CSEDD region. Building a skilled workforce was identified in the community survey and in all three of the community meetings as being one of the most important issues facing the region today. This is an important issue for two different reasons. First, the community members surveyed felt that the business community does not have access to a skilled workforce to fulfill its needs. Second, the “brain drain” throughout the region is one of the worst in the state. All four counties in the region have had negative net migration for over a decade. Opportunities have to exist or young professionals will have no reason to stay in the area. Workforce development is one of several necessary tools for solving both problems. By being strategic about what workforce development opportunities are supported, a region can more efficiently train young persons in occupations that give them the option to stay in the area after completion. ---PAGE BREAK--- 37 knowledge, skills, and experience. CSEDD board members will being promoting the program for Columbia College at the local level and expects Columbia College will see a 10 percent increase in program enrollment by fall 2020 as a result. Action Item: Establish high school off campus tech center and innovation lab in Calaveras County Innovation labs with tech centers offer opportunities for potential small businesses to access specialized equipment while gaining a valuable network. Additionally, these types of centers often act as training grounds for high school and college students as they prepare for high paying tech jobs. Currently there is an innovation lab and tech center in Sonora, in Tuolumne County. While most of these types of centers are found in more urbanized areas, the center in Sonora has proven the model in rural areas. While this model may not work in the sparsely populated areas of Mariposa and Alpine counties, there is an opportunity for replication in Calaveras County. Over the next two years, Calaveras County officials, Columbia College, and the high school superintendents will partner to obtain private foundation funding, while seeking EDA assistance, to obtain the proper equipment to run the innovation lab. Objective Three: Promote and develop community and business resiliency within the CSEDD region When compared to other regions, the CSEDD region has many outside threats to the health of its business climate. The region is in a constant threat of fire danger, and is currently locked in a prolonged drought. This was proven by the Rim Fire, the largest fire ever in the Sierra Nevada even though it did not start until late fall. A normal year’s precipitation would have ended that fire fairly quickly, but the extended drought exacerbated the problem. While natural disaster is the most immediate threat to the health of the region, there are other threats that the region faces due to its high dependence on government controlled lands for its tourism revenue. Government furloughs and prolonged recession have in the past, and may again, take their toll on the region’s important tourism industry so it is imperative that local leaders be prepared to deal with human caused threats. Objectives 1 and 6 are meant to address the human caused threats while this objective is meant to address natural disasters. Fire danger and drought were far and away the two largest issues identified at the community meetings and the two seemingly go hand in hand. Both the Butte and Rim fires in the past several years have devastated the region, displacing hundreds of residents and destroying home based businesses. Calaveras County has been hit particularly hard. It was revealed during the Angels’ Camp community meeting that several land owners have migrated out of the county all together and sold their property to marijuana farmers from out of state This has further exasperated the out-migration issue. Additionally, the constant fire danger has made obtaining insurance extremely costly and has even forced many people to self-insure. It is the goal of the CSEDD, and its partner organizations, to reduce the short-term stress and the long-term economic effects on the business community due to the inevitable natural disasters. Action Item: Develop a long-term permanent response recovery strategic plan to replace existing preliminary plan The CEDS planning committee has developed a preliminary plan for business disaster response and economic resilience. However, the dedicated staff time necessary to develop a permanent, long-term disaster response plan was not available at this time. The long-term plan will include a process for monitoring and addressing business needs, assigning staff from each county communication responsibilities, developing a revolving loan fund for insurance gap funding, and connecting displaced businesses and employees with the two resiliency centers discussed below. Action Item: Development of Calaveras County Chamber of Commerce Butte Fire Recovery Center EDA has awarded the Calaveras County Chamber of Commerce, in partnership with CSEDD, $250,000 to open a fire recovery center in San Andreas for those affected by the Butte Fire. One-half of the Chamber’s time will be dedicated to operating the resiliency center and partner organizations will be hiring a half- time business outreach person. The outreach person ensures that the center will be maximizing its impact rather than being reactive as businesses look for help. Most business owners affected by disaster are preoccupied putting their lives back together and may not know what resources to approach for assistance. In addition to the employees working directly on the project, the Alliance Small Business Development Center (SBDC) will offer nine consultants to work with businesses coming through the Center. The facility will be operational in 2017 and is funded for two years. In that time period, the partners plan to seek funding from other public and private sources to keep the facility operational. By keeping the center open indefinitely, partners will be much more proactive rather than reactive in their response to future disasters such as inevitable fires. In the meantime, the first round of EDA funding will help save or create (from dislocated workers starting businesses) 30 businesses affected by fire. ---PAGE BREAK--- 38 Action Item: Development of Tuolumne County Disaster and Business Resiliency Center Tuolumne County and the State of California partnered to obtain $70 million in HUD funds as part of the National Disaster Resilience Competition. Of the $70 million, $20 million is dedicated to business development and resiliency through constuction of a community resiliency center. The project will be fully operational by the end of 2017, and within two years of being operational, the Center will have assisted in the creation or saving of 30 small businesses. Objective Four: Promote a coordinated marketing plan through­ out the CSEDD region. Currently, there are different groups in each of the four CSEDD counties working on visitor attraction. As discussed in objective one, many visitors to the area are regional visitors, not single destination visitors which means the four counties in the district need to work together to cross-promote the region. The Gold Country Visitors’ Association (GCVA) in conjunction with Visit California is the primary group coordinating a regional marketing effort. Unfortunately, the GCVA does not include the high Sierra in its region. Essentially half of the CSEDD region is without an organized marketing effort, including all of Alpine County. Action Item: Promote coordinated marketing throughout the region. Under the leadership of the CSEDD board, it will be the responsibility of the partner organization formed in Objective One to complete a multi-county strategic marketing plan. The plan will be complete by Q1 2019. The plan will include cross- promotional items for all regional visitors’ centers, connecting with Visit California, and a plan that includes outreach to national and international visitors to California. This effort will in no way compete with the GCVA effort, rather it will supplement what GCVA is currently lacking. Action Item: Ensure all three counties within the GCVA region are voting members of the association. Currently Tuolumne and Calaveras County Visitor Bureaus are members. It will be the responsibility of each county’s CSEDD representatives to ensure their respective county stays active in the association. By Q3 2017 Mariposa County will have also joined GCVA. Membership is $750 per year and will likely be paid for by chamber membership dues, county general funds, or TOT. Action Item: Partner with regional leaders to cross-train employees. The simplest, yet most important, step in organizing a coordinated marketing effort is to cross-train employees and volunteers at all visitors’ centers and chambers of commerce about regional efforts. The staff at the Alpine Chamber of Commerce or the Tuolumne Visitors’ Bureau need to know what activities are available in Mariposa or Calaveras County and vice versa. This is especially important as many people enter and exit Yosemite NP at different entrances. There will be information about things to do in Mariposa County even if a visitor is entering the NP through the Groveland entrance in Tuolumne County. Information will also be readily available in Mariposa about Tuolumne and Calaveras counties for people entering the NP through Mariposa County. Additionally, both Madera and Mono counties will be approached about a potential cross-promotional effort to maximize visitors coming from the east and south entrances. This effort will require limited resources, such as staff time for cross training, and will take up minimal space at chambers offices and visitor centers for the other counties to put promotional materials. It is the goal of the CEDS planning committee to have marketing materials in shared spaces and staff cross trained by Q3 2017. Objective Five: Promote infrastructure improvements through­ out the CSEDD region. During the SWOT analysis, the weakness that was identified as being in most need of attention was infrastructure. While several types of infrastructure were identified as being an issue throughout the region, the three largest identified issues were water storage security, lacking sewer line development, and broadband infrastructure. Upon the completion of the six outlined action items, regional businesses will benefit tremendously as access to markets, water and sewer capacity, and broadband all improve. Action Item: Seek State and Federal Funding to Provide Broadband Service to Underserved and Unserved Communities Communities within the Central Sierra Economic Development District region are served by a handful of last-mile broadband service providers offering direct subscriber line, coaxial cable, and fixed wireless services. Direct subscriber lines are wired connections which generally meet the minimum definitions for “broadband service” as defined by the California Public Utilities Commission. Direct subscriber line service providers include AT&T throughout much of the region, along with smaller service providers with smaller focus region including Sierra Tel Internet, CALTEL Connections, and TDS Telecom. Coaxial ---PAGE BREAK--- 39 cable is another wired connection technology that generally enables much higher download and upload speeds. Comcast is the franchisee for cable services for the vast majority of the developed areas within the four counties of the CSEDD region. Finally, fixed wireless services offer connectivity by broadcasting signals to a fixed receiver in a consumer’s home or business. This technology can offer moderately fast service to harder-to-reach locations, but price and reliability may be lower than traditional wired technologies. There are many service providers offering fixed wireless connections in much of the CSEDD region, including Volcano Wireless, Conifer Communications, Frontier Communications, and unwired Broadband, Inc. Unfortunately, many portions of the CSEDD Region remained completely unserved by any type of broadband service. An even greater portion of the region is deemed “underserved” by the California Public Utilities Commission, meaning that broadband service of some type does exist in the area, but the speeds offered do not meet the State of California’s minimum threshold of 10 megabit per second download speeds and 3 megabit per second upload speeds. According to the most current statistics from the California Public Utilities Commission dated December 31, 2015, only 33,870 of the CSEDD Region’s 49,232 households were deemed ‘served’ by fixed broadband, with 8,666 households (17.6 percent) deemed ‘underserved’ and a further 6,696 households (13.6 percent) with no service at all. State and federal funding sources exist to provide grants or subsidized loans to public and for-profit entities seeking to expand broadband connections into unserved and underserved areas. Through the encouragement of the CSEDD board, county planners and potential service providers should partner to identify opportunities to take advantage of these funding sources to extend services to unserved and underserved area. Specific funding programs include the California Advanced Services Fund, a revolving grant and subsidized loan account administered by the California Public Utilities Commission, and Rural Development Community Connect grants, a program funded by USDA Rural Development. Action Item: Seek funding for non-highway road construction improvements to increase access to markets While state-funded highways form the backbone of connectivity between the CSEDD region and outside markets, many locally-maintained roadways serve as the critical feeders and regional connectors to and from the state highway system. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) should pursue a strategy of connecting the CSEDD counties with Highway 99 and Interstate 5 by completing capacity upgrades on important east-west routes such as Highways 120 and 108. At the same time, planners within Calaveras, Tuolumne, and Mariposa counties should pursue capacity, safety, and reliability improvements along important routes connecting communities to these and other critical State Highways. The Caltrans Local Assistance Division offers a variety of grant programs aimed at expanding capacity, safety, and reliability of locally-maintained roadways that feed into the State Highway system. The most prominent of these grant programs is the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a flexible program that is intended specifically for projects that increase road capacity for multiple modes (passengers, freight, and transit). County planners should pursue STIP and other state grants that increase the capacity of local feeder roadways, leading to better connections to outside markets. Action Item: Phoenix Lake dredging project for sustainable water storage The Tuolumne County Resource District will complete engineering plans for the Phoenix Lake improvements including; dredging plans, sediment forebay design, and wetland enhancement design, complete the necessary environmental review, obtain the required regulatory permits and compliance for Phase 3, and purchase the required land for the sediment forebay. Phase 2 to be completed by the end of 2018 followed by seeking funding for Phase 3, the actual dredging. Action Item: Seek funding for water and waste water treatment facility construction and expansion Water and wastewater issues are substantial throughout the region. Water storage has become a major concern due to sediment in the reservoirs and long- term storage has been exposed in the recent drought. Water transportation is even a bigger issue. Wooden flumes, open air ditches, and old pipes transport the majority of the regions water and some studies have shown that between 40 and 50 percent of water is actually lost during transportation due to leaks in the aging infrastructure. Over the next five years, the joint powers authorities (JPA) for Tuolumne and Calaveras counties, alongside Alpine and Mariposa counties will be prioritizing which projects need to be addressed first. Through CSEDD board facilitation, the counties and respective JPAs will identify five distinct projects for which to apply for EDA, USDA Rural Development, State Proposition 1 and Proposition 84 funding. It is the CEDS planning committee’s goal to see at least two projects funded at the federal level and one $0.5 million waterline improvement project funded through State Proposition 1 bond funds. Action Item: Seek funding for the Sierra Rail expansion The Tuolumne County Transportation Council in partnership with the Sonora ---PAGE BREAK--- 40 industrial park, and the Tuolumne County Economic Development Authority will be seeking funding over the next five years to improve the current rail line that runs from Sonora to Oakdale where it connects to the main Union Pacific line. At present, the current rail is only capable of supporting train cars at five miles per hour. The cost for updating the rail to a 20 or 25 mile per hour rail line has been determined to be $2 million and with TIGER or DOT funding can be completed by 2022. The updating of the rail would be a major boon to Tuolumne County. Rail would be the most efficient way to transport both lumber and cheap propane to the Sonora industrial park. Also, the improved rail system could be used for visitor services related activities, offering short-haul dinner trips to tourists. Action Item: Encourage Pacific Gas and Electric to Extend Calaveras County Natural Gas Connection Currently, the only portion of the CSEDD region with natural gas infrastructure is the community of San Andreas in western Calaveras County. San Andreas is provided with natural gas by Pacific Gas and Electric, via a small-diameter pipeline connected to PG&E’s larger pipelines in Lodi. The remainder of the CSEDD Region, including all of Tuolumne and Mariposa counties, lack natural gas availability. Tuolumne County is the most populous county in California without any residential natural gas availability. Tuolumne County and the CSEDD region should pursue strategies that grant incentives for Pacific Gas and Electric to extend its current natural gas pipeline south and east along Highway 49 from San Andreas to Sonora, thus providing this vital residential service to the more densely populated parts of the CSEDD region. Given PG&E’s focus on upgrading and maintaining existing structure in the face of increased regulatory scrutiny in the wake of the 2010 San Bruno accident, any extension of the San Andreas pipeline will not come easily. Objective Six: Expand upon existing business retention and expansion programs Business retention and expansion programs (BRE) are some of the most important tools available to economic developers. While BRE is conceptual and refers to numerous programs throughout the community, these programs include but are not limited to Small Business Development Centers, Chambers of Commerce, and job training facilities. Business attraction is a negative sum game as multiple regions compete for the same businesses that are interested in relocating. Communities are forced to offer more and more economic incentives and most just end up wasting scarce resources with little or no benefit. Additionally, high-job growth often accompanies businesses in expansion mode, especially second stage companies. Also, it is much easier to retain a business than it is to attract a new one, as the owner and employees are already routed in the community. As shown in the appendix, other than workforce development, survey respondents said that expanding business retention and expansion programs was listed as the second most important step that the region needed to take for economic development purposes. In an effort to address those concerns, the CEDS planning committee has come up with the following action items. Action Item: Expand upon existing business retention and expansion programs In partnership with the Alliance Small Business Development Center (SBDC), CSEDD has been awarded a $50,000 grant from USDA Rural Development to expand current business retention and expansion efforts into underserved communities. Currently Alliance SBDC serves Tuolumne and Mariposa counties and the Delta College SBDC in Stockton is responsible for serving Alpine and Calaveras counties. Due to severe financial constraints in recent years the Delta College SBDC has been unable to adequately serve the needs of existing and emerging small businesses in these two counties. Presently no other business assistance programs are serving Alpine and Calaveras counties. By partnering with CSEDD, the chambers, and local government, the needs of local small businesses will be assessed and met. Qualified local consultants will be used whenever possible including current SBDC consultants from San Joaquin and Stanislaus Counties. When needed regional consultants will be recruited to meet business needs where ever local consultant expertise is not available. The program will begin Q4 2016 and run through Q2 2018. CSEDD staff will identify clients and provide referrals to Alliance SBDC and will work in conjunction with Alliance SBDC to offer business trainings in the underserved high Sierra region. The District will strive to provide ongoing guidance and financial resources to our partnership organizations and/or directly to local business owners to help them create or save 20 additional jobs through an established BRE process and that will be measured by the total number of jobs created per year over the next 5-year reporting period. Action Item: AgPlus EDA Technical Assistance In 2015, the CSEDD partnered with CSU, Fresno, CSU, Chico, and Valley Vision to submit an IMCP designation proposal for food and beverage manufacturing. The designation, known as AgPlus, was awarded in July of 2015 and lasts through at least June of 2017. In September 2016, a two-year, $250,000, EDA Technical Assistance grant was awarded to the region with $35,000 in federal funds staying ---PAGE BREAK--- 41 in the CSEDD region. The federal and subsequent non-federal matching funds will be used to coordinate and develop projects within the region that address components of the AgPlus implementation strategy. Through implementation of the pillar group strategies, businesses will be assisted as they are connected to regional projects and financing opportunities. It is estimated that five jobs will be created or saved as a result of these efforts. Action Item: Obtain funding to further expanded the BRE program For the reasons outlined in action item one, there are too many businesses in the four county region, especially Alpine and Calaveras counties, that are severely lacking business support services. The allocation of scarce resources in the valley has left these rural communities underserved. The USDA program is a boost to these businesses but by the end of 2018, CSEDD plans to increase BRE funding by 10 percent region wide. Action Item: Provide ESRI Business Analyst support services CSEDD staff used to purchase ESRI Business Analyst to assist start-ups in the region. As the cost become prohibitive CSEDD has entered into a partnership with the EDA University Center, CSU, Chico to provide local businesses with the same service at a fraction of the cost. Starting in October 2016, CSU, Chico will subsidize the business assistance by utilizing inexpensive, bulk educational licensing. CSEDD staff will make mapping and data requests on an as needed basis and will remain the single point of contact with the business. ESRI reports will be created for a minimum of 15 businesses per year. Objective Seven: Ensure a plan for Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) collection on vacation rentals is in place in each of the region’s four counties. Vacation rentals have skyrocketed throughout the CSEDD region. TOT is vital to many counties throughout California but is especially important to the CSEDD region as tourism is one of the region’s most important sectors. All of the region’s visitor services are funded through TOT as well as many other local services. TOT is an excellent source of revenue for a county because it is a way to provide the necessary services to its residents without placing a larger tax burden on them. Mariposa, Alpine and Tuolumne counties have seen dramatic increases in former long term rentals being converted to AirBnB type vacation rentals over the past five years. Rentals are popping up seemingly everywhere whether or not the property is permitted or zoned for vacation rentals. Due to their proximity to Yosemite NP, Mariposa and Tuolumne counties have already begun tracking and collecting TOT on these types of rental properties. Unfortunately, due to staff constraints and lack­ ing a plan, Alpine and Calaveras counties have yet to begin collecting TOT on these types of properties. As hotel and motel nights slow, and the pressure for business and visitor services increase CSEDD must assist Calaveras and Alpine counties by helping them create a plan to start collecting revenue within the next year. Action Item: Create a simple plan for Alpine and Calaveras counties to adopt CSEDD board members will work together to create a simple plan for Alpine and Calaveras counties to start collecting TOT on internet booked vacation rentals such as AirBnB. Partners will explore what is currently working and what is not working in Mariposa and Tuolumne counties keeping in mind that very little staff time can be dedicated to the monitoring of rentals that do not self-report. This plan will be complete by Q3 2017. Action Item: Adopt the plan at the county level CSEDD will work with boards of supervisors in Alpine and Calaveras counties to introduce the plan. It is expected that both counties will adopt the plan and assign staff members to monitor and collect TOT by Q2 2018. The additional TOT revenue collecting through the monitoring will make up for the cost of the added staff time. Objective Eight: Improve regional airport infrastructure for faster shipping & delivery services within the CSEDD region. Air transportation is a huge barrier to entry (weakness) identified in the SWOT analysis. Businesses located in the CSEDD region have little to no access to one- day or overnight shipping options. This negatively affects the service industry, retailers, and producers. Over the next five years, the CSEDD will partner with the Tuolumne County Airports Department to ensure the proper infrastructure is developed to bring small cargo planes to the region. While the Columbia Regional Airport is located in Tuolumne County, the benefits of having daily cargo planes flying in and out of the County are tremendous and felt region wide. In many small, rural communities FedEx or UPS fly in and out of the regional airport multiple times per day. This allows both a morning and afternoon pick- up and drop off for next-day shipping. With many online competitors and an impatient customer base, retailers and even some wholesalers are forced to offer expedited shipping or they simply cannot survive. The same thing works in reverse, local manufacturers and retailers would benefit from decreasing any lags in their supply chain’s distribution. It is also noteworthy that because ---PAGE BREAK--- 42 of the CSEDD region’s issue with out-migration, expedited shipping is one more amenity that may or may not help keep young professionals in the area. Action Item: Assess the airport infrastructure and identify gaps to be filled. With assistance from the CSEDD, the Tuolumne County Airports Department (TCAD) will create an asset inventory of current airport amenities. The inventory will also identify infrastructure gaps that may be keeping cargo planes from utilizing the facility. The asset inventory will be completed by Q4 2017. Action Item: Foster relationships with local shipping carriers Upon completion of the asset inventory, members of the TCAD and the CSEDD will share the report with local representatives from FedEx and UPS. CSEDD representatives will build a relationship with the local representatives from the major companies to help further define what is needed at the airport to develop a shipping contract. The development of these relationships will start immediately. Action Item: With the help of local shipping company representatives, create a plan to address the necessary infrastructure improvements. Partners will create a strategic plan to make the Columbia Airport attractable for FedEx or UPS to begin making cargo flights in and out at least once or twice per day. This plan will be complete by Q2 2019 and will include cost estimates for all improvements. The plan will also include a draft of what a proposed agreement with a shipping company may include. Action Item: Seek and obtain private and grant funding for necessary improvements Staff from Tuolumne County will be needed to dedicate time to writing proposals for infrastructure improvements and to put the strategic plan in place. At this time, it is assumed that two separate proposals will need to be submitted with the anticipation that at least one will be funded. Until the strategic plan is complete the total amount of funding necessary has not been identified but it will likely be around $250,000. The most likely source of funds will be FAA Small Airport Grant funds, supplemented by private match. It is the goal of the CEDS planning committee to have funding in place by Q2 2021. ---PAGE BREAK--- 43 IMPLEMENTATION AGENDA & EVALUATION FRAMEWORK ---PAGE BREAK--- 44 IMPLEMENTATION AGENDA & EVALUATION FRAMEWORK This section outlines the CSEDD implementation agenda and the performance measures that will be used to measure the outcomes of the objectives. The objectives and goals are prioritized in order of regional importance.The timeline is listed with three abbreviations: NS; not started, ID; in development, C; completed. Objective One: Promote advanced visitors’ services within the CSEDD region Action Items Lead Agency and Partners Year 1 Timeline Action Item: Develop a regional tourism partnership organization Lead Agency: CSEDD Partners: • Gold Country Visitors Association • Mariposa County Chamber of Commerce • Tuolumne County Visitors Bureau • Alpine and Calaveras Counties Resources: No additional resources needed Measures: Partnerships developed with at least eight organizations. Action Item: Review current visitors’ centers and identify new locations Lead Agency: A sub-committee of the partnership Partners: • CSEDD • Gold Country Visitors Association • Mariposa County Chamber of Commerce • Tuolumne County Visitors Bureau • Alpine and Calaveras Counties Resources: Increased staff time from partner organizations Measures: Review three visi­ tors’ centers NS Action Item: Successfully move or open one or two visitor service centers in optimal locations Lead Agency: CSEDD Partners: • Gold Country Visitors Association • Mariposa County Chamber of Commerce • Tuolumne County Visitors Bureau • Alpine and Calaveras Counties Resources: Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) from the county or counties that move or open a visitors center will be used for funding Measures: Move a minimum of one visitors’ center Evaluation Framework Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 ID NS ID ID C C ID ID C C ID C C C ---PAGE BREAK--- 45 Action Items Lead Agency and Partners Timeline Evaluation Framework Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Objective Two: Build a skilled workforce within the CSEDD. Action Item: Increase school dual enrollment of the Columbia College CTE High School Articulation program Lead Agency: Columbia College Partners: • Tuolumne County • Mariposa County • Calaveras County • Alpine County Resources: No new resources needed Measure One: Two agreements in place by second quarter of 2017 C C C C C Measure Two: Four agreements in place by end of 2017 Measure Three: All four counties have at least two agreements in place by end of 2019 Measure Four: Get 200 students region-wide enrolled in the program by end of 2019 Measure Five: 90% success rate of getting kids enrolled in further tech study or tech jobs ID C C C C ID ID C C C ID ID ID C C ID ID ID ID C Action Item: Enhanced partnerships between CSEDD staff and board members, the Mother Lode Work Force Investment Board (WIB) Lead Agency: CSEDD Partners: • Mother Loade Work Force Investment Board Resources: Increased staff time from each county involved with CSEDD Measure One: Increase referrals to Mother Loade WIB to 50 per year Action Item: Promote Columbia College Water Resource Management program Lead Agency: Columbia College Partners: • None Resources: No new resources needed Measures: A 10% increase in program enrollment ID ID ID C C ID C C C C Measure Two: Increase referrals to Mother Loade WIB to 150 per year ID ID ID ID C ID ID C C C Lead Agency: Calaveras County Partners: • Columbia College, Calaveras Unified School District, CSEDD Resources: Seek $50,000 in funds from EDA or USDA with private match from Calaveras Community Foundation, Sierra Pacific Industries Action Item: Establish high school off campus tech center and innovation lab in Calaveras County Measures: Purchase all equipment and aquire space from the County ---PAGE BREAK--- 46 Action Items Lead Agency and Partners Evaluation Framework Timeline Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Objective Three: Promote and develop community and business resiliency within the CSEDD region. Action Item: Development of Tuolumne County Disaster and Business Resiliency Center Lead Agency: CSEDD sub-committee Partners: • Alpine County • Calaveras County • Mariposa County • Tuolumne County Resources: Increased staff time from each member county Measures: Complete a multi- county business resiliency disaster preparedness strategic plan ID ID ID C C Action Item: Develop a long term permanent response recovery strategic plan to replace the existing preliminary plan Lead Agency: Calaveras County Chamber of Commerce Partners: • CSEDD • Alliance Small Business Development Center (SBDC) Resources: EDA funded project; has been awarded and will be funded with $250,000 for 2017 and 2018 Measure One: Get the facility functional by the second quarter of 2017. ID C C C C Action Item: Development of Calaveras County Chamber of Commerce Butte Fire Recovery Center Lead Agency: Tuolumne County Partners: • Tuolumne County Economic Development Authority Resources: HUD and private foundations have committed to funding the center with $70 million of which $20 million will be directly related to business development and resiliency Measure One: Have a functional facility by the end of 2017 ID C C C C Measure Two: Help create or save 30 small businesses NS ID C C C Measure Two: Help create or save 30 small businesses ID ID C C C Measure Three: Obtain alternative funding to keep the Center open indefinitely for a quicker response for business resiliency NS ID C C C ---PAGE BREAK--- 47 Action Items Lead Agency and Partners Evaluation Framework Timeline Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Objective Four: Promote coordinated marketing efforts throughout the CSEDD region. Action Item: Promote a coordinated marketing plan throughout the region. Lead Agency: A sub-committee of the tourism partnership Partners: • Gold Country Visitors Association • Mariposa County Chamber of Commerce • Tuolumne County Visitors Bureau • Alpine and Calaveras Counties Resources: Increased staff time from partner organizations Measures: Complete a multi- county strategic marketing plan Action Item: Partner with regional leaders to cross-train employees Lead Agency: CSEDD Partners: • Mariposa County Chamber of Commerce • Ebbetts Pass Visitors Center • Alpine County • Calaveras County Resources: Increased staff time from each county involved with CSEDD Measures: All visitors’ centers have marketing materials about the other three counties and all employees staffing the centers are knowledgeable about those materials ID ID C ID ID C C C C C Action Item: Ensure all three counties within the GCVA region are voting members of the association. Lead Agency: Partners: • None Resources: $750/year for each of the three counties Measures: All three counties are voting members in good standing C C C C C ---PAGE BREAK--- 48 Action Items Lead Agency and Partners Timeline Evaluation Framework Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Objective Five: Promote infrastructure improvements throughout the CSEDD region. Action Item: Seek State and Federal Funding to Provide Broadband Service to Underserved and Unserved Communities Lead Agency: CSEDD Partners: • Alpine County • Mariposa County • Tuolumne Couny • Calaveras County • Caltel Resources: Measure One: Increased staff time from Tuolumne and Calaveras County staff Measure Two: Increased staff time from Alpine and Mariposa County staff Measure Three: Increased staff time from CSEDD, and Alpine and Mariposa County staff. Funds will be requested from the California Advanced Services Fund and USDA Rural Development broadband revolving loan funds Measure One: Develop a partnership group to expand Caltel and comcast “the last mile” ID C C C C Action Item: Seek funding for non-highway road construction improvements to increase access to markets Lead Agency: CSEDD board member facilitation Partners: • Tuolumne County • Calaveras County • Alpine County • Mariposa County Resources: Measure One: Increased staff time from each mem­ ber county Measure Two: Funding needed from EDA, TIGER or DOT Measure One: Apply for funding for eight distinct projects region wide ID ID ID C C Action Item: Phoenix lake dredging project for sustainable water storage Lead Agency: Tuolumne County Resource Conservation District Partners: • None Resources: Measure One: Phase 2 funding from California Prop 84 bond measure; $1,670,250 awarded Measure Two: Phase 3 funding from California Prop 84; unknown amount to be requested in 2018 ID ID C C C Measure Two: Develop a partnership group to expand “back bone” to Alpine and Mariposa Counties. Measure Three: Write and submit three proposals for broadband expansion funding assistance NS ID C C C NS NS ID C C Measure Two: Obtain funding for at least four projects NS ID ID ID C Measure One: Complete engineering plans for the Phoenix Lake improvements including; dredging plans, sediment forebay design, and wetland enhancement design, complete the necessary environmental review, obtain the required regulatory permits and compliance for Phase 3, and purchase the required land for the sediment forebay. Measure Two: Obtain funding and begin dredging NS NS ID ID C ---PAGE BREAK--- 49 Action Items Lead Agency and Partners Evaluation Framework Timeline Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Action Item: Seek funding for the Sierra Rail expansion Lead Agency: Tuolumne County Transpor­ tation Council Partners: • Sonora Industrial Park • Tuolumne County EDA Resources: Measure One: Increased staff time for TCTC to write proposals Measure Two: $2 million in TIGER or DOT funding will be needed Measure One: Apply for two TIGER or DOT grants ID ID C C C Action Item: Encourage PG&E to extend Calaveras County natural gas connection. Lead Agency: CSEDD sub-committee Partners: • PG&E Resources: No new resources needed NS ID C C C Measure Two: Upgrade rail lines from 5mph to 20mph NS NS ID ID C Measure One: Form a group to work directly with PG&E to work towards expanding natural gas distribution Measure Two: Expand natural gas distribution out of past San Andreas NS NS ID ID C Action Item: Seek funding for water and waste water treatment facility construction and expansion Lead Agency: CSEDD board member facilitation Partners: • Tuolumne County Joint Powers Authority • Calaveras County Joint Powers Authority • Alpine County • Mariposa County Resources: Measure One: Increased staff time from each county and city involved with the identified projects Measure Two: Funding needed from USDA Rural Development, EDA, or the State Measure Three: Request $500,000 in State Proposition 1 funds for waterline improvement ID ID ID C C Measure One: Apply for funding for five more distinct projects region wide including improved infrastructure at New Melones and water transportation Measure Two: Obtain funding for at least two projects Measure Three: Complete one waterline improvement project NS ID ID ID C ID ID ID ID C ---PAGE BREAK--- 50 Action Items Lead Agency and Partners Evaluation Framework Timeline Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Objective Six: Expand upon existing business retention and expansion programs Action Item: Expand upon existing business retention and expansion programs. Lead Agency: CSEDD Partners: • Alliance Small Business Development Center (SBDC) Resources: USDA Rural Development funding of $50,000 over 2017 and 2018 Measures: Create or save 20 additional jobs through BRE program ID C C C C Action Item: AgPlus EDA Technical Assistance Lead Agency: Valley Vision Partners: • CSEDD • CSU, Chico • CSU, Fresno Resources: Awarded $250,000 for business technical assistance; $35,000 staying in CSEDD region Measures: Create or save 5 additional jobs through BRE program ID C C C C Action Item: Obtain funding to further expand the BRE program Lead Agency: Alliance Small Business Development Center (SBDC) Partners: • CSEDD Resources: Will submit proposal to SBA, EDA, and USDA Rural Development Measures: Increase funding for programs in underserved communities by 10% by 2018 ID ID C C C Action Item: Provide ESRI Busienss Analyst support services Lead Agency: CSU, Chico Partners: • CSEDD Resources: Contracting with CSU, Chico for $1,500 per year Measures: Provide ESRI Business Analyst support services to at least 15 businesses per year C C C C C ---PAGE BREAK--- 51 Objective Seven: Create a uniform Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) collection plan for vacation rentals across the entire region Action Item: Create a simple plan for Alpine and Calaveras counties to adopt Lead Agency: CSEDD sub-committee Partners: • Alpine County • Calaveras County Resources: Increased staff time from each county involved with CSEDD Measures: Create a simple plan for Alpine and Calaveras counties to adopt ID C C C C Action Item: Adopt the plan at the county level Lead Agency: Alpine and Calaveras Counties Partners: • None Resources: No new resources needed Measures: Adopt the proposed plan at the county level NS ID C C C Action Items Lead Agency and Partners Timeline Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Evaluation Framework ---PAGE BREAK--- 52 Action Items Lead Agency and Partners Timeline Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Evaluation Framework Action Item: With the help of local shipping company representatives, create a plan to address the necessary infrastructure improvements. Lead Agency: Tuolumne County Airports Department Partners: • CSEDD Resources: Request funding or staff time from Tuolumne County and Tuolumne County EDA Measures: Create a tangible strategic plan Action Item: Seek and obtain private and grant funding for necessary improvements Lead Agency: Tuolumne County Airports Department Partners: • CSEDD Resources: Measure One: Request funding or staff time from Tuolumne County and Tuolumne County EDA Measure Two: Requesting $250,000 from FAA Small Airports grant Measure One: Write and submit two or more proposals to fix identified infrastructure issues and enact the strategic NS NS ID ID ID ID C C C C Action Item: Foster relationships with local shipping carriers Lead Agency: Tuolumne County Airports Department Partners: • CSEDD Resources: Tuolumne staff time needed Measures: Develop marketable relationships with a minimum of two shipping carriers and create a list of all necessary partners ID ID C C C Objective Eight: Improve regional airport infrastructure for faster shipping & delivery services. ID Action Item: Assess the current airport infrastructure and identify gaps to be filled Lead Agency: Tuolumne County Air­ ports Department Partners: • CSEDD Resources: Tuolumne County staff time needed Measures: Create an asset inventory to fill gaps C C C C Measure Two: Obtain Funding NS NS ID ID C ---PAGE BREAK--- 53 ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE The Comprehensive Economic Development strategy committee has developed an organizational structure to ensure the timely implementation of this comprehensive economic development strategy. The CEDS strategy committee will meet annually, and when needed, more often. The CEDS committee will be responsible for the following: • Organizing regular communication between the CSEDD region’s counties • Tracking and evaluating the progress of the region objectives and goals • Creating partnerships between regional stakeholders • Recommending and encouraging use of local workforce development or educational programs • The CSEDD will act as the lead agency in the event of an economic or natural disaster in communication between state and federal agencies. ---PAGE BREAK--- 54 BUILDING REGIONAL ECONOMIC RESILIENCE In many locations economic prosperity is dependent on a region’s ability to withstand sudden changes in the economy. The resilience of a region’s business community is dependent on numerous factors including the type of disruption, displacement of customers, displacement of the workforce, access to and from the business, and disruptions in the supply chain. When compared to other regions, the CSEDD region has many outside threats to the health of its business climate. The region is in a constant threat of fire danger, and is currently locked in a prolonged drought. While natural disaster is the most immediate threat to the health of the region, there are other factors that threaten to disrupt the economy. Due to its high dependence on government controlled lands for its tourism revenue the CSEDD region could be wildly affected by government furloughs and prolonged recession. Fire danger and drought were the two most prominent issues identified at the community meetings. Both the Butte and Rim fires in the past several years have devastated the region, displacing hundreds of residents and destroying home based businesses. Calaveras County has been hit particularly hard. Many people did not have fire insurance or cannot now afford home owners’ insurance due to a drastic increase in rates. As a result, many multi-generation land owners are selling their property pennies on the dollar and exiting the area. This is causing further disruptions in the customer base and workforce. While the most proven way to ensure economic resilience due to government policy changes is to diversify the economic base, it is the goal of the CSEDD and its partner organizations to reduce the short term stress and the long term economic effects on the business community due to the inevitable natural disasters. The CEDS planning committee has identified multiple steady-state and responsive actions to be taken to ensure proper economic resilience. Steady-State Economic Resilience Moving into 2017, CSEDD will be taking a leadership role for the entire region in terms of putting steady-state economic resilience initiatives into action. Many of the objectives and action items described earlier in this document not only seek to increase economic prosperity long term, they also have the inherent goal of better preparing the region for disruptions in the economic base. Increasing partnerships with Mother Lode EDC The Mother Lode WIB is an excellent resource for local businesses and job seekers, however, the WIB’s services are underutilized. Starting in 2017, each of the CSEDD participating members will increase their WIB referrals with CSEDD increasing its total referrals to 150 per year over the next 4 years. Capitalizing on a Broadening Economic Base As noted in the industry clusters section, tourism is and has been the economic base industry for the region for a very long time. Unfortunately, tourism is very susceptible to disruptions during peak seasons. This is especially true for the CSEDD region as much of an entire tourist season could be lost due to one devastating fire. By supporting sector growth in health care and value-added agriculture (the two identified emerging clusters) the region’s economic base is broadening. A diversified economy is much more likely to withstand future disruptions. Expanding BRE program Businesses with owners and employees routed in the community are less likely to relocate, even when facing a disruption. They are simply too invest in the community. Business retention and expansion programs are an excellent opportunity for regional economic developers to ensure their businesses are both happy and healthy. By providing services during the good times, businesses will be better prepared to last through disruptions and will know where to seek help during the rough times. Development of a Long-term Permanent Response Recovery Strategic Plan The CEDS planning committee has developed a preliminary plan for business disaster response and economic resilience which is outlined below, in the responsive section. However, the resources and dedicated staff time necessary to develop a permanent, long term, disaster response plan was not available at this time. The long term plan will include a process for monitoring and addressing business needs, assigning staff from each county communication responsibilities, developing a revolving a loan fund for insurance gap funding, and connecting displaced businesses and employees with the two resiliency centers. ---PAGE BREAK--- 55 Responsive Economic Resilience As discussed above, the development of a long term disaster response plan will be begin in 2017. However, should a disruption occur in the near future, to ensure there is an interim plan, an outline of the responsive plan is included below: Process for regular communication In the interim, CSEDD has agreed to act as the point of contact of a network of information passing the business community in each county and the counties themselves. Until a final responsive action plan is created, the following people will be responsible for communicating with businesses, and CSEDD board and staff: Tara Schift – Mariposa County Larry Cope – Tuolumne County Michael Oliveria – Calaveras County Terry Woodrow – Alpine County Monitoring and updating business needs As part of the communication process each of the four people listed above will be responsible for distributing the Small Business Administration (SBA) Estimated Disaster Economic Injury Worksheet. It is understood that in the case of a substantial disruption where the business owner themselves must evacuate, it may not be appropriate to have the formed immediately returned. However, timely distribution of the worksheet will ensure there is a proper assessment of the short term economic impact of the disruption. The worksheet is included in the appendix. Rapidly Contact Key Officials to Communicate Business Needs After the four sub-region contacts report back to CSEDD, CSEDD staff will be responsible for reaching out to state and federal officials to inform them of the disruption’s impact. Once provided with the proper data, state and federal officials can make better informed decisions on how to allocate scarce resources. Connect Businesses with Resiliency Centers With the assistance of EDA, HUD, and private donors, local partners have been able to obtain funding to develop two disaster recovery centers. All local partners will have the ability to refer displaced businesses and employees to either center once they are fully operational. EDA has awarded the Calaveras County Chamber of Commerce, in partnership with CSEDD, $250,000 to open a fire recovery center in San Andreas for those affected by the Butte Fire. One-half of the Chambers time will be dedicated to operating the resiliency center and partner organizations will be hiring a half time business out-reach person. The out-reach person ensures that the center will be maximizing its impact rather than being reactive as businesses look for help. Most business owners affected by disaster are preoccupied putting their lives back together and may not know what resources to approach for assistance. In addition to the employees working directly on the project, the Alliance Small Business Development Center (SBDC) will offer 9 consultants to work with businesses coming through the Center. The facility will be operational in 2017 and is funded for two years. In that time period, the partners plan to seek funding from other public and private sources to keep the facility operational. By keeping the center open indefinitely partners will be much more proactive rather than reactive in their response to future disasters such as inevitable fires. Tuolumne County and the Tuolumne County Economic Development Authority partnered to obtain $72 million in HUD and private foundation matching funds to open a Tuolumne County Disaster and Business Resiliency Center. Of the $72 million, $20 million is dedicated to business development and resiliency. The project will be fully operational the end of 2017. ---PAGE BREAK--- 56 APPENDICES ---PAGE BREAK--- 57 APPENDIX A: SURVEY RESULTS 1. In what town/city do you live in? 2. Are you aware of any previous planning activities, documents, or reports undertaken that might be relevant to creating a new five year economic development plan? City Responses Percent Angels Camp 1 6% Columbia 1 6% Twain Harte 1 6% Sonora 11 65% Valley Springs 1 6% Other unicorporated areas (Tuolumne County) 2 12% Total 17 100% Planning Activity Responses Percent Community Assessment 2 20% Economic Development Plan (EDA, CDBG, HUD, USDA-RD) 2 20% Workforce Study or Analysis 0 0% Target Industry Study 0 0% Project Feasibility Study 0 0% General plan (economic development element) 4 40% Affordable housing 1 10% Cell phone coverage 0 0% Other 1 10% Total 10 100% 3. Please list the names of the studies marked in question 2 above. Community Assessment Focus Group “Tuolumne County General Plan and related EIR Community Assessment funded by Sonora Area Foundation TUD Urban Water Management Plan Columbia Airport Master Plan” TOURISM & BUSINESS EXPANSION STUDY BY THE BUXTON COMPANY CDBG #13-CDBG-8948 Not sure what the “NAME” is. Tuolumne County General Plan? ---PAGE BREAK--- 58 4. In your opinion, what are the three leading causes of unemployment in your community? (Select up to three) 5. What are the three leading reasons that businesses fail or private businesses, companies, or entrepreneurs might not be successful in business in your community? (Select up to three) Cause Responses Percent Lack of job opportunity within the region 14 29% Ability to find qualified candidates 10 21% Resident's willingness to work 3 6% High business costs 5 10% Slow business growth 4 8% Availability of jobs 7 15% Other 5 10% Total 48 100% Reason Response Percent Distance to markets 5 12% Funding/capital access 3 7% Community support 3 7% Cost of energy 4 10% Availability of skilled labor 7 17% Employee recruitment and retention 5 12% Cost of land 3 7% Transportation/ cargo/ shipping 1 2% Other 11 26% Total 42 100% 6. How do you rank the following barriers to economic development within your community? Barriers Total Responses Distance to markets 3 21% 10 71% 1 7% 0 0% 14 Funding/ capital access 8 57% 5 36% 1 7% 0 0% 14 Community support 8 57% 5 36% 1 7% 0 0% 14 Finding qualified employees 8 57% 5 36% 1 7% 0 0% 14 Finding enough employees 7 50% 6 43% 1 7% 0 0% 14 Cost of energy 4 31% 6 46% 2 15% 1 8% 13 Real estate prices 6 46% 6 46% 1 8% 0 0% 13 Broadband access 11 73% 3 20% 1 7% 0 0% 15 Cell phone coverage 7 50% 6 43% 1 7% 0 0% 14 Local taxes/ licensing/ permitting 11 73% 4 27% 0 0% 0 0% 15 Very Important Somewhat Important Not Important Don't Know/ No Opinion ---PAGE BREAK--- 59 9. Of the items marked in question eight, which have been successful? Past Action Very Successful Somewhat Successful Not Important Don't know/ no opinion Created a program 2 2 3 0 Obtained government grants or funding 1 2 4 0 Participated in a regional program 0 4 2 0 Partnering with educational institutions 0 3 2 0 Other 1 1 1 0 7. Are there any other barriers important to economic development within your community not listed in question six? We don’t need to look like cities in the valley, we need to build upon our unique location and history. Can you buy a pair of shoes or bedding or home goods here? We are sending our “customers” to other counties to purchase what should be here and in doing so send our sales tax dollars to other counties; Declining condition of roads and lack of Stategovt funding even though there are adequate funds raised through State license fee and gas taxes to fix these funds are diverted to other pro­ grams (health care, high speed rail, urban areas, etc) long permitting time frames and cost of development; Need more rentals. A large apartment complex, town homes, or condos is necessary immediately if any business is to survive in TC; Onerous regulation and related fees which discourage local investment; Lack of social outlets for yound people. While the area might be attractive for its beauty and outdoor activities, there is nothing here to attract young professionals and families. 8. What has been done in the past to promote, support, and leverage economic development programs or initiatives in your community? (Check all that apply) Past Action Response Percent Participated in a regional program 7 19% Created a program 6 17% Obtained government grants or funding 9 25% Obtained private or non-profit funding 4 11% Don't know 7 19% Other 3 8% Total 36 100% ---PAGE BREAK--- 60 10. What are the top three assets for doing business in your community? (Select up to three) 3 3 2 4 3 4 6 6 10 Other Transportation/ cargo / shipping Energy costs Infrastructure Educational resources Renewable energy resources Innovation programs Available commercial property Abundant natural resources 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Top Community Assets 11. How important are the following business programs as a strategy for your community’s economic development plan? Business Programs Total Responses Address needs of existing businesses (retention/expansion) 8 47% 9 53% 0 0% 0 0% 17 Promote entrepreneurship (startup) 13 76% 4 24% 0 0% 0 0% 17 Attract new businesses (recruitment of new companies) 14 82% 3 18% 0 0% 0 0% 17 Prepare workforce with training, skills, and education 13 76% 4 24% 0 0% 0 0% 17 Business advocacy 8 44% 10 56% 0 0% 0 0% 18 Subsidized access to capital programs 6 35% 8 47% 2 12% 1 6% 17 Very Important Somewhat Important Not Important Don't know/ No opiinion 13. Are there any other ways not listed in question 12 that the private sector will very likely participate in local economic/business development in your economy? 12. How do you see the private sector participating in local economic development/ business development program in your local community? Participation Total Participating in ongoing planning activities (board member, advisory council) 4 21% 15 79% 0 0% 0 0% 19 Formation of strategic partnerships (business ventures, joint ventures) 4 22% 8 44% 4 22% 2 11% 18 Contractors for implementation of specific strategies 0 0% 14 78% 3 17% 1 6% 18 Project/ program financing 1 6% 12 67% 5 28% 0 0% 18 Very Likely Somewhat Likely Not Likely Don't know/ No opinion Better support for proposed projects that will enhance and or generate economic development during the permitting process, work to “streamline and simplify” the permitting process; Local participation will be based on perceived value to the local business. It is an educational process to show cause and effect; The private sector will not be energetically involved unless and until the governmental/regulatory posture of the County changes; The local economy is basically very small businesses that depend on tourism and they aren’t very aggressive. ---PAGE BREAK--- 61 15. Which of the following tactics would best help your community become more economically resilient? (Select up to three) Total Action Response Percent Planning efforts to broaden the region's industrial base 10 24% Adapting business retention and expansion programs 11 26% Creating a more resilient workforce through workforce development 8 19% Promoting business continuity and preparedness within the region 10 24% Other 3 7% Total 42 100% Total Cluster Response Percent Agriculture 1 3% Manufacturing 3 8% Retail Commercial 1 3% Entertainment & Hospitality 8 22% Business or Personal Services 1 3% Healthcare 13 36% Technology 2 6% Recreation 2 6% Other 5 14% Total 36 100% 16. What do your see as the two most successful business clusters in your region for job creation, investment, and economic development? (Select up to two) 14. How economically resilient do your think your community is? (The community’s ability to recover quickly from a shock, withstand a shock, and avoid a shock altogether) Resilience Response Percent Very resilient 1 6% Somewhat resilient 6 33% Not resilient at all 9 50% Don't know 2 11% Total 18 100% ---PAGE BREAK--- 62 Survey Comments: 2. Are you aware of any previous planning activities, documents, or reports undertaken that might be relevant to creating a new five year economic development plan including: Other, Urban water Management Plan, Columbia Regional Airport Master Plan; Community Assessment Focus Group; Tuolumne County General Plan and related EIR, Community Assessment funded by Sonora Area Foundation, TUD Urban Water Management Plan, Columbia Airport Master Plan; TOURISM & BUSINESS EXPANSION STUDY BY THE BUXTON COMPANY CDBG #13- CDBG-8948; Not sure what the “NAME” is, Tuolumne County General Plan?. 4. In your opinion what re three leading causes of unemployment in your community? (Select up to three): Other, State and Local Government regulations on development, abuse of CEQA, NIMBYism, Lack of ability to utilize natural resources in forest, conflicting State and local permitting regulations, too many state agencies with complex and slow permitting requirements; Other, communications systems, phone and internet, Example, downtown Angels Camp has zero cell phone service and limited internet/wifi. Political will to make use of our resources to benefit the county such as removing fuels from the forest is cheaper than fire suppression costs and could generate income from bio-mass; other, technology infrastructure, poor leadership at county level, lack of understanding of the essential need for a well-balanced general plan to update; Other, Lack of Capital Investment in our County, Our county policies have effectively driven resident capital out of the county and created barriers to outside capital coming in; Other, lawsuits by opposition groups; Other, Apart from government there is not activity that allows for full time decent paying jobs. 5. What are the three leading reasons that businesses fail or private businesses, companies or entrepreneurs might not be successful in business in your community? (Select up to three): Other, Aging population, fairly low median income, lack of skilled work force, We have an aging population, reduction in population growth, lack of affordable housing and marginal education system. Kids are moving away. When groups propose economic development projects they are often met with resistance and lawsuits that are easy to file with the well intended but broken CEQA system; Permit process for start up business. Lack of understanding of what it takes to run a successful business by owner; Other, Failure to establish and work a business plan. Wanting the business to run on their schedule rather than when customers are around. Unwillingness by Caltrans and county to permit signs to inform tourists of what is offered; Other, I don’t know, perhaps local businesses working together to engage with the visiting public/tourists…setting a welcome atmosphere, a sense of community, a small town sense of place; Other, Excessive regulation and related fees/taxation; Other, County Over Reach; other, overregulation; other, government, The State of California puts so many regulations on businesses. They make it hard for any business in California, especially a small business, to thrive. Raising minimum wage will be putting many small businesses out of business in the upcoming years; Other, Education & mentoring on how to run a business inc. employee and money management, Community Support goes both ways. Employee retention relates to wages and benefits; Other, successful business planning; Other, Lack of high-speed internet; Too close to Nevada where it is much cheaper to set up a business. No support/interest in bringing in industry. 6. How do you rank the following barriers to economic development within your community? Declining condition of roads and lack of Stategovt funding even though there are adequate funds raised through State license fee and gas taxes to fix these funds are diverted to other programs 17. What should be the top three goals of the region’s economic development program? (Select up to three) Goals Response Percent Increase/ retain jobs 13 25% Develop or improve relations with businesses in our region 4 8% Identify top businesses for relationship development and maintenance 4 8% Improve/ change community image (internal and/or external) 5 10% Improve/ preserve quality of life 4 8% Program assessment of our current 2 4% Better community planning 4 8% Train & educate the workforce to fill skills gaps 6 12% Increased capital access 1 2% Business advocacy 5 10% Other 3 6% Total 51 100% Total Item Response Percent Supporting small and medium-sized enterprises 11 22% Investing in physical (hard) infrastructure 11 22% Ensuring that the local investment climate is functional for local businesses 7 14% Encouraging the formation of new enterprises 7 14% Investing in soft infrastructure (educational and workforce development, institutional 4 8% Attracting external investment (nationally and internally) 4 8% Supporting the growth of particular clusters of businesses 4 8% Other 1 2% Total 49 100% 18. In the next five years, what would you like to see accomplished as part of an action oriented economic/business development program within the region? (Select up to three) ---PAGE BREAK--- 63 (health care, high speed rail, urban areas, ect) long permitting timeframes and cost development; We don’t need to look like cities in the valley, we need to build upon our unique location and history. Can you buy a pair of shoes or bedding or home goods here? We are sending our “customers” to other counties to purchase what should be here and in doing so send our sales tax dollars to other counties; Need more rentals. A large apartment complex, town homes, or condos is necessary immediately if any business is to survive in TC; Onerous regulation and related fees which discourage local investment. 8. What has been done in the past to promote, support, and leverage economic development programs or initiatives in your community? (Check all that apply): Other, Black Oak Tribe, Sonora Area Foundation and service organizations support; Innovation Lab, Resiliency funding, Grant funding for County Govt funding, tree mortality funding; The county has had a paid Economic Development person in the past. The concept was part of past General Plans. This is not a function of the Chamber of Commerce to do but they are trying to fill the void. Just as Destination Angels Camp or Angels Camp Business Association. Many efforts over the years, some successful but most spin into limited results for the money and time spent; Bureaucratic/governmental programs full of platitudes and political agendas but nothing of any consequence that seriously tackles the need to attract capital to our county; Other, Not much; Larry Cope, TCEDA Director has done a phenomenal job in all the above areas; The Alpine Biomass Committee has part of it mission to promote a sustainable local economy. 9. Of the items marked in question eight, which have been successful? Economic Development should be the incubator of new ideas and be able to let others take the steps needed. It is not just about the money, the educational tools, or the level of noise generated around this activity. It is about being innovative and helping others to see opportunities. 10. What are the top three assets for doing business in your community? (Select up to three): Other, Close proximity to large population centers and high income demographics, Have abundant natural timber resources but severely limited in ability to utilize, good recreation but road and transportation infrastructure is lacking; The tree mortality will be an ongoing project for the next decade or more. With it we will need to develop the “on the ground” ability to work with the bio-mass issue. Create jobs to improve our watersheds and our strengthen our communities by making use of the resources here. Reduce the fuel loading saves fire suppression costs and provides income; Other, desirable location; Other, lack of competition. 11. How important are the following business programs as a strategy for your community’s economic development plan? Assist in building a workforce trained in how to use the resources currently in the county. Water and wastewater operators, environmental work, forestry, minerals, and watershed management. Some of this is starting with Columbia College now; I assume the question is what we should be doing because if it is what we are doing the Not Important boxes should be checked. 14. How economically resilient do you think your community is? (The community’s ability to recover quickly from a shock, withstand a shock, and avoid a shock altogether): Our rural community tens to lag economic upturns and lead economic downturns. Rural communities are also at a disadvantage with urban areas for grants funding and legislation; We proved that with the Butte Fire; We learned from the Butte fire that we were not prepared and had no means of recovery in place. We had to rely on State and Fed funding, and help from FEMA, Red Cross and other non-profit organizations. That being said, there was little immediate organization in place; the narrow economic base of our County makes if very vulnerable to economic shock and likely prone to slow recovery; Its resilience comes from the dependency on government. 15. Which of the following tactics would best help your community become more economically resilient? (Select up to three): Other, Communication and Technology infrastructure; Other, Eliminate onerous regulations and fees, Focused and innovative efforts to attract capital to our County. What do you see as the two most successful business clusters in your region for job creation, investment and economic development? (Select up to two): Black Oak Casino is major, Chicken Ranch Casino is ok in spite of poor management, Sonora Regional Medical Center is a major asset from a jobs and service standpoint; Other, Timber and water, think of the largest group of highest paid workers in the county work for CCWD. And Sierra Pacific Industries has the greatest private investment of land and resources in the county; A healthy base of light, clean manufacturing would do much to bring jobs and financial stability to our County; Other, Aging Population. 17. What should be the top three goals of the region’s economic development program? (Select up to three): Better community planning should entail a more streamlined and SIMPLIFIED entitlement process that does not take years and cost tens of thousands of dollars (often hundreds of thousands); Calaveras is quickly becoming known as the new “pot capital” of the Sierras, not a good family image to present when young families are looking for a place to raise families; Other; technology infrastructure; Avoid bureaucratic or governmental flag-waving for political purposes. Focus on what needs to be done to ATTRACT CAPITAL to our county. Only then will we see job growth and new wealth developing here; Other, more resources into upkeep of our regions used for tourism; Other, Create vibrant town; Other, Forest restoration; There is the possibility of forest restoration providing significant jobs without having an adverse impact on tourism. 18. In the next five years, what would you like to see accomplished as a part of an action oriented economic/business development program within the region? (Select up to three): We have had a number of interested individuals over the years that have tried to develop very viable projects and have run into so much regulation and/or opposition that they left or failed. Some notable examples are Bell’s project in Tuolumne, Winery project on the Jamestown mine site, Mountain Springs master planned community. There are several notable residential, commercial and resort destination projects currently proposed that should be encouraged, supported and facilitated; We don’t need more government programs to drain our already over-taxed community. We need innovative ideas for creating incentives to invest here and creating an environment that will support investors placing capital at risk. Period; Other, Forest resoration. ---PAGE BREAK--- 64 APPENDIX B: SBA WORKSHEET ---PAGE BREAK--- 65 APPENDIX C: CSEDD STRATEGY COMMITTEE ROSTER Terry Woodrow Alpine County [PHONE REDACTED] Randy Hanvelt Tuolumne County [PHONE REDACTED] Michael Oliveria Calaveras County [PHONE REDACTED] Paul DeBaldo [PHONE REDACTED] Marshall Long Mariposa County [PHONE REDACTED] Tara Schiff Mariposa County [PHONE REDACTED] APPENDIX D: PHOTO CREDITS Russell Neches Cover Jose Machado Cover Jason Jenkins Page 3 Tom Hilton Page 7 David Berry Page 8 Thank you to the photo contributors of this document. If you have any questions about the photos used in this document, please contact the Center for Economic Development at [PHONE REDACTED]. Brian Cantoni Page 14 US Department of Agriculture Page 22 Michael Koncuska Page 23 Helen Gordon Page 33 Jose Machado Page 52 ---PAGE BREAK--- 66 APPENDIX E: PUBLIC COMMENTS The Central Sierra Economic Development District released the CEDS document for public comments and review between October 10, 2016 and November 9, 2016. The document was posted on the CSEDD website, and a press release was sent out to local media sources. The Center for Economic Development at CSU, Chico (CED) received two public comments during the 30-day period. Where appropriate, the comments were incorporated into the CEDS. However, most comments were regarding the validity of the idea that government is at all responsible for the creation of jobs or the meeting of the outlined goals and objectives. The comment’s author feel it is the business owners themselves and therefore not the regions place to claim job creation through business assistance and disaster relief. The comments also question the validity of disaster relief planning, as they feel it is more of an organic process. However, preliminary plans were made in accordance with EDA CEDS guidelines. The second public comment was received on November 7, 2016 which high- lighted the needs for a trained workforce at the local community college, improving and promoting the tourism industry, and enhancing regional water storage; all of which is already included within the CEDS. The objectives and goals in the CEDS were derived from community surveys and town hall meetings, and reflect the desires of the community members. Any suggestions not incorporated, were because they did not fit with the feedback the CED received during the community outreach. From both the comments, the Center for Economic Development made changes to the CEDS. Objective three was reworded to better reflect the action items that are being completed in order to acheive the objective and goals. In addition, the description of the action items was changed to better convey how these will impact the regional community and business resiliency. The CED also addressed the term “BRE” within objective six. It was mentioned the term and definition of “Business Retention and Expansion” programs was confusing and not clear. The CED added further expanation to the term “BRE” and mentioned that it is a conceptual term and not a verbatim, dictionary definition. To better acknowledge local zoning and permitting issues within the CSEDD region, the CED added “local zoning and permitting” to the top weaknesses section of the document. Because it was mentioned in the public comments that this is a significant regional issue and should be addressed more thoroughly, an additional written explanation and opportunities for improvement was added to the CEDS. If anyone has any questions regarding the incorporation of public comments, please contact the Center for Economic Development at [PHONE REDACTED]. ---PAGE BREAK--- 67 Page 1 of 12 November 4, 2016 Mr. Larry Cope, Director Central Sierra Economic Development District 99 North Washington Street Sonora, California 95370 Subject: 2017-2022 CEDS Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Dear Sirs: In response to the draft 2017-2022 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) (herein referred to as Strategy) we are submitting for your review and consideration of the following “Response.” As one successful business leader in the county recently stated when discussing this purposed Strategy - “If you have complaints, not only speak up but provide constructive comments and practical solutions. And then ask yourself, what do you want?” First, we would like all interested parties who are concerned about the economic future of the region to read a copy of this Strategy. Then they would review our Response and speak up, either in writing or at public hearings, if they have any of their own concerns and suggestions. To help those that might feel intimated by the length and breadth of the Strategy, listed below is a quick look at what we feel are some of the more important findings.  The Strategy is a five-year road map to fulfill the District’s regional vision to promote economic vitality within the CSEDD (Central Sierra Economic Development District). The Strategy was developed, in part, from a community survey and in which eight Key Findings were uncovered.  The eight Key Findings are represent the general concerns of citizens about current economic conditions throughout the four-county region (Alpine, Calaveras, Tuolumne and Mariposa).  There are eight goals and objectives have been purposed that will focus on addressing these regional economic concerns.  Our Response provides comments and recommendations that focus primarily on the goals and performance measures and whether or not they can be successfully implemented.  Our Response provides a number of comments and recommendations that can be summed up in the following statement: “In many cases, local governments can promote economic development, but it cannot create, private sector businesses or jobs. Business Fri, 4 Nov 2016 23:17:57 Page 2 of 12 owners and private capital investment create them, thus being the primary driver of economic prosperity in the region - not government.” We encourage the community to take advantage of this public review process, which will hopefully start a much needed conversation with elected officials and their appointed organizations to ensure they are doing everything within their authority and financial resources to assist local businesses “create a stronger, more resilient region, able to withstand both economic and natural disaster disruptions,” as stated in the Strategy’s Vision Statement. And since this is a five-year strategic road-map, the public will have a chance to make future comments and recommendations when the required Annual Reports must be published. It is never too late to become part of the planning process. ---PAGE BREAK--- 68 Page 4 of 12 CSEDD Strategy - Overview: The Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS), dated 2017, stated that three community town hall meetings were held by District staff and that a public survey (questionnaire) was conducted to elicit community feedback on what citizens were concerned about regarding local economic conditions and how the District and its partner organizations might find ways to “promote a more resilient economy.” A resilient economy is defined by how well a community can withstand and/or respond to certain types of disasters, i.e., fires and economic recessions. From these meetings and the survey questionnaire, a number of ‘Key Findings’ emerged that where reviewed at both regional and community levels. These key findings were to be used as an integral part of the CEDS committee’s SWOT analysis. The resulting SWOT analysis was used, in part, to develop the District’s five-year road map which attempts to address identifiable obstacles affecting economic growth in region. After reviewing all of the material, as well as submitting written questions to CSEDD, Community Development Agency (CDA) officials, and Chico State University staff who helped in the writing of the Strategy, we have put together a list of comments and recommendations that we believe not only take into account our understand of the economic conditions that exist today in the region, but reflect our professional views of whether or not the purposed goals and objectives in the Strategy can be achieved. CEDS Public Survey Results and Key Findings In preparation of the Strategy, a community survey (18-questions in all) was completed by employees from CSU – Chico University, California - Center for Economic Development. The survey was designed to uncover what citizens in the region where concerned about relative to current and future economic and business development needs. The survey questions where distributed to District Board members, as well as various community members and households via the internet, radio and media outlets. It is not known how many survey notices where actually sent out or how many individuals actually received them. This would have been helpful to determine the statistical validity of the results and whether or not they truly represent the concerns of the region. There were only 17 responses received from the survey, of which 15 of them were from Tuolumne County residences. As survey goes, this is a very low response rate considering the large number of potentially affected citizens throughout the region, which could be in the tens of thousands. It would have also been helpful to know the breakdown of responders. Did they come from governmental employees, were they business owners, private sector hourly workers, retired citizens or from local land use developers and so on. Comment and Recommendations: In our opinion, this was not a statistically significant survey of the community. Given the uncertainty of the distribution method and the extremely low response rate, we would recommend a follow-up phone survey of at least 400 households per county and city. This would Page 3 of 12 Introduction There is no question that the Strategy contains ambitious economic development and disaster response plan goals. It is commendable for taking on so many important issues. But in several cases described below, this Response questions whether the District is actually accountable for all these objectives and goals and whether or not they can be achieved within the purposed timeframes. Why? Because in most cases governmental agencies and many of their associated governmental partnership organizations have limited control or influence over whether or not local economies thrive, except when they can limit the number of burdensome and conflicting regulations, excessive fees and requirements that they imposed on local businesses in the first place. This is especially true when businesses are trying to create a new product or try to provide a new service in this ever changing marketplace. To demonstrate this point, look at some of the recent news headlines across America. The Wall Street Journal has reported almost daily that “the US economy is inching along, productivity is flagging and millions of Americans appear locked out of the labor market (Sputtering Startups Weigh Down Growth).” In several of the Strategy’s Key Findings found on page 5 of the report, these are similar issues facing all of us at the local level. Business creation is down in lumber, forestry, mining and construction jobs are hard to find. Our young adults are still leaving the area seeking education and employment elsewhere. In just the last couple of weeks, a number of business owners have approached us and said that the Strategy’s “Key Findings and survey results” do reflect these same challenges. Government data also shows a decade long slowdown in entrepreneurship. However, it seems to us that the bigger big-box stores are doing very well regionally and seem to have survived the Great Recession. But they are not creating the type of jobs discussed in the Strategy, such as those found in small business involved in manufacturing and hi-tech. Add to this that our region’s job growth continues to be primarily in the low-paying service industry. Government jobs, however, continue to be available at a greater pace than in the private sector. These jobs are usually higher-paying with exceptional retirement and medical benefits, but are harder to qualify for given most require college degrees or years of specialized experience. We do believe that the Strategy’s goals and objectives are needed for an economy that continues to struggle from the Great Recession, but we believe if they are to be achievable, certain changes or modification need to be made. Stated another way, we believe in many cases doing less is more. In addition, many times governmental organizations make promises they cannot possibly keep – like creating new businesses and jobs. So the focus of our Response, stated again, is to provide recommendations for those goals and objectives which we believe cannot be realistically completed. Note: The authors of this Response each have over 30+ years of professional experience and educational training in senior level positions in both government (former County Directors of Environmental Health; Senior Staff Code Enforcement Officer and Rural County School Educator) and within the private sector (Local Private Land Developers, Private Business Owners; Construction Contractor) and Corporate Vice President of Environmental Affairs- both in the US and Internationally at companies with over 10,000 employees and with annual revenues between 1-3 billion dollars. ---PAGE BREAK--- 69 Page 5 of 12 allow the District to verify the accuracy of results and to give a clearer picture of what citizens are concerned about (baseline) and then allow for tracking of any the changes in perspective over the next five-years (trends). From the SWOT, the public survey and regional meetings, the following is a list of the Strategy’s Key Findings. Key Findings: 1. THERE IS A LACK OF JOB OPPORTUNITIES WITHIN THE REGION 2. THERE IS A SHORTAGE OF SKILLED LABOR WITHIN THE REGION 3. LOCAL ZONING AND PERMITTING IS HINDERING GROWTH 4. THERE ARE SOME CONUNTIES NOT COLLECTING TOT FROM AIRBNB TYPE VACATION RENTALS 5. INFRASTRUCTURE INCLUDING BROADBAND IS LACKING WITHIN THE REGION 6. VISITOR’ SERVICES ARE INADEQUATE AND IN WRONG LOCATIONS 7. EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES ARE NOT BEING UTILIZED 8. ONE-DAY SHIPPING IS NOT AVAIABLE WITHIN THE CSEDD REGION Finding 1, 2 and 3 were of no surprise to us. They reflect what many of us have always believed - that there are just too many regulations and conflicting governmental requirements that impose unnecessary rules and costs on businesses without adding any measureable value to the local economy. This reality has also contributed, in our opinion, to the reported lack of jobs and skilled labor throughout the region, i.e., businesses are reluctant to expand and young adult coming out of local community colleges continue to seek better paying jobs elsewhere. There are many examples of where businesses or development projects have not been started due to the cost of obtaining regulatory approvals. And even if a particular project was actually viable and could have possibly made its way through the process, there still is this persistent and discernable belief that it is just not worth the hassle or expense. This negative community perception has become reality in many of cases, which results in a persistent negative view of local government – unfair or not. This negative perception of local government has been discussed many times at public meetings and before policy makers, but the perception persist to this day because little has visibly been done, in our opinion, to eliminate these governmentally created obstacles. The other Key Findings (4 through 8) did not appear to originate from the public survey results. We are assuming they came primarily out of internal discussions between CSED staff, Chico employees and District board members. We have made no attempt to address them in this Response, although many of our recommendations about the limited power of government to create jobs and new businesses still applies throughout. In summary, we believe most of the concerns articulated in Key Findings 1, 2 and 3 are nearly identical to our own and reflect the overall concerns of the community. A number of community members have expressed similar feelings to us that continues to be an unfriendly places to do business and more of the same is expected in the near future regardless of which political party is in power. We agree, as a group, that the concerns expressed in this Response will be difficult to address and that the Strategy’s goals and objectives, although commendable, can ever be Page 6 of 12 successfully implemented or completed for the reasons detailed in the remainder of this Response. Response to: CSEDD OBJECTIVES AND ACTION ITEMS for 2017-2022 – In this Response only the first three Key Findings and several of the corresponding objectives, goals and action items have been addressed. The comments and recommendations are intended to not only give the District a general overview of what is believed to be the key economic issues facing the community, but also to point out why many local business owners believe that government cannot, and will not, create or save private sector jobs as promised. The goals and objectives in this Strategy, along with the goals and objectives in the previous Economic Development Strategy (2012-2015), as well as the grant funding that goes along with such efforts, will no doubt benefit those that currently work in government. These are the type of jobs that government can most readily create. Listed below are the first three Key Findings and some of the corresponding objectives - A. KEY FINDING: THERE IS A LACK OF JOB OPPORTUNITIES WITHIN THE REGION  Objective number Six: Build a skilled workforce within the CSEDD region.  Action Item: USDA Rural Development Program - Expand upon existing retention and expansion programs. Measures: Create or save 20 additional jobs through BRE program; Create or save 5 additional jobs through BRE program. Comments: Besides the goal of creating or saving 20 jobs, the goal was also designed to “assess the unmet needs” in the community. This is to be accomplished by “hiring qualified consultants (whenever possible including existing consultants).” How is this goal going to “create or save 20 jobs” by “studying the unmet needs for next three years” (see the timeline table for completion) and then provide referrals to Alliance SBDC for “business training.” Nowhere in the purposed “action item” does it describe how this is going to be completed, how many jobs per year will be created and what types of jobs are being targeted. We recommend that more details be provided, either in the Strategy or provide to us in this Response. A number of local business owners recently discussed among themselves what could government possibly do to prevent a job loss if a local business couldn’t make enough revenue to make pay roll, rent or pay their suppliers? How would the District or its partnership organizations help prevent an employee(s) from being laid off in this circumstance? What if the product or service is no longer in demand and the business is on the verge of going under? What can the District within the context of this Strategy to save the business? If the goal is to merely study these ---PAGE BREAK--- 70 Page 8 of 12 Recommendation: 1) Since BRE was reported to be a conceptual term and one that even the University staff had trouble defining, District staff might want to provide a better description in the Strategy and how it specifically applies to each goal where the term was used. Alternately, it is recommended that the goal itself be rewritten to better reflect what can actually be accomplished when promising to create private sector businesses or jobs. For example it might be purposed: “The District will strive to provide ongoing guidance and financial resources to our partnership organizations and/or directly to local business owners to help them create or save 20 additional jobs through an established BRE process and that will be measured by the total number of jobs created per year over the next 5-year reporting period.” 2) This might seem a bit nit-picky but we recommend that the word “Measure” be replaced with the word “Goals.” For example in Objective 6, it states that the “Measure” is to create or save 20 additional jobs through BRE program.” This is the goal. The performance measure is the outcome and results, which is designed to generate reliable data on the effectiveness of the program or goals. In another example the “goal” in Objective Two is to “get 200 students region-wide enrolled in the program by the end on 2019.” A performance measure would record the results each year (maybe in an Annual Report) on how many students actually became enrolled in years 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. If problems should arise and this goal cannot be achieved, then modification can be instituted quickly and effectively. At the end of year 5, if 200 students have been successfully enrolled, the performance results would be 100%, thus achieving the stated goal. As the goal is stated now, no new students will be enrolled in the program in year 1, 2, and 3, but all 200 will have been successfully enrolled in years 4 and 5. So for first three years this goal will be “IP – In Progress.” Why would it take three years to study this goal and then have it be completed in years 4 and 5? And isn’t this already an established program in the community? If so, three years seems a bit excessive and should be modified to reflect the comments above. A. KEY FINDING: THERE IS A SHORTAGE OF SKILLED LABOR WITHIN THE REGION Objective number Two: Build a skilled workforce within the CSEDD region (page 44). Action Item: Increase school dual enrollment of the Columbia College CTE High School Articulation program. According to local sources, Columbia College already manages this community educational program. So how will the District play a role in its continued operations and success? And yes, it is true that some business owners in the region cannot find “skilled” employees for their business, but most have said they will settle for “suitable” employees, meaning employees that show up on time, learn the job quickly, are honest and have good interpersonal communication skills. This doesn’t require technical skills beyond these type of simple, but desired important Page 7 of 12 unmet needs over the next three years through “studies, consulting reports and making inquiries,” how would this achieve the goal? What would be the performance measures for each of the five years? Five jobs per year or all 20-jobs at the end of year five? And who is going to report these outcomes, if any, in the CSEED’s Annual Report. Do the other partner organizations have their own internal and public Annual Reports? If so, wouldn’t your efforts be a waste of duplication of time and money? Besides, this is a USDS Rural Development grant. Who initially applied for the grant and who is ultimately responsible for the outcomes? Are the goals and measures for years 1 through 5 the responsibility of SBDC, Valley Vision or the District. This should be clarified to transparency purposes. Continuing with this line of questioning, recent discussions with Chico University staff revealed that term BRE (business retention and expansion), which is used repellently in the Strategy to describe how the goals and objectives would be achieved, turns out to be more of a conceptual term. Clarification of the meaning of BRE was requested and the following verbatim response was given to us: “BRE is conceptual and in the context of your question refers to numerous programs throughout the community. That could all be classified as BRE programs. Most of which are discussed though out the document. The SBDC is the primary example but the chambers, TCEDA, and Motherlode Job training all participate in these types of activities to an extent.” We might be wrong, but this explanation is somewhat vague and difficult to understand how it could effectively apply to the District’s goals. Since there are no specific BRE programs identified in the Strategy targeting specific goals and objectives, we again don’t understand how the District can achieve the stated goal of “creating or saving 20 additional jobs through BRE programs” over the next five years. The goals and action items performance measures) do not provide a clear path towards accomplishing this commendable but vaguely worded objective. Even if it were possible to accomplish the goals, it is difficult to see how such an objective could reasonably be accomplished in year one. Even if you could, the timeframe boxes for year 2, 3, 4, and 5 should be left “blank” since the goal would have already been completed in year 1. Secondly, how could one determine if any of the new jobs were in fact created or saved by the implementing agency (SBDC) rather than the current business owner or investor who actually does all of the work in the first place? The District or SBDC might have an important role to play, but it is the business owner that makes this happen. As stated in the Strategy, the $50,000 grant awarded to SBDC is going to be used for “consultants to conduct studies” about the needs of local businesses and to offer future business training. It is hard for us to understand how business training can create jobs or save them, especially when the economy continues to undergo tumultuous shifts that sometimes seems to happen overnight. In summary, objective number six seems unrealistic and the performance measures do not clearly articulated who will be responsible for the ultimate outcomes and the methods that will be used to track and inform the Public of the successful outcomes. ---PAGE BREAK--- 71 Page 9 of 12 employee traits. So the term suitable seems to be a much more meaningful term than skilled in the context of building a workforce that can do the types of jobs most in demand and can do the job when called upon. When business owners are asked what they look for in an employee, they would choose suitable over skilled any day. Employers are also looking for employees that can fill out a simple resume or application. High schools in the region currently provide this type of student training. Yes, these are not technical skills like being able to write computer code or operate complex robotic machinery. However, these are not the type of entry-level jobs that are in high demand in the region. The type of jobs in demand today, here in the Motherlode, don’t required a skilled workforce in the context of STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math). We know of a couple successful local business owners in the construction trades that have offered these types of entry-level jobs to local citizens looking to start the careers. But the sad truth today is that so many of them do not possess these very basic skills due to dropping out of school, having prior criminal records or limited work experience. So the goal of creating a skilled workforce is not as important as teaching young adults that they need to graduate from school, learn about responsibility and what it takes to be successful in this economy. Rather than focus CDA grant money towards creating technical level skills for an area that has very little manufacturing or companies that create intellect capital, the focus should be on entry level employment skills for kids coming right out of high school or community colleges, especially in service jobs such as plumbers, carpenters, housing construction, truck drivers, agriculture and so on, which are much more in demand. The goals and objectives that are ultimately selected in the Strategy should be based upon what is important to the region now and what regional assets can be leveraged in the next couple of years. We are not Silicon Valley or San Francisco. This is a challenging problem for any rural community in California, except in the high populated cities where those jobs are readily available for anyone graduating with advanced college degrees. B. KEY FINDING: LOCAL ZONING AND PERMITTING IS HINDERING GROWTH Local Zoning: Local zoning County General Plans) has been a hot button topic for the past several decades. There is a strong belief today that local zoning and governmental permits have, and will continue to, hinder economic development in the region. But it is interesting to note that no evidence, facts or historical narratives were provided in the Strategy to explain why District staff or others believe local zoning requirements hinder local economic growth. They are certainly annoying and can potentially drive up the cost of development projects, but there is no evidence that they in fact hinder economic development in the region economic development is defined as the process by which a community improves the economic, political, and social well- being of its people). It is also interesting that this issue was included as a “Key Finding” but no new goals or objectives are being purposed to address them. In fact, only a few vague public comments about zoning were recorded in the survey’s comment section. Most of the responses were more concerned about regulatory permitting requirements and the cost of government regulations being imposed on businesses and the local economy. For this reason, our Response Page 10 of 12 does not have any comments concerning local zoning, at this time. However, as community General Plan draft updates make their way through the various Board planning committees and are released for public review, will we update our Response. Local Permitting: Local permitting requirements are a big concern to local business owners who struggle to create or expand their operations. It is well documented that most of today’s federal and state regulatory permitting requirements hinder and/or suppress economic development, especially in rural communities and towns that are already facing unique challenges of their own, such as declining populations, lack of employment opportunities, poor work skills and loss of farms and working lands. At $1.885 trillion, the cost of regulations now exceeds the cost of federal individual and corporate income taxes, which raised about $1.82 trillion last year. The California State Code of Regulations - which includes CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) – can place unnecessary cost burdens on local citizens. However, most of the environmental regulations that affect locals are controlled by the state and federal government. Once you add up all of these regulations, it can be economically stifling to small businesses who have to navigate these numerous obstacles. If the District is really committed to promoting economic development and addressing the concerns as expressed in the community survey, then they should develop clear, achievable and measureable objectives that help businesses navigate around these regulatory obstacles. What is needed more than anything else today is for government to reassess the impact of their environmental and permitting laws created over the past 30 years. Counties should go back and look at what is not working, what laws just add cost without adding value and then repel or replace them. Just in the last eight years over 10,000 new laws have been enacted in the United States, having an estimated 1.8 trillion dollar impact on the economy. We can’t control most of these costs at the federal and state levels, except when we vote with our pocket books. But at the local level, this Strategy could seize an opportunity to better understand which regulations are having the largest impacts and then come up with strategies to lessen the regulatory burdens government has created in the first place. Another permitting related problem that could be studied and addressed is California’s strict rules on obtaining professional licenses, such a cosmetology, tattoo artist, plumbers, dental assistant, and other certified practitioners. This makes it very expensive for graduating students to find entry level jobs in the trades and is holding back growth and investment in the service sector. California is 43rd in the US ranking of states where it’s easiest to start a new business. This might be an area where local policy makers can recommend reforms that remove barriers and promote competition in the service sector, especially in health and education. Every dollar reduced in start-up and operating costs is important to small businesses. Nearly 30% of jobs in the U.S. now require an occupational license, up from 5% in the 1950s. According to the Wall Street Journal, the service sector is expected to generate almost 95% of new jobs in the next decade. Nurses and personal-care and home-health aides are projected to make up 1.2 million of the 9.8 million new jobs expected by 2024. ---PAGE BREAK--- 72 be the case, however, and will look forward to tracking the progress of this project and the positive impact it might have on local small businesses over the next three years. Final Recommendation: All of the goals and objectives are based on a five-year performance-time horizon. Shouldn’t each objective and goal be established within a specified timetable necessary to complete each of them? Some objectives may in fact take longer than five years, but most listed in the Strategy are projected to be completed within 2-3 years. Is there any justification for making every performance result five years in length? Having each goal and objective with its own timetable for completion would make it easier for the District Board to track them each year for the desired results and if not achieved, measures could be taken to identify the specific weak points and/or identify better approaches and new timetables assigned. In addition, if an objective or project was unable to be continued for whatever reasons, it should be eliminated or updated with a new completion date. The Annual Reports will be able to document whether or not the actual results were met, exceeded, or fell short of projected outcomes. The authors and contributors for this Response want to acknowledge the exceptional work by all CSEDD Board members and staff, as well as the assistance from Chico State University project specials, to develop this five-year Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy. Thank you for your public service. Sincerely, Ken Perkins Cc: Malinda Matson, Economic Development Representative for Northern and Coastal California Page 11 of 12 Objective number One: Promote advance visitor’ services with the CSEDD region. No Comment Objective number Four: promote coordinated marketing efforts throughout the CSEDD region. No comment Objective number Five: Promote infrastructure improvements throughout the CSEDD region. No comment Objective number Six: Expand upon existing business retention and expansion programs. Besides the comments already provided regarding a request for a clear definition of BRE programs, no further comments are being provided. Objective number Seven: Create a uniform Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) collection for vacation rentals across the entire region. No Comments provided Objective number Eight: Improve regional airport infrastructure for faster shipping. No comments provided Additional Recommendation: Objective Three: Promote and develop business resiliency within the CSEDD region. Action Items: Expand upon existing business and expansion programs; Develop a long term permanent response recovery strategic plan to replace the existing preliminary plan; Development of business resiliency centers. These three Action Items appear to primarily address natural disasters. But how do these action items help “create 30 small businesses?” Objective three should d be rewritten to clearly define what the District is trying to achieve – which according to the description – “develop a permanent, long-term disaster plan.” How are these three objectives going to promote business resiliency? The term could be more appropriately changed to “community resiliency.” As we have learned, the State of California, along with Tuolumne County submitted a $55,000,000 grant request and received $19,755,000 for “Community Resilience Centers” as a result of the RIM fires and other natural disasters. In addition, the description in Objective Three goes on to state that the plan is to “monitor and address business needs and connecting displaced businesses and employees with resiliency centers.” Again, the Action Items should be rewritten to reflect the more appropriate term – “Community Resiliency Centers” instead of “Business Resilience Centers” as purposed in the Strategy. Would only businesses have access to the Centers in times of emergency or would others within the community have access? In addition, the $55,000,000 federal grant award to the State, which in the Strategy mentions that $20,000,000 will be “directly related to business development and resiliency.” However, it has been reported on the Tuolumne County website that the $20,000,000 will be allocated to building a new “bio-mass facility” not for business development and resiliency centers. How does the construction of a biomass facility “help create or save 30 small businesses?” We hope this will ---PAGE BREAK--- 73 Mon, 7 Nov 2016 16:23:21 My name is Susan Reichle and I live in Tuolumne County. Unfortunately, I could not open up the 5 year strategic plan ( I wouldn’t have read 63 pages anyway but for what it’s worth, I wanted to put in my 2 cents. I am happy we have some outside help to give a much needed different perspective. I agree with the 7 key points identified in the newspaper, depending on which zoning and permitting laws you want to get rid of. We need to keep young people and their families in the County, with viable jobs, i.e not expansion of Walmart jobs, especially as the Walmart grocery will probably take away union jobs at Safeway and Savemart. I’ve often thought that appealing to small manufacturing firms that would have minimal impact on our environment and culture--a key reason tourists bring their dollars here--could be enhanced by having work ready employees trained at our local Community College. Also, our meat industry could be revived by stressing healthful, sustainably raised livestock that could be marketed as such, so when Bay Area people think “ Tuolumne they think “excellent quality meat to buy Hopefully this would also keep our traditional ranchers and their families in business into the future. The other component of that is having our own slaughter industry, saving money and providing viable jobs. Again, the Community College could be utilized. Modern communication technology is essential for many reasons. Also, maintaining the environment that attracts tourists. It’s been shown that high end tourists are an economic boon. These tourists from urban areas want outdoor opportunities that they don’t get where they live, and will pay for it. Oh, and how we collect and store water in this changing climate situation will be critical to how we adapt and develop. We need forward thinkers, not outdated ways. That’s all I can think of just now. I look forward to reading what you come up with. ---PAGE BREAK--- U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Economic Development Administration Jackson Federal Building, Room 1890 915 Second Avenue Seattle, Washington 98174 [PHONE REDACTED] June 27, 2017 Terry Woodrow Chair Central Sierra Economic Development District Board of Directors Larry Cope Executive Director Central Sierra Economic Development District 99 North Washington St. Sonora, CA 95370 Dear Ms. Woodrow and Mr. Cope: EDA Seattle Regional Office staff have reviewed and approved the amendment to your Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) presented to EDA on June 26, 2017. We commend your organization for its good efforts, and we look forward to working with you as you continue to address the economic development planning and implementation needs of the Central Sierra region. Sincerely, Malinda S. Matson Economic Development Representative Coastal and Northern California ---PAGE BREAK--- Objective 9: Developing a diversified value-added forest economy. It is imperative that the communities of the Central Sierra develop a diversified value-added forest economy. This will require the reestablishment of forest-based infrastructure including, but not limited to, combined heat/power plants (utilizing woody biomass), post and pole operations and new emerging technology based products like Bio-Char and other soil amendments for agriculture, fire bricks, firewood, pellets, nano-fibers and cross laminated beams. These projects will, in combination, allow this region to become more fire safe, restore forest health, sequester carbon, become better stewards of our watersheds, improve air quality, protect and improve our water quality and quantity, and foster public safety. They will also protect many existing jobs and put hundreds of people in our economically depressed communities back to work in family wage jobs. Action Item: Keep sawmills and other forest based industries open and operating to reduce waste biomass in forests and therefore reducing fire danger and restoring forest health. Work with the USFS / Stanislaus National Forest and where possible with private landowners to accelerate green harvest and forest thinning projects to restore forest health. In the process, develop programs to fully utilize the residual bio-mass materials with all of the technologies available. In partnership with local and regional partners like Valley Sierra Small Business Development Center Delta College Small Business Development Center and local economic development organizations, work with existing businesses to streamline their processes, find capital, train workforce, navigate regulatory requirements. By collaborating with the economic development organizations, chambers, and local governments, the needs of biomass-based businesses will be assessed and met. Qualified local consultants will be used whenever possible and, when needed, additional regional consultants will be recruited to meet business needs wherever local consultant expertise is not available. ---PAGE BREAK--- The program will begin Q4 2018 and run through Q2 2020. CSEDD staff will identify clients and provide referrals to SBDC staff. The District will strive to provide ongoing guidance and financial resources to our partnership organizations and/or directly to local business owners to help them create or save 20 additional jobs through an established BRE process and will be measured by the total number of jobs created per year over the next 5-year reporting period. Action Item: Keep existing infrastructure such as forest roads and transportation routes open and up to date in the region. In partnership with the US Forest Service, National Park Service, California Department of Transportation, local/regional governments, economic development organizations and private land owners, work together to maintain important roadway infrastructure that allows for productive and efficient transportation of materials used in forest-based industries. Work together to obtain federal and state funding to repair existing infrastructure and build new as needed. By collaborating with the US Forest Service, National Park Service, California Department of Transportation, local/regional governments, economic development organizations and private land owners, the transportation infrastructure needs of forest-based businesses will be met. The program will begin Q4 2017 and run through Q2 2021. CSEDD staff will work with the US Forest Service, National Park Service, California Department of Transportation, local/regional governments, economic development organizations and private land owners as a facilitator to bring all parties to the table. The District will strive to provide ongoing guidance and financial resources to this partnership. Action Item: Work on bringing additional infrastructure to the communities serviced by the CSEDD to assist in growing, retaining, expanding and attracting forest based industries. In partnership with the Economic Development Administration, USDA Rural Development, state/local/regional governments, economic development organizations, private land owners and other partners, work together to attract funding to build necessary infrastructure, such as water, sewer, telecommunication and broadband, that allows for additional business growth in forest-based industries. Also work together to obtain federal and state funding to repair existing infrastructure. ---PAGE BREAK--- By collaborating with the Economic Development Administration, USDA Rural Development, state/local/regional governments, economic development organizations, private land owners and other partners, the infrastructure needs of forest-based businesses will be met. The program will begin Q4 2017 and run through Q2 2021. CSEDD staff will work with the Economic Development Administration, USDA Rural Development, state/local/regional governments, economic development organizations, private land owners and other partners as a facilitator to bring all parties to the table. The District will strive to provide ongoing guidance and financial resources to this partnership. Action Item: Train local economic development organizations on how to attract industries that can use materials, such as waste biomaterial, extracted from the forest. Work with new and existing economic development organizations and local governments to train their staff on how to work with forest-based businesses who want to move to their communities. By collaborating with the International Economic Development Council, California Association for Local Economic Development, Fresno State Office of Community & Economic Development and other partners, training needs of local economic development organizations will be met. The program will begin Q4 2017 and run through Q2 2021. CSEDD staff will work with the International Economic Development Council, California Association for Local Economic Development, Fresno State Office of Community & Economic Development and local organizations as a facilitator to bring all parties to the table. The District will strive to provide ongoing guidance and financial resources to this partnership. Action Item: Expand partnerships with regional universities and colleges on how to find new commercial uses for materials that can be extracted from the forest. Work with regional universities and colleges to find new and productive uses for materials that can be extracted from the forest, such as waste biomaterial, and can be manufactured into a viable product. ---PAGE BREAK--- By collaborating with the regional universities new and possibility exciting new products will be brought to the market. The program will begin Q4 2017 and run through Q2 2019. CSEDD staff will work with regional universities and local organizations as a facilitator to bring all parties to the table. The District will strive to provide ongoing guidance and financial resources to this partnership. Action Item: Encourage linkages between industries within the forest industry. Work with existing businesses and newly attracted businesses to strengthen ties between to create a stronger cluster. By collaborating with new and existing forest based businesses, new partnerships can be formed that better prepares each business for downturns in the industry. The program will begin Q4 2020 and run through Q2 2021. CSEDD staff will work with existing businesses and newly attracted businesses as a facilitator to bring all parties to the table. The District will strive to provide ongoing guidance and financial resources to this partnership. Action Item: Work on workforce issues that will appear as technology changes and new technologies emerge within the forest based industry. Work with existing businesses and newly attracted businesses to develop training programs that will fit the needs of their industry. By collaborating with new and existing forest based businesses, a new training partnership can be formed that prepares employees for changes in the industry. The program will begin Q4 2018 and run through Q2 2021. CSEDD staff will work with existing businesses and newly attracted businesses as a facilitator to bring all parties to the table. The District will strive to provide ongoing guidance and financial resources to this partnership. ---PAGE BREAK--- Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy 2018‐2023 Humboldt County California Parts I‐IV Final Adopted March 26, 2018 Funded in part with grants from: WIA Rapid Response, CA Community Development Block Grant, and The Davenport Institute for Public Policy & Civic Engagement at Pepperdine University Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy 2018‐2023 Humboldt County California ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Humboldt County, California • 2018 Final 3 CEDS Summary 5 PART I: INTRODUCTION CEDS PURPOSE 7 TARGETED STRATEGIES 9 REGIONAL/COUNTY OVERVIEW 12 VISION 16 PART II: FOCUS AREAS AND STRATEGIES OVERVIEW 19 INDUSTRY - BUILD, ATTRACT, RETAIN AND GROW 20 OVERVIEW OF WORKFORCE (BUILD, ATTRACT AND RETAIN) 28 BUILDING WORKFORCE – TRAINING/EDUCATION (STRATEGY 4A) 29 WORKFORCE - ATTRACT AND RETAIN (STRATEGY 4B) 33 ALTERNATIVE AGRICULTURE 38 TOURISM / ARTS & CULTURE 41 PART III: IMPLEMENTATION/NEXT STEPS OVERVIEW 43 APPENDIX A: INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT LIST Projects listed in Prosperity 2012 CEDS 53 2018 Project List 55 APPENDIX B: WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT - CURRENT AND PLANNED INITIATIVES Workforce Development Board (WDB)– Overview 67 WDB Current Initiatives 67 Additional Recommended Strategies to Build Workforce 72 APPENDIX C: TOURISM, ARTS AND CULTURE Current Efforts to Support Tourism, Arts and Culture 75 APPENDIX D: LINKS TO SOURCE DATA 77 APPENDIX E: ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS 79 Table Of Contents ---PAGE BREAK--- Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Humboldt County, California • 2018 Final 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Humboldt County, California • 2018 Final 5 A Summary of Humboldt County’s 2018 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy A Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy, or CEDS, is a plan that helps guide local economic development efforts. It is also required for a region to be eligible for certain federal grants. Goals in writing a CEDS include deciding on and prioritizing economic development initiatives and helping to plan for a vibrant and resilient economy. Humboldt County produces a new CEDS every five years. In the past, this document has focused on several “industry clusters.” Industry clusters are related by industry, geography, shared workforce needs, transportation issues, or other factors. Certain clusters, named the “Targets of Opportunity” gained attention because they each fit a number of criteria including providing good jobs, sending exports outside the region, and producing growth over time. The Targets of Opportunity were: • Diversified Health Care • Specialty Food, Flowers & Beverages • Building & Systems Construction In addition to the six industries above, two additional industries that did not fit all of the criteria were selected for additional focus: Tourism and Forest Products. Previously the CEDS focused on identifying and taking advantage of and opportunities related to the clusters, while addressing, as much as possible, weaknesses and threats. The 2018 CEDS process was initiated with a focus on these still-promising industry clusters. However, stakeholder and community input consistently revealed that the region’s most pressing economic issues and promising opportunities cut across industry clusters. These include enhancing our workforce, addressing transportation and infrastructure limitations and more. As a result of these findings, 2018 CEDS is organized around cross-industry themes and strategies. 2018 CEDS Organizers conducted over 70 stakeholder interviews, several strategy sessions and distributed 18,000 surveys to Humboldt County citizens seeking their input on the local economy. Consultants and staff working for the County of Humboldt and the California Center for Rural Policy then analyzed the input and distilled an analysis of Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT). This analysis revealed the need for two overarching strategies: • Strategy 1: Support Efforts to Address Infrastructure Needs, especially for Transportation and Broadband • Strategy 2: Support Efforts to Improve Workforce Development Programs for all Industries More detailed strategies are presented in Parts I and II of Prosperity! 2018. The 2018 CEDS also addresses two other areas: Alternative Agriculture and Tourism, Arts and Culture. Alternative Agriculture was consistently noted as a significant economic driver and cultivation, changes in the state regulatory • Investment Support Services • Management & Innovation Services • Niche Manufacturing ---PAGE BREAK--- Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Humboldt County, California • 2018 Final 6 framework and anticipated changes to the local economy received a lot of attention. This industry is referred to in the CEDS as “Alternative Agriculture” because it remains illegal at the federal level and the CEDS is submitted to a federal agency. The intersection of arts/culture and tourism were also noted as important in the local economy. While the previous CEDS document addressed tourism, it did not significantly address the value of arts and culture and the opportunities offered by this industry cluster. The CEDS is a shared plan. All Humboldt County residents have a stake in our economy and where it, and we, are going. This plan will guide our actions in economic development for the next five years. Therefore, all are welcome to participate and be heard. To read the full document, visit this link: To provide public comment, you may give input online or attend a public meeting on September 13, 2018 from 6pm- 8pm at the Sequoia Conference Center. Humboldt County Economic Development Specialist Kenneth Spain can be reached at (707) 445-7745. To reach your County Supervisor, visit this link: ---PAGE BREAK--- Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Humboldt County, California • 2018 Final 7 CEDS PURPOSE This Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) serves as a guide for economic prosperity and resiliency and outlines the policies, programs, and investments that we believe will strengthen the economy of Humboldt County. It builds upon the original CEDS, adopted in 1999, and the updated version, Prosperity! 2012. Prosperity! 2018, is the culmination of a year-long regional planning process designed to bring the public and private sectors together to create an economic road map, or plan, to diversify and strengthen regional economies in a concerted and collaborative effort for the benefit of all. Humboldt County updates the CEDS every five years. Findings In order to build a strong and resilient economy, economic development efforts need to: • Build on regional • Address cross-industry and industry-specific barriers to growth and prosperity • Anticipate and address evolution in industry needs, technology, workforce demands and changes in the economy This requires a coordinated, regional effort that: • Addresses infrastructure gaps and deficiencies • More effectively builds and retains workforce that responds timely to industry needs • Strengthens and supports promising emerging industries • Highlights and promotes the region’s and opportunities Two new areas of interest were identified by stakeholders, Alternative Agriculture and Tourism/Arts and Culture, as strong economic drivers and priority areas of interests. Both are examined in detail in this report. Summary of Implementation Plan The CEDS Strategy Committee, comprised of representatives from private industry, economic development elements of local governments, non-profits and the public, guided the CEDS process from launch to completion. Moving forward, it is recommended that this Committee be expanded and strengthened to ensure: • More comprehensive Tribal, industry and regional representation • Mechanisms are in place to prioritize and implement recommended strategies The CEDS Strategy Committee will also evaluate progress, collect and analyze relevant data and submit annual reports to the U.S. Economic Development Administration (EDA). These reports will help guide policy making, investment decisions in infrastructure, and the pursuit of grants and loans to support desired outcomes. Part I: Introduction ---PAGE BREAK--- Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Humboldt County, California • 2018 Final 8 Summary of the CEDS Development Process Approach Previously, the CEDS development process and reports focused on several promising “industry clusters” that were related by industry, geography, shared workforce needs, transportation issues, or other factors. These “Targets of Opportunity” met certain criteria that included providing good jobs, sending exports outside the region, and producing growth over time. They were: • Diversified Health Care • Specialty Food, Flowers & Beverages • Building & Systems Construction In addition, Tourism and Forest Products were also highlighted as significant economic contributors to the region. The 2012 CEDS update focused on identifying and taking advantage of and opportunities related to the clusters, while addressing, as much as possible, weaknesses and threats. The 2018 CEDS process was initiated with a focus on these still-promising industry clusters. However, stakeholder and community input consistently revealed that the region’s most pressing economic issues and promising opportunities cut across industry clusters, so the 2018 report reflects these findings. Information and Input Gathered The CEDS Strategy Committee, comprised of county, state and non-profit organizations lead by an ad-hoc committee of the Workforce Development Board, utilized over 70 one-on-one interviews, several focus groups, surveys and more to reach out to more than 18,000 households, businesses, local governments, Tribes and non-profit organizations to gather information for a SWOT Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats) analysis. That input and analysis formed the basis for the strategies outlined in this report. Introduction to the Full 2018 CEDS The CEDS planning process is designed to promote inclusiveness, guide investments that will support the region’s economy and provide resilience to economic shocks originating within and outside the region, including natural disasters and state, national and even global changes in the economy. The CEDS provides a vehicle for individuals, organizations, local and Tribal governments, education, and private industry to engage in meaningful conversation about what capacity building efforts would best serve economic development in the region. Ultimately, the CEDS analyzes the local economy and serves as a guide for establishing regional goals and objectives, developing and implementing a regional plan of action, and identifying investment priorities and funding sources. The CEDS will be monitored and reported on annually to ensure regular engagement of partners and stakeholders and progress toward relevant and critical strategies for achieving and maintaining regional economic prosperity. • Investment Support Services • Management & Innovation Services • Niche Manufacturing ---PAGE BREAK--- Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Humboldt County, California • 2018 Final 9 TARGETED STRATEGIES Specific focus areas and targeted strategies were identified that will strengthen the local economy, allow the region to mitigate weaknesses and threats and capitalize on and opportunities. To provide public comment, you may give input online or attend a public meeting on September 13, 2018 from 6pm-8pm at the Sequoia Conference Center. ¾ ¾ Focus Area: Build, Attract, Retain and Grow Industry To foster economic growth and prosperity, the region needs to successfully build, attract, retain and grow industry. In the current market, decisions regarding where to establish, locate or relocate a business are driven by access to talent, customers, industry networks, quality of life for the principal owner and key company talent as well as other factors. The following strategies seek to support an economic environment that draws and retains business in the region. Strategies 1. Build a business support and response system 2. Market area assets and opportunities to businesses. 3. Provide business support, collaboration and education 4. Support efforts to address Infrastructure needs, especially focused on investments and other efforts designed to eliminate barriers and increase the resources needed for businesses to grow and prosper in the region. 5. Support efforts to address social barriers to industry attraction and workforce development, access to affordable housing and healthcare, crime rates, and blight. ¾ ¾ Focus Area: Workforce To foster business success and overall prosperity, the region needs to develop and support skilled workforce. The following strategies were identified to build, develop, attract and retain workforce that is responsive to employer needs. Strategies - Build Workforce 1. Develop a more integrated workforce development system that includes employers, economic development and workforce development professionals, educators/trainers and other relevant stakeholders to ensure efforts address local employer needs with a special focus on target occupations and industries. 2. Change messaging and better highlight local employment opportunities, including those that emphasize specialized skills and trades. ---PAGE BREAK--- Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Humboldt County, California • 2018 Final 10 Strategies - Attract and Retain Workforce 1. Reframe community narrative to refocus attention on community and decrease the prevalence of negative messaging on social media and in the community—to inspire pride and investment and make the area more inviting to incoming workforce. 2. Support efforts to address infrastructure needs, including related to housing (quantity and quality), access to healthcare, reliable transportation, upgraded and accessible technology/broadband and more. 3. Support and promote assets that support community health and wellness, enrichment and culture (arts, entertainment, education, recreation). ¾ ¾ Focus Area: Alternative Agriculture Alternative Agriculture has been recognized as a significant economic driver in the region for decades. The industry is going through a transition from an underground economy to a legal economy at the state and local levels. Federal laws remain an obstacle to complete transition. State legislative and local changes can have a measurable impact on this transition, and related industry sectors, prompting an interest in supporting related businesses. Strategies 1. Identify, fund and empower an organization to represent the Alternative Agriculture cluster charged with creating a vision and strategic plan to navigate through the ever-changing transition in the industry. 2. Support industry (both business and workforce) education. 3. Support integration with mainstream business community. ¾ ¾ Focus Area: Tourism / Arts & Culture Tourism does not meet the Targets of Opportunity cluster criteria but has been identified as a significant economic driver and was examined extensively in the 2014 Redwood Coast-Targets of Opportunity Report prepared by the California Employment Development Department. Like Tourism, the Arts and Culture cluster does not meet the Targets of Opportunity criteria, but related businesses and professionals contribute significantly to the local economy, helping to attract and retain workforce and foster a higher quality of life for residents. In addition, community Arts and Cultural assets and projects catalyze community revitalization and increase the competitiveness of emerging and mature industries. This contribution to the economic vibrancy warrants its inclusion and detailed examination in the 2018 CEDS. ---PAGE BREAK--- Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Humboldt County, California • 2018 Final 11 Strategies 1. Develop a plan for long-term viability of Arts and Culture. 2. Create a cohesive regional brand & plan to promote Tourism & the Arts. 3. Develop centralized, common tools for sharing arts and culture information. ---PAGE BREAK--- Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Humboldt County, California • 2018 Final 12 REGIONAL/COUNTY OVERVIEW Economic Conditions The US economy has grown over 4 percent in 2018 and is expected to continue to grow, though at a slower pace, for the next several years. According to the Humboldt Economic Index produced by Humboldt State University (HSU), the future of Humboldt County is not as clear. In May 2018, the Composite Index, which tracks four leading indicators, including unfilled orders for manufactured goods, number of initial unemployment insurance claims, building permits and help wanted advertising was up .02 points over the prior month and down .01 percent over the same period last year. While the index drop is not significant, it does highlight the need for continued efforts to strengthen the economy in the coming years. Key Elements of the Regional Economy Targets of Opportunity A Targets of Opportunity 2004-2014 update prepared by the Labor Market Information Division (LMID) of the California Employment Development Department provides the five-county region, consisting of Del Norte, Humboldt, Mendocino, Siskiyou, and Trinity, with a resource for workforce development and strategic planning. This report studied previously identified Target of Industry Clusters, which are economically interdependent groupings of companies with related business activities. In the five-county regional economy, the Targets of Opportunity industry clusters demonstrate the greatest opportunity for the region’s residents and together exhibit a combination of: • Expanding opportunity (job and/or firm growth) • Job quality (wage growth) • Improving competitiveness (strong or growing specialization, concentrated employment) • Career potential (job opportunities at entry, mid, and high wage levels) Using the above criteria, in 1999 the Humboldt County Workforce Development Board identified the following Target Industry clusters: • Diversified Health Care • Specialty Food, Flowers & Beverages • Building & Systems Construction • Management & Innovation Services • Niche Manufacturing • Investment Support Services ---PAGE BREAK--- Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Humboldt County, California • 2018 Final 13 In 2014, the Targets of Opportunity industry clusters accounted for 66.9 percent of the region’s total private sector employment and 72.3 percent of the region’s total private sector wages. Altogether, the Targets of Opportunity outperformed the regional economy in most respects, adding employment, wages, and employment concentration. In addition to these six emerging industries, Forest Products and Tourism were also identified in previous work as industry clusters of interest. Though they do not meet all of the criteria of the Targets of Opportunity, they are significant contributors to the local economy. Arts and Culture Although not identified as a Target Industry Cluster, the local Arts community contributes significantly to the local economy while providing enrichment for residents, career opportunities for practitioners and a draw for tourists and visitors. Previously, Arts was grouped as an industry under Tourism but multiple stakeholders requested that this report examine this industry more closely. Emerging Industries There are a number of Emerging Industries, such as alternative energy generation, that present opportunity for the region, though at this time they do not meet the Targets of Opportunity criteria. Alternative Agriculture has been a major aspect of the Humboldt County economy for more than 50 years and estimates put the economic contribution of this industry in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Recent legislative changes are altering the economic landscape though this industry continues to demonstrate great promise. Emerging Industries, including Alternative Agriculture, will be discussed more extensively later in this report. Entrepreneurship Capacity New firm creation is another key element of the regional economy. Data indicates strong entrepreneurship capacity and this asset was often noted in interviews and strategy sessions. In fact, many of the region’s largest private sector employers began as nonemployer firms (self-employed firms with no employees). The county continued to experience substantial and continued growth of nonemployer firms despite the impacts of the recession, with a net increase of 1,884 new nonemployer firms from 2004-2014, representing a growth rate of 20 percent. Entrepreneurship capacity was examined more extensively in the Targets of Opportunity 2004- 2014 report. ---PAGE BREAK--- Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Humboldt County, California • 2018 Final 14 Population, Labor Force, Unemployment The US Census listed Humboldt County’s total 2017 population as 136,754, a 1.6 percent increase over 2010. This relatively low population density, low traffic congestion and quick commute times contribute to a high-quality rural lifestyle. Eureka, the county seat and population hub, houses approximately 28,000 residents. Arcata, the second most populated city in the county is home to more than 17,000 residents and Humboldt State University, one of the largest employers in the county. It is followed by Fortuna, the third largest incorporated city with nearly 12,000 residents. Rio Dell is home to approximately 3,400, and Ferndale has nearly 1,400. Trinidad, the smallest incorporated city, has about 300 permanent residents and Blue Lake has 1,265. The population of unincorporated Humboldt County is 70,063. McKinleyville is the largest unincorporated community with just over 15,000 residents; and, Garberville (the hub of Southern Humboldt County) has a population of 900. Willow Creek, in eastern Humboldt County, has about 1,700 residents and Scotia, at the southern end of the Eel River Valley, has a little less than 1,000 inhabitants. Education Humboldt County residents have reached higher levels of educational attainment than surrounding counties. About 90 percent of the county’s age 25 and older population have high school diplomas or GEDs (compared to about 82 percent for the state) and 28 percent have Bachelor’s Degrees or higher. Labor Force Participation Slow population growth and an older than average population (close to 17 percent of the population is over age 65 compared to less than 14 percent for state of California) are thought to be contributing factors to the region’s historically low unemployment rate of under 3.2 percent (May 2018). This is a full point lower than California’s unemployment rate of the same period. These factors may also help to explain the current workforce shortages discussed later in this report. Housing Quality affordable rental housing and opportunities for homeownership offer long-term social and financial benefits, making housing an important economic influencer. The county’s median home price of $308,000 is rising but is still significantly less than the statewide median price of $564,830. Rental costs in the region are also rising but remain much lower than in more urban areas of California, especially along coastal communities near the major cities. Home construction remains sluggish compared to pre-recession levels. Municipalities and organizations continue to identify and address barriers to construction, incentivizing the building of new market rate, low cost and HUD supported affordable housing. ---PAGE BREAK--- Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Humboldt County, California • 2018 Final 15 Challenges and Opportunity While the Targets of Industry Clusters and many emerging industries offer significant opportunity for the region, feedback gathered from industry leaders, subject matter experts and other stakeholders revealed that Humboldt County faces significant challenges such as: • Difficulty in attracting and retaining qualified workforce • Limited, unreliable, and/or compromised infrastructure • Geographic isolation and resulting conditions, including transportation challenges Fortunately, Humboldt County also contains several assets that bolster the region’s economic strength and resilience and offset many of these challenges. Among these are: • A culture of entrepreneurship where people start businesses to live here and proactively address challenges to ensure long term growth and prosperity • Small town, rural quality of life with many outdoor recreational opportunities that attract educated, talented and creative individuals who want to live, work and play in a healthy, vibrant community • Humboldt Bay, with the harbor, a deep-water port and essential facilities, provides a productive environment for aquaculture and other industries with expansion potential. The Port of Humboldt Bay is California’s northernmost deep-water shipping port and the only port between San Francisco (258 miles south) and Coos Bay, Oregon (180 miles north) • The Redwoods as an international icon drawing locals and visitors alike • Visual and performing arts, and cultural assets that are integral to Humboldt County’s identity, enhance the quality of life for residents, and contribute to innovative businesses and vibrant communities. Many of the region’s successful international companies have merged arts with industry, including jewelry maker Holly Yashi, Marimba One and more Additional assets that contribute to the strength and resilience of the region include: • Highly productive agricultural land with a long growing season and many micro‐climates. Humboldt County produces grass-fed beef, excellent quality wine grapes, flowers and many other products • Abundant water and delivery infrastructure for industrial use that offer a unique and valuable asset • Humboldt State University (HSU) and College of the Redwoods (CR) that are large employers and draw individuals into the area, infusing the county with over $300 million annually. Additionally, HSU and CR train talented people, many of whom become valued area employees or entrepreneurs • Highly productive forests for harvest and renewal. Humboldt County is one of the few places in the world where redwood, a premiere, niche wood product, grows well ---PAGE BREAK--- Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Humboldt County, California • 2018 Final 16 • Regional airport with recently expanded service to Los Angeles • Two Highways--HWY 101 travels north to south and Hwy 299 travels east to west, linking to Interstate 5 at Redding, approximately 145 miles from the Coast of Humboldt County. HWY 299 was recently upgraded to accommodate STAA (Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982) trucks, increasing the opportunity to transport goods and services in and out of the county at a lower cost. Caltrans has a pending realignment project (Richardson Grove Project on US 101) that would allow HWY 101 to accommodate STAA trucks as well. VISION Throughout the CEDS process, stakeholders envisioned a region that capitalizes on the county’s and opportunities while mitigating, as much as possible, identified weaknesses and threats; a region where mutual support and collaboration between individuals, businesses, agencies and communities is fostered to create economic prosperity for all. Goals To achieve this vision, the goals identified in the previous CEDS update, Prosperity! 2012, were reaffirmed and included: • Diversified, growing industries that export goods and services • A strong local economy that maximizes use of locally produced goods and services • Constant creation of new firms and jobs with wages that support a family • A business climate that welcomes and nurtures entrepreneurship, business expansion and strategic community- based problem-solving • Quality of life that supports enjoyment of nature, small town rural life and connection to community Strategies to accomplish the Vision and Goals The 2018 CEDS process identified a need to support a coordinated, regional effort to achieve identified goals with a focus on: • Addressing infrastructure gaps and deficiencies • More effectively building and retaining workforce that responds to industry needs • Strengthening and supporting promising emerging industries • Highlighting and promoting the region’s and opportunities ---PAGE BREAK--- Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Humboldt County, California • 2018 Final 17 To further these efforts and build resilience in the regional economy, the County Board of Supervisors has restructured the Economic Development Division of County Government to include a newly added Director of Economic Development. The person in this position will play a collaborative role in a coordinated regional economic effort that supports the implementation of identified strategies. A primary goal of EDA in funding the development and ongoing updates to the CEDS is to generate dialogue between the public and private sectors. As a result of this process, greater communication and the desire for greater cooperation between business and government is anticipated to result in a more coordinated regional approach and greater economic success. ---PAGE BREAK--- Prepared by DRY CREEK RANCHERIA BAND OF POMO 2018-2022 COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY (CEDS) Bellacana Vineyards and Wines ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 This Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (“CEDS”) was written by Bluestem Consulting, Inc. for the Dry Creek Rancheria Band of Pomo Indians and adopted by the Board of Directors on December 12, 2017. The plan was developed and written in compliance with the U.S. Economic Development Administration’s CEDS requirements as provided for in 13 CFR Part 303. In partnership and with special thanks to Board of Directors CEDS Committee DCR Tribal Departments and all of the Tribal staff, Tribal members, and community stakeholders who provided input to this plan. ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION 4 SECTION II: SUMMARY BACKGROUND 7 Demographic and Socioeconomic Profile 7 Geography & Climate 9 Economic Environment and Trends 10 Housing 13 Education 14 SECTION III: SWOT ANALYSIS 15 Process Summary 15 Industry Clusters 15 Tribal Assets & Resources 18 Culture & History 21 Public Input 22 SECTION IV: STRATEGIC DIRECTION & ACTION PLAN 29 Vision & Strategic Goals 29 Action Plan – Priority Projects and Activities 34 SECTION V: EVALUATION FRAMEWORK 39 APPENDICES 40 Appendix A – Public Input Summary 41 Appendix B – CEDS Tribal Member Survey 42 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This five-year, Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS), funded in part by a planning grant from the U.S. Economic Development Administration (EDA), is the result of a one-year planning process designed to build the capacity and guide the economic prosperity and resilience of the Dry Creek Rancheria Band of Pomo Indians. The process included a review of the current economic and financial position of the Tribe, a comprehensive SWOT analysis, and significant public input through interviews, focus groups, and a Tribal member survey. Underlying the planning process was the Tribe’s vision for a resilient and sustainable Tribal economy that leverages and preserves the of the Tribe’s history and cultural heritage, builds diversified assets in an environmentally responsible way that can support the Tribe for current and future generations, and provides opportunity, hope and, ultimately, an improved quality of life for all Tribal members. As a result of the planning process, the following strategic goals were adopted: GOAL 1: Income Growth and Diversification GOAL 2: A Strong and Cohesive Tribal Community GOAL 3: Development of Our Most Valuable Resource – Our People GOAL 4: Support the Building Blocks of a Resilient and Sustainable Economy There are key strategies, actions and evaluation measures connected with each goal, described in later sections of this document. As a requirement of EDA funding, the Tribe will evaluate, report on progress made and update this plan annually. BOARD OF DIRECTORS Chris Wright – Chairman Betty Arterberry – Vice-Chairman Marjie Rojes – Secretary/Treasurer Tieraney Giron – Member at Large Jim Silva – Member at Large CEDS COMMITTEE Dora Azevedo – Tour & Travel/Sales, River Rock Casino Dave Cade – DCR Housing Director Melissa Napoli – Marketing Coordinator, River Rock Casino Tina Rojes – Manager, OHOSA Tobacco Shop Jim Silva – Member at Large, DCR Board of Directors David Smith-Ferri – DCR Business Authority Board Member and Tribal Grants and Contracts Officer ---PAGE BREAK--- SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION 4 SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION The Dry Creek Rancheria Band of Pomo Indians (“DCR” or “the Tribe”) is a federally-recognized tribe whose homeland is in Northern California, some 75 miles north of San Francisco along the Russian River and Alexander Valley region. There are approximately 1,174 tribal members, with the majority residing close to their ancestral lands in Sonoma, Mendocino and Lake Counties. Tribal headquarters are in the city of Santa Rosa, California. The DCR land base includes the 93-acre Dry Creek Rancheria in rural Sonoma County, as well as three fee properties in Sonoma County totaling an additional 580+ acres. The Tribe’s main revenue source has been the River Rock Casino which opened in 2002 and is located on the Rancheria. The casino has provided many jobs, contributed substantially to the local and regional economy, and supported the provision of essential services for tribal members including education support, child health care, elder care, and affordable housing programs. New competition in the area over the last three years has had a significant impact on the casino. As a result, there has been a reduction in Tribal revenue available to support critical services and the casino has been forced to reduce its workforce, causing a loss of jobs. While casino revenues have now stabilized and there are plans in place to strengthen and grow operations in the future, the Tribe is also focused on building economic resiliency by developing a plan that will allow for diversified revenue sources, helping to support the long-term economic viability and vitality of the Tribe and its tribal members. Resiliency is an ingrained attribute of the Pomo people. Settlement of Southern Pomo bands in the Alexander Valley dates back over 5,000 years. As descendants, DCR tribal members have demonstrated resilience and persistence not only by still inhabiting their ancestral homelands, but also through the preservation of their cultural heritage including tribal ceremonies, Pomo language, basket weaving, jewelry making, and through utilizing and protecting the rich natural resources of the area to enhance economic survival. ---PAGE BREAK--- SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION 5 The CEDS process was undertaken to develop community-driven economic development goals, associated strategies, priority projects, and an implementation plan. The goal of the CEDS is to strengthen the short- and long-term economic prosperity and resilience of the Tribe, ultimately helping to preserve cultural heritage, build for current and future generations, and improve the overall quality of life for DCR Tribal members and their families. The planning process sought to answer three key questions: As part of the CEDS process, EDA requires four elements to be addressed including a summary background describing the current economic situation, a SWOT Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) analysis that identifies internal and external factors that speak to the Tribe’s unique assets and position within the regional economy, the strategic direction the Tribe wants to take over the next five years and an associated action plan, and an evaluation framework that creates performance measures for achieving the plan’s goals and objectives.1 1 13 CFR § 303.7 ---PAGE BREAK--- SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION 6 In late 2016, Bluestem Consulting was hired to facilitate the CEDS planning process. The process approach was community-driven allowing for extensive input from tribal members using a variety of different methods. The CEDS Strategy Committee, who guided and oversaw the process, was comprised of a diversified group of Tribal members. Representatives from every tribal department were interviewed. Two focus groups were held – one with Tribal employees and one with elders. Several tribal member small business owners were interviewed. A CEDS survey was mailed to every adult tribal member with 379 returned surveys, a 54% response rate. A project priority poster board was available for member input at the bi-annual tribal member meeting. In addition, several external stakeholders were contacted and interviewed for input and feedback. The process began in December 2016 and culminated in this written document in September 2017. After considering and incorporating public comments, the Tribal Board of Directors approved this CEDS plan in October 2017. This plan will drive economic development efforts of the DCR Tribe. It will be evaluated and updated at least annually to meet the changing economic environment and the needs of DCR Tribal members. A more detailed timeline and list of all public input participants and activities can be found in Appendix A. ---PAGE BREAK--- SECTION II: SUMMARY BACKGROUND 7 SECTION II: SUMMARY BACKGROUND Demographic and Socioeconomic Profile The Dry Creek Rancheria Band of Pomo Indians is comprised of 1,174 tribal members. Although the Tribal membership is dispersed geographically across the country, the majority reside in rural Sonoma, Lake and Mendocino counties in northern California. Tribal member population is on the rise, increasing 13.1% in the last five years2. This is more than four times the population growth in the three- county region, which grew 2.8%, from 636,385 in 2010 to 654,814 in 2016. The DCR Tribal youth population, comprising 40% of all Tribal members, is significantly higher than the region’s youth population rate of 20%. 3 Total population in the region, including Sonoma, Mendocino and Lake Counties, is over 654,814. The population is aging, with the number of people 65 or older increasing from 14.5% in 2010 to 18.9% in 2 DCR Tribal Enrollment Office, 2012, 2017 3 DCR Tribal Enrollment Office, 2017; U.S. Census Bureau 2016 Population Estimates, Sonoma County, Mendocino County, Lake County Source: U.S. Census Population Estimates, 2010, 2016 - 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 under 18 yrs 18-65 yrs 65+ yrs 139,598 404,554 92,232 132,901 398,261 123,652 Sonoma, Mendocino & Lake Counties Total Population Trend 2010 2016 ---PAGE BREAK--- SECTION II: SUMMARY BACKGROUND 8 2016. Sonoma County economic officials anticipate that roughly a quarter of county workforce will retire over the next 10 years.4 With relatively slow population growth in the region, the already low unemployment rate in the area, and the strong growth in Tribal population coupled with the large number of Tribal youth, there is great employment opportunity for the Tribe’s young and growing workforce. While the region is considered one of the most resource-rich areas in the country, many Tribal members do not share equally in the economic prosperity that has resulted. The unemployment rate in Sonoma County, where most Tribal members reside, is near a two-decade low of 3.2%.5 However, more than 24% of DCR Tribal members are without jobs. Lower education levels may, in part, contribute to the lower average wages for Tribal members who are employed. The average DCR Tribal member per capita income of under $32,000 is less than two-thirds of the per capita income in Sonoma County. Lower incomes, higher unemployment, and the high cost of housing make homeownership considerably more challenging for Tribal members, who own their homes at less than half the rate of the total population across the three- county region. ECONOMIC STATUS Unemployment Rate Avg Per Capita Income Home Ownership Bachelor’s Degree or Higher High School Graduate or Higher DCR Tribe 24% <$32,000 26.7% 10.3% 75.9% Sonoma County 3.2% $52,300 59.4% 32.9% 87.1% Mendocino County 4.6% $41,547 57.9% 23.7% 86.8% Lake County 5.6% $36,264 63.0% 16.0% 80.4% Sources: 2017 DCR CEDS Survey; U.S. Census Bureau, 2015 ACS 5-yr Estimates; Bureau of Labor Statistics, April 2017 4 The Press Democrat, Sonoma County’s economy is healthy for now, April 28, 2017 5 Bureau of Labor Statistics, April 2017 ---PAGE BREAK--- SECTION II: SUMMARY BACKGROUND 9 Geography & Climate Sonoma, Mendocino and Lake Counties, located along the state’s northern coast with close proximity to San Francisco, offer some of the country’s most diverse and beautiful geography with miles of coastline, expansive river valleys, clear lakes, mountain tops and redwood forests. The region’s rolling hills, rich soil and moderate climate make it home to hundreds of world-class wineries. The temperature in the region averages 56-59°F with 216-262 sunny days per year and average annual rainfall of 30-45 inches, depending on the area. The Dry Creek Rancheria is a 93-acre property located in the small rural community of Geyserville in northern Sonoma County. Located on a hillside with beautiful, expansive views of the Dry Creek Valley, the Rancheria is situated three miles from Highway 101 in the heart of wine country. Although abundant in natural beauty, this three-county region is located along several active fault lines making several areas highly susceptible to earthquakes. The Rogers Creek fault cuts through the heart of Sonoma County to the northern outskirts of Santa Rosa. This is one of the four major faults in the San Francisco Bay area and is predicted to have enough pent up energy to produce a major earthquake in the next 20 years.6 This also creates risk of tsunamis in the coastal areas of the region. Because of this risk, resiliency planning is an important element of any economic development plan for the Tribe. 6 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Vol. 106, No. 2, pp. April 2016 Source: USGS, 2013 Dry Creek Rancheria ---PAGE BREAK--- SECTION II: SUMMARY BACKGROUND 10 Economic Environment and Trends THE REGION Sonoma, Mendocino and Lake Counties were slow to bounce back after the 2008 recession, which had a dramatic effect on the region’s economy. At the peak in 2010, unemployment was close to 13% in Sonoma and Mendocino Counties and almost 18% in Lake County7. The housing market, which had been one of the highest in the country prior to the recession, experienced a near- collapse with housing prices declining almost 50% in some areas8. Analysis of Gross Domestic Product (“GDP”) indicates that the region was in decline prior to the onset of the recession. From 2005 to 2009 there was more than $2 billion lost in real GDP. Almost two-thirds of losses can be attributed to a combination of construction and real estate. There were smaller losses in the visitor spending industries.9 Although recovery was slow, Sonoma and Mendocino Counties are now in the middle of robust economic growth. Lake County’s growth has been more moderate, in part due to its geographic location and in part due to recent fire seasons that have caused significant damage in the area.10 All three counties are experiencing decade-low unemployment rates and strong home sales. Construction has been slow to rebound, but real estate and tourism-related industries have risen sharply over the last five years. Tourism and hospitality revenues are on the rise and provide over 10% of the jobs in Sonoma and Mendocino Counties. 7 Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2010 8 California Association of Realtors, 2009-2017 9 Sonoma-Mendocino CEDS, November 2016 10 Northbay Business Journal, February 2017 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% County Employment by Industry Sonoma County Mendocino County Lake County Source: California Employment Department Division, June 2017 ---PAGE BREAK--- SECTION II: SUMMARY BACKGROUND 11 Sonoma County is the region’s economic driver with the most diverse economy of the three counties (as indicated by a more even distribution of employment across industries as shown in the chart above). While the cost of living is high in Sonoma County, it is still significantly lower than in the Bay area, positioning the county as a lower-cost service hub. It also boasts the largest population center of the three counties in the City of Santa Rosa. The Executive Director of the Sonoma County Economic Development Board described the economy as “booming” in almost all business sectors.11 The agreeable climate and rural nature of the region leads to a large percentage of acreage used for agricultural purposes. Agricultural land comprised 58% of total land in Sonoma County, 40% in Mendocino County and 19% in Lake County.12 The value of agriculture reached over $1 billion for the three counties combined in 2015. The top producing crop (excluding marijuana) for all three counties is grapes and wine, accounting for approximately two-thirds of the agriculture value in Sonoma and Lake Counties and 40% of the value in Mendocino County.13 Since 1996 when California made the use of medical marijuana legal, Mendocino County has been part of the largest cannabis-producing region in the country. The passage of Proposition 64 in November 2016 made recreational marijuana legal in California for the first time. There will undoubtedly be economic opportunities and challenges as a result of this new industry over the next five years. The high cost of living in the region is a major obstacle for business growth, both in terms of higher operating costs and maintaining a qualified workforce. This challenge will be compounded by the retirement of large waves of baby boomers over the next five to ten years. The aging population will also create economic 11 The Press Democrat, Economic Forecast: Unemployment low in Sonoma County but key challenges remain, January 12, 2017 12 2012 U.S. Census of Agriculture 13 2015 Sonoma, Mendocino and Lake County Crop Reports Source: Sonoma County 2016 Crop Report ---PAGE BREAK--- SECTION II: SUMMARY BACKGROUND 12 opportunities. As the local population ages, there will be growth in the healthcare industry, which is already the second largest industry in the region. Nationally, as baby boomers retire many may begin to travel more, creating the potential for even greater gains in the tourism and hospitality industries. DCR TRIBE The primary economic driver for the DCR Tribe has been the River Rock Casino which opened for business in 2002. The casino has provided revenues to fund critical Tribal government services, as well as provide quality jobs to Tribal members and the surrounding community. Since the opening of a competing casino in 2013, River Rock has experienced a 50% decline in revenues and been forced to cut its workforce by over a third. In addition to the casino, the Tribe generates revenue from the Alexander Valley RV Park and Campground, the OHOSA Tobacco Shop (located in the casino), the Bellacana Vineyards and its newly created Bellacana Wines. Not surprisingly, almost 23% of employed Tribal members work in the leisure and hospitality industry. The Tribe currently employs just over 400 people, with the casino and campground accounting for well over 90% of these jobs. After leisure and hospitality, educational and health services (17.2%) followed by the retail industry (15.1%) are the largest employers of Tribal members. According to the 2017 DCR CEDS Survey, 9% of Tribal members are self-employed and over 58% expressed some level of interest in starting their own business. Although River Rock Casino revenues have been stabilized and there is potential for future growth, the Tribe has placed a priority on diversifying revenue sources to help build a more resilient and sustainable Tribal economy in the future. Source: 2017 DCR CEDS Survey; Calif. Employment Department Division, June 2017 ---PAGE BREAK--- SECTION II: SUMMARY BACKGROUND 13 Housing Sonoma County, where most Tribal members reside, is one of the most expensive housing markets in the country when home prices are compared to incomes. Home prices in the county have been climbing since 2012, when prices began to rebound after the historic market crash. The median home price has jumped almost 90% during this time. In June 2017, the median price for a three- bedroom, two-bath home was $627,250. The median household income in the county was just over $64,000.14 The Housing Affordability Index (“HAI”) prepared by using median housing and income numbers placed Sonoma County as one of the top ten least affordable housing markets in the nation. The general rule of thumb is that no more than 30% of a household’s income should be spent on housing. According to the HAI calculation, it would have taken 82% of the average Sonoma resident’s salary to afford the mortgage payment on the median house in 2016. For Tribal members who have even lower incomes on average, this means finding affordable housing is extremely challenging at best. The dream of homeownership is unreachable for many Tribal members, who own homes at less than half the rate of the total population across the three-county region. 15 Mendocino and Lake Counties are more affordable with median home prices of $445,000 and $259,500, respectively. The housing issue also creates challenges for businesses trying to fill their labor force. With limited affordable housing options in the area, new and growing businesses are unable to attract and keep new workers. 14 American Community Survey 2015, 5-year estimates 15 2017 DCR CEDS Survey; U.S. Census Bureau, 2015 ACS 5-yr Estimates $445,000 Mendocino County $259,500 Lake County $555,410 California $265,500 United States $627,250 Sonoma County Sources: California Association of Realtors, June 2017 (California prices); National Association of Realtors, June 2017 (US price) ---PAGE BREAK--- SECTION II: SUMMARY BACKGROUND 14 Education Most living wage jobs in the region require some form of post- secondary education. DCR Tribal members lag behind the educational attainment of the region as a whole, which can make competing for quality jobs in the area challenging. In Sonoma County, 29.4% of the population over 17 has a bachelor’s degree or higher, compared to just 10.5% of DCR Tribal members. There are a number of educational institutions in the region that offer post-secondary certificates and degrees including Sonoma State University, Mendocino College, Empire College and Santa Rosa Junior College. Although there are fewer college graduates among Tribal members, the 2017 DCR CEDS Survey showed that 49% of adult Tribal members have a long-term goal to improve their education, and 19% hope to achieve a bachelor’s degree or higher. The DCR Tribe places a high priority on education, providing financial support for Tribal members obtaining post- secondary education in the form of vocational certificates, two-year and four-year college degrees, and post-graduate studies. Source: 2017 DCR CEDS Survey; American Community Survey, 2014 5-yr estimates ---PAGE BREAK--- DRAFT 2015 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT UPDATE ---PAGE BREAK--- To be a regional economic and commercial hub with a multitude of services for both residents and visitors. Bishop will be a diverse, well-rounded, welcoming, sustainable, vibrant community that collaboratively promotes its unique Eastern Sierra location and provides year-round business and outdoor recreation opportunities. VISION: ---PAGE BREAK--- INTRODUCTION 1 Study Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Community Involvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Regional Cooperation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 EDE Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 ECONOMIC AND HOUSING MARKET SNAPSHOT 3 Population and Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Household Income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Employment and Labor Markets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Taxable Retail Sales. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Business Locations and Land Parcel Ownership . . . . . . . . . . 12 Housing Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 COMMUNITY INPUT 20 OPEN HOUSE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Community Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Economic Development and Challenges . . . . . . . 23 Promoting Bishop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Bishop’s Role in the Regional Economy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Investing in Economic Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Bishop Airport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 WORKING GROUP SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Vision for Success . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Goals from the Working Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Beyond Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 TABLE OF CONTENTS ---PAGE BREAK--- CASE STUDIES AND BEST PRACTICES 35 Broadband Access . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Educational Institutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Airport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Regional Health Center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Regional Tourism Branding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Regional Grant Coordination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Underutilized Parcels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Façade Improvements and Business Improvement Districts . . . 41 Downtown Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Sierra Business Council . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 GOALS AND POLICIES 43 Goal 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Goal 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Goal 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Goal 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Goal 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 APPENDIX A: IMPLEMENTATION PLAN APPENDIX B: BIBLIOGRAPHY ---PAGE BREAK--- 1 The City of Bishop retained BBC Research & Consulting (BBC) and Bauer Planning and Environmental Services (BPES) to prepare an update to the Economic Development Element (EDE) of the city’s General Plan. City of Bishop staff, residents and business leaders contributed significant time and effort to the development of the EDE goals and policies. The study team gratefully acknowledges the leadership of Gary Schley, City of Bishop Public Services Officer, and Jim Tatum, City Manager. STUDY OBJECTIVES In support of the vision of the Economic Development Element, the objective of this study is to define the city’s strategy for supporting, strengthening and diversifying the larger community economy, and recommend appropriate and actionable public policies for strategy execution. This refresh of Bishop’s EDE is part of a comprehensive General Plan update. The Mobility Element and Housing Element updates are complete. The Land Use Element and Municipal Code will be examined in the future as resources become available. The City of Bishop framed the EDE analysis and development around the following principles: ■ ■ Develop, articulate and refine Bishop’s economic development strategies and develop specific initiatives at a level of detail appropriate for incorporation into the City’s General Plan; INTRODUCTION ■ ■ Ensure that the City’s economic development efforts recognize and complement ongoing Inyo County, Mono County and Bishop Paiute Tribe economic development policies, concepts of economic sustainability, and the community’s values regarding protection of its unique environmental setting and community atmosphere; ■ ■ Incorporate regional economic infrastructure initiatives, such as Digital 395, the Northern Inyo Hospital complex, and expansion of the Bishop Airport, into the overall economic development plan strategy; and ■ ■ Prepare an economic development plan that capitalizes on Bishop’s opportunities and is consistent with the likely land use and mobility policies defined in the broader General Plan document. The City’s current EDE, prepared in the early 1990s, identified two major opportunities and three major constraints to economic development. The opportunities included increased retail sales and expanded tourism, and the constraints included lack of housing and developable land as well as constraints on available financing and facilities. All of these constraints and opportunities still exist. Bishop has new opportunities in the emerging technical sector, in expanded regional services, and a wide range of related fields as a result of the recent completion of Digital 395—a fiber optic cable project that extended high-speed data and broadband service to the Owens Valley. This ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT UPDATE INTRODUCTION ---PAGE BREAK--- 2 applicable economic development plans and studies and in-depth conversations with key stakeholders from the Town of Mammoth Lakes, Inyo and Mono counties, the Bishop Paiute Tribe and the Sierra Business Council. This EDE includes goals and policies that address the regional nature of Bishop’s economy, recognizing that strategic partnerships will strengthen and support Bishop’s economic growth. EDE ORGANIZATION Following this introduction, the EDE presents: ■ ■ A snapshot of Bishop’s economic and housing market; ■ ■ A summary of community input to the plan development; ■ ■ Best practices and case studies; and ■ ■ Goals and policies. Appendix A is the draft EDE implementation plan. Appendix B is a bibliography. update to the EDE relied heavily on the involvement of residents, community leaders and regional stakeholders. COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Participation from Bishop residents and business leaders was essential to build a strong foundation for the EDE. Opportunities for resident and business leader contributions to the development of the EDE included an interactive Open House and participation in the EDE’s Working Group. Open house. The City of Bishop hosted an EDE Open House to provide community members with an opportunity to share their experiences and opinions of Bishop’s current economy and goals for the future. More than 120 people participated. Working group. City of Bishop staff invited business and community leaders to serve on the EDE Working Group. On average, 30 stakeholders participated. In addition to reviewing interim work products, members of the Working Group participated in four strategy sessions to develop the EDE vision, goals and policies and implementation plan. At the fourth and final EDE Working Group meeting, members shifted their efforts from EDE development to implementation planning (see Appendix A for the preliminary implementation plan), including the formation of four separate committees. This underscores the importance of ongoing community involvement in close partnership with the City during implementation. REGIONAL COOPERATION Bishop’s economy functions within the context of the greater Eastern Sierra region, providing goods and services to locals, visitors and residents of nearby communities. Developing an understanding of the regional economy included review of ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT UPDATE INTRODUCTION ---PAGE BREAK--- APPENDIX A IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ---PAGE BREAK--- Draft timeframes; contingent on staff and/or volunteer capacity City of Bishop Economic Development Element Implementation Plan GOAL 1. ACTIONS RESPONSIBLE PARTIES 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Policy 1.0 Policy 1.1 Action 1.1.1 Convene meeting of representatives of appropriate agencies City of Bishop, Caltrans and Inyo County Local Transportation Commission, Federal Highways, EPA, NHTSA) and downtown business/property owners to discuss opportunities for pedestrian and bicycle enhancements. City of Bishop Action 1.1.2 Prioritize implementation of Mobility Element policies and actions for bicycle and pedestrian improvements on Main Street City of Bishop Action 1.1.2 Develop 5‐year plan for traffic calming, pedestrian and bicycle enhancements on Main Street as an extension/amplification of the Mobility Element policies and actions. City of Bishop, Agency Partners, downtown business/property owners, EDEIC Action 1.1.3 Implement 5‐year plan City of Bishop, Agency Partners, downtown business/property owners Policy 1.2 Action 1.2.1 Create EDEIC subcommittee to lead efforts to explore and build community support for a truck route. EDEIC Truck Route Committee Action 1.2.2 Develop truck route policy recommendation. EDEIC Truck Route Committee Action 1.2.3 Implement truck route policy recommendation. City of Bishop, EDEIC Policy 1.3 Action 1.3.1 Create EDEIC subcommittee to focus on downtown issues. EDEIC Downtown Committee, City of Bishop Action 1.3.2 Develop recommendations for façade improvement incentive and program options. EDEIC Downtown Committee Action 1.3.3 Fund the program (grants, financial institution partners, general fund allocation) City of Bishop Action 1.3.4 Implement façade improvement program. City of Bishop Create a vibrant, authentic, and pedestrian‐friendly downtown that is a destination for residents and tourists. Establish the Economic Development Element Implementation Commission (EDEIC) co‐led by the Bishop Area Chamber of Commerce and the City of Bishop, with membership comprised of business property owners and residents. IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE Work with appropriate agencies and investigate options to calm traffic and better the pedestrian and bicycle environment on the Main Street portion of 395. Revisit options for a truck route that will remove truck traffic from downtown while ensuring private motorist traffic remains. Explore methods to incentivize Main Street and other downtown property owners to invest in façade improvements to make downtown more attractive to visitors and residents. ---PAGE BREAK--- Draft timeframes; contingent on staff and/or volunteer capacity City of Bishop Economic Development Element Implementation Plan GOAL 1. ACTIONS RESPONSIBLE PARTIES 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Policy 1.4 Action 1.4.1 Develop contact list of vacant and underutilized property owners. City of Bishop, EDEIC Downtown Committee Action 1.4.2 Contact property owners. EDEIC Downtown Committee Action 1.4.3 Serve as a resource to property owners for attracting tenants that support the vision of a vibrant downtown. EDEIC Downtown Committee, City of Bishop Policy 1.5 Action 1.5.1 Host a PBID informational meeting with downtown property and business owners. EDEIC Downtown Committee, City of Bishop Action 1.5.2 Develop PBID recommendations. EDEIC Downtown Committee, downtown business and property owners Action 1.5.3 Implement PBID recommendations. EDEIC Downtown Committee, downtown business and property owners, City of Bishop Policy 1.6 Action 1.6.1 Develop recommendations for updating the Municipal Code. City of Bishop, EDEIC Action 1.6.2 Implement recommendations. City of Bishop Policy 1.7 Action 1.7.1 Develop downtown activity plan for year‐round events. Bishop Area Chamber of Commerce, EDEIC Downtown Committee Action 1.7.2 Implement plan. Bishop Area Chamber of Commerce, EDEIC Downtown Committee, downtown businesses, residents Policy 1.8 Action 1.8.1 Identify potential barriers to redevelopment. City of Bishop, EDEIC Action 1.8.2 Reform zoning and requirements. City of Bishop Promote infill redevelopment of vacant or underutilized commercial sites through the reform of municipal zoning, parking requirements and public incentives. Create a vibrant, authentic, and pedestrian‐friendly downtown that is a destination for residents and tourists (CONTINUED). IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE *EDEIC is the Economic Development Element Implementation Commission, comprised of the Bishop Area Chamber of Commerce and Visitor's Bureau leadership, local business and commercial property owners and residents. Initiate contact with owners of vacant and underutilized properties to encourage more productive uses that support the vision of a vibrant downtown. Explore property owner interest in developing a Property‐Based Improvement District (PBID) to fund downtown enhancements trash and recycling, public realm cleaning, beautifications, public restrooms), special events and parking and access management. Update the Municipal Code to strengthen the downtown overlay zone to allow for increased density (height); mixed use buildings retail first floor, housing above); and to reflect updated planning goals as established through the General Plan. Collaborate with local partners to design and implement programs to enliven downtown longer business hours, improved lighting, special events and festivals) and draw tourists and residents downtown. ---PAGE BREAK--- Draft timeframes; contingent on staff and/or volunteer capacity City of Bishop Economic Development Element Implementation Plan GOAL 2. Promote Bishop and the Eastern Sierra Region as a world‐class, year‐round destination. ACTIONS RESPONSIBLE PARTIES 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Policy 2.1 Action 2.1.1 Create EDEIC/Chamber of Commerce Tourism Committee. EDEIC Action 2.1.2 Convene a meeting of partners to initiate strategic planning process. City of Bishop, EDEIC Tourism Committee Action 2.1.3 Develop strategic marketing plan. EDEIC Tourism Committee, partners Action 2.1.4 Implement strategic marketing plan. City of Bishop, EDEIC Tourism Committee, partners Policy 2.2 Action 2.2.1 Participate in Eastern Sierra brand creation. EDEIC Tourism Committee, City of Bishop, partners Policy 2.3 Action 2.3.1 Identify steps to modernize website, web portals and collateral materials. Bishop Area Chamber of Commerce, EDEIC Tourism Committee Action 2.3.2 Consider provide funding support for modernization. City of Bishop Action 2.3.3 Implement modernization. Bishop Area Chamber of Commerce Policy 2.4 Action 2.4.1 Prioritize and implement General Plan actions related to infrastructure support. City of Bishop (ONGOING) Policy 2.5 Action 2.5.1 Identify barriers and incentive opportunities to promote development of diverse retail and food options. EDEIC, downtown business and property owners, residents, City of Bishop Action 2.5.2 Remove barriers and offer incentives. EDEIC, City of Bishop IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE Work with the Bishop Area Chamber of Commerce and Visitor's Bureau and other local partners to develop and implement a strategic plan to market Bishop and the Eastern Sierra as a year‐round destination. Collaborate in the creation of an Eastern Sierra brand to promote the region as a tourist destination in all seasons. Support the modernization of the Bishop Area Chamber of Commerce website and other web portals and collateral materials to better attract tourists in the digital and social media age. Continue to invest in city infrastructure to support Bishop as a tourist destination. Create opportunities to encourage the development of diverse retail and food options pop‐up stores, open air markets). ---PAGE BREAK--- Draft timeframes; contingent on staff and/or volunteer capacity City of Bishop Economic Development Element Implementation Plan GOAL 2. Promote Bishop and the Eastern Sierra Region as a world‐class, year‐round destination (CONTINUED). ACTIONS RESPONSIBLE PARTIES 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Policy 2.6 Action 2.6.1 Create EDEIC Finance Committee EDEIC, City of Bishop Action 2.6.2 Develop sustainable funding plan EDEIC Finance Committee Action 2.6.3 Implement sustainable funding plan EDEIC, City of Bishop, partners Policy 2.7 Action 2.7.1 Create EDEIC Workforce Committee EDEIC Action 2.7.2 Research workforce and entrepreneurial skill needs EDEIC Workforce Committee Action 2.7.3 Research local skill training/education opportunities EDEIC Workforce Committee Action 2.7.4 Develop training/education recommendations EDEIC Workforce Committee Action 2.7.5 Work with local partners to develop training/education programs EDEIC Workforce Committee, local partners, City of Bishop Work with partners to identify appropriate public and private sector mechanisms to sustainably fund investment in tourism promotion and the infrastructure necessary to make Bishop a viable year‐round destination. Work with Bishop Union High School, Cerro Coso Community College, existing vocational programs and tourism industry business leaders to IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE ---PAGE BREAK--- Draft timeframes; contingent on staff and/or volunteer capacity City of Bishop Economic Development Element Implementation Plan GOAL 3. ACTIONS RESPONSIBLE PARTIES 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Policy 3.1 Action 3.1.1 Update City of Bishop website and other media to promote D395 City of Bishop Action 3.1.2 Update website, web portals, social media, other collateral to promote D395 Bishop Area Chamber of Commerce Policy 3.2 Action 3.2.1 Create EDEIC Business Development Committee EDEIC Action 3.3.2 Collaborate with partners to attend appropriate events and promote the Eastern Sierra to diverse businesses EDEIC Business Development Committee, City of Bishop Policy 3.3 Action 3.3.1 Identify high‐priority parcels for future development EDEIC, City of Bishop Action 3.3.2 Pursue purchase, lease or co‐development of high priority parcels City of Bishop, EDEIC Policy 3.4 Action 3.4.1 Plan quarterly or biannual meetings of general plan implementation staff to facilitate coordination. City of Bishop Policy 3.5 Action 3.5.1 Identify potential partners for grant‐writing program EDEIC Finance Committee Action 3.5.2 Identify potential grant opportunities EDEIC, City of Bishop, partners Action 3.5.3 Pursue grant‐writing opportunities EDEIC Finance Committee, partners, City of Bishop Coordinate economic development goal implementation with other general plan elements. Work with other jurisdictions and local institutions to implement a grant‐writing program that will benefit all sponsors. Support a balanced and diverse local economy that contributes to Bishop's high quality of life; protects the community's amenity base; leverages D395; and improves the financial well‐being of its residents. IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE Promote D395 in city communications and encourage the Bishop Area Chamber of Commerce and local real estate community to market D395. Work with neighboring jurisdictions, federal agencies and regional economic development organizations to promote the Eastern Sierra to a diverse range of prospective businesses. Purchase, lease or co‐develop LADWP and Inyo County‐owned land for residential, commercial and light industrial uses. ---PAGE BREAK--- Draft timeframes; contingent on staff and/or volunteer capacity City of Bishop Economic Development Element Implementation Plan GOAL 4. Strengthen the community's role as a regional center for retail, education and healthcare. ACTIONS RESPONSIBLE PARTIES 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Policy 4.1 Action 4.1.1 Create a business development center plan EDEIC Business Development Committee Action 4.1.2 Implement business development center plan EDEIC Business Development Committee, City of Bishop, partners Policy 4.2 Action 4.2.1 Develop small business startup/expansion loan fund plan EDEIC Finance Committee Action 4.2.2 Meet with financial institutions to pursue fund development EDEIC Finance Committee, City of Bishop Policy 4.3 Action 4.3.1 Identify opportunities to modify existing processes/regulations to encourage new business attraction. EDEIC Business Development Committee, City of Bishop Action 4.3.2 Make modifications City of Bishop Policy 4.4 Action 4.4.1 Compile information and third‐party resources EDEIC, City of Bishop Action 4.4.2 Explore connecting prospective tenants with owners of under‐utilized parcels EDEIC, City of Bishop Policy 4.5 Action 4.5.1 Identify types of businesses needed to retain local spending EDEIC, City of Bishop Action 4.5.2 Develop recruiting plan EDEIC, Bishop Area Chamber of Commerce, City of Bishop Action 4.5.3 Implement plan EDEIC, Bishop Area Chamber of Commerce, City of Bishop Policy 4.6 Action 4.6.1 Modify existing code, regulations and processes as needed to support development of modern housing products. City of Bishop Action 4.6.2 Identify development opportunities in concert with Policy 3.3 City of Bishop Policy 4.7 Action 4.7.1 Establish quarterly or biannual meeting to discuss opportunities to provide support EDEIC, City of Bishop, Northern Inyo Hospital Policy 4.8 Action 4.8.1 Support efforts of the EDEIC Workforce Committee to engage with local educational institutions EDEIC Workforce Committee, City of Bishop, local educational institutions Support creation of a business development center that will help entrepreneurs navigate City processes as well as assist with business planning and capital formation. IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE Encourage and support local educational institutions' efforts to offer courses, certificates and degree programs that enable residents of the region to Provide support to Northern Inyo Hospital's role as a regional healthcare provider efforts to attract and retain medical professionals). Support development of modern housing products to attract a diverse and educated workforce. Support existing local retail businesses and recruit appropriate businesses to diversify Bishop's retail base and retain spending that is otherwise leaking from the community. Provide information link to third‐party site, inventory database) related to available commercial sites and existing businesses. Refine the City of Bishop's processes and regulations to encourage businesses to locate in Bishop. Work with financial institutions to develop a small business startup or expansion loan fund. ---PAGE BREAK--- Draft timeframes; contingent on staff and/or volunteer capacity City of Bishop Economic Development Element Implementation Plan GOAL 5. Support development of commercial air service at the Bishop Airport to provide reliable air travel year‐round. ACTIONS RESPONSIBLE PARTIES 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Policy 5.1 Action 5.1.1 Create a subcommittee of the EDEIC to participate in Inyo County's airport planning efforts. EDEIC Action 5.1.2 Continue to provide staff support for planning efforts. City of Bishop Policy 5.2 Action 5.2.1 Coordinate and support implementation of Mobility Element policies 5.1 and 5.2. City of Bishop, EDEIC Policy 5.3 Action 5.3.1 EDEIC research best practices from similarly sized airports and regions. EDEIC IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE Participate in and support plans to expand the Bishop airport with a long‐term goal of commercial air service. Work with Inyo County and other regional partners to provide support for all‐weather air service to the Eastern Sierra region with good local ground connections and integrated transit services. Investigate financing mechanisms if it is necessary to subsidize commercial air service. ---PAGE BREAK--- 1 Lassen County Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy 2012 Connecting Assets with Opportunities Funded by State of California Department of Housing and Community Development Economic Development and Planning/Technical Assistance Program Grant Photos courtesy of Joel Rathje ---PAGE BREAK--- Connecting Assets with Opportunities Lassen County 2012 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy LASSEN COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS District 1 – Bob Pyle District 2 – Jim Chapman District 3 – Larry Wosick District 4 – Brian Dahle, Chairman District 5 – Jack Hanson, Vice-Chairman LASSEN COUNTY ADMINISTRATION Martin Nichols, Chief Administration Officer Maurice Anderson, Planning and Community Development ---PAGE BREAK--- Connecting Assets with Opportunities Lassen County 2012 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction 1 2.0 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy 2 3.0 Economic Analysis 5 3.1 Socioeconomics Data 5 3.2 Documents Review 6 3.3 Local and Regional Resources 6 3.4 Assets, Opportunities, Challenges (Constraints) 7 4.0 Vision / Goals 8 4.1 Vision 8 4.2 Goal Setting 8 5.0 Action Plan 10 5.1 Planning Process 10 5.2 CEDS Committee Action Plan 11 5.3 Initiative 1: Attracting Visitors 12 5.4 Initiative 2: Growing 18 5.5 Initiative 3 – Enhance Traded Sectors 26 5.6 Regional Initiatives 30 6.0 Organizing for Implementation 31 Appendix A. Data Analysis – Factors Affecting Economic Performance B. Document Review C. Work Session Participants and Presentations D. Infrastructure Projects E. 25 Immutable Rules of Tourism F. PSREC The Lost Sierras, Lassen Rec & Tech G. Marketing Concept – LLTT H. Lassen County Annual Events I. Resources for Building Assessments & Developments J. CDBG – Rest Stop Welcome Center Guide K. Sample Tool Box & Façade Programs L. ICMA Rural Communities Smart Growth M. Lassen County CDBG Loan Program N. CalFOR Access to Capital O. Pledges P. AmeriCorps program information and application Q. Website Data Tables R. Ideal Proposal Content S. Potential Funding Sources T. Scenic Byways ---PAGE BREAK--- Connecting Assets with Opportunities Lassen County 2012 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Page 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION Lassen County is faced with a variety of economic challenges including the loss of a major industry sector (timber), declining revenues, stagnant population growth, high unemployment history, and an aging population but also has some unique assets that could create some economic opportunities. The County previously had staff working at least part time on economic development following a 2004 Economic Development Strategy for the county with a 2009 addendum. The City had a similar type staff-driven plan. In 2010 the Lassen Economic Development Council (LEDC) was organized consisting of key stakeholders to work on issues and constraints to economic development. The LEDC had identified some projects which were being moved forward. However, there was no comprehensive economic development plan for the county and the city. The County had received funding from the State of California, Community Development Block Grant program to develop an updated Economic Development Strategy. The County felt this was an opportunity to help strengthen the LEDC, a public-private partnership, and requested the LEDC to be the lead on developing a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS). The Lassen County strategy follows the CEDS framework, documented in Section 2.0 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy. The process looked at Lassen County through a different lens – using assets as the basis for connecting activities to opportunities which create ripple effects through creative collaboration. Section 4.0, Action Plan, outlines the three initiatives identified by the CEDS committee as priority actions with recommended actions for moving forward and measuring performance progress. The Action Plan focuses on Lassen County assets that can generate or drive economic activity: 1. Attracting Visitors 2. Growing Local 3. Enhancing Traded Sectors Each initiative is designed around Lassen County’s key assets. Section 5.0, Implementation, provides recommendations for organizational structure for the LEDC to operate as a public/private partnership. Action Teams are recommended for action plan tasks based on pledges provided by CEDS committee members at the August 29, 2012 CEDS priority action planning session. Also included are recommendations for technical assistance for launching the Action Plan Initiatives, professional services and applying to AmeriCorps for an intern to assist in the plan implementation. An Implementation Guide, matrix, with Action Plan Tasks, assignments, resources and timelines is also included to help guide LEDC with implementation. ---PAGE BREAK--- Connecting Assets with Opportunities Lassen County 2012 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Page 2 CEDS Strategic Planning Framework 1. Analysis – demographics, economy, investment climate, infrastructure, challenges, capital projects; 2. Vision – stakeholder interviews on vision, goals, and expected outcomes; 3. Action Plan – priority initiatives, engagement and commitment of partners to implementation; 4. Evaluation – performance measurements for effectiveness and progress. 2.0 COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY In addition to developing a “roadmap” for economic development, the County also wanted to prepare the roadmap as an Economic Development Administration’s (EDA) Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CED). The CEDS process uses a four-step strategic planning framework that involves significant input from private sector, key stakeholders and public input. This framework was used for the Lassen County CEDS: 1. Analysis 2. Vision 3. Action Plan 4. Evaluation The overall purpose of a CEDS is to bring together the public and private sectors, nonprofits, community-based organizations, and individuals to build a consensus of actions and priorities that will ultimately generate economic activity. The LEDC sat as the CEDS Committee, conducting the planning work sessions, outreach, public hearings, and adoption of the CEDS. The Lassen County Board of Supervisors participated in the planning and also accepted the plan at a formal Board meeting for submittal to State of California, Department of Housing & Community Development, and project funder. 2.1 CEDS Committee As directed by the Economic Development Administration, the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) Committee is “an entity identified by the planning organization (County) as responsible for developing, updating, or replacing a strategy and is the principal facilitator of the economic development Planning and implementation process”. The Lassen County Economic Development Council (LEDC) was selected to serve as the CEDS Committee, Planning, and Implementation Organization. The LEDC is a coalition of stakeholders and institutions including regional business and community organizations, representatives from federal, state, county, regional, and local government agencies. Meeting the EDA requirements for the committee, Lassen County CEDS Committee representatives included: ---PAGE BREAK--- Connecting Assets with Opportunities Lassen County 2012 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Page 3 Representing Local Government  Jenna Aguilera, Lassen County Planning and Building Services  Maurice Anderson, Lassen County Planning and Community Development  Jim Chapman, Lassen County Board of Supervisors  Jared Hancock, City of Susanville City Administrator  Jack Hanson, Lassen County Board of Supervisors  Nick McBride, Susanville City Council  Martin Nichols, Lassen County Chief Administrative Officer  Jamie Smith, Lassen County Planning and Building Services  Brian Wilson, Susanville City Council  Larry Wosick, Lassen County Board of Supervisors Representing Business and Industry  Nick Albonico, High Desert State Prison  Chuck Downs, Subway  Bob Edwards, Banner Lassen Medical Center  Dick Ellena, Best Western Trailside Inn  Rhonda Fuller, High Desert State Prison  Campbell Jameson, Diamond Mountain Casino and Hotel  Eric Mumaw, California Correctional Center Representing Utilities  Bob Marshall, Plumas-Sierra Rural Electric Cooperative  Theresa Phillips, Lassen Municipal Utility District  Scott Welch, Plumas-Sierra Rural Electric Cooperative Representing State & Federal Gov  Stan Bales, Bureau of Land Management  Dennis Benson, Bureau of Land Management, Eagle Lake Field Office  Heidi Perry-McCourt, Lassen National Forest  Representing Banking and Finance  Kathie Garnier, Eagle Home Mortgage and Historic Uptown Susanville Association  Maria Nye, Plumas Bank Representing Nonprofits  Patti Hagata, Lassen County Chamber  Louise Jensen, Lassen Land & Trails Trust Representing Education and Workforce Development  Dr. Marlon Hall, Lassen Community College  Teri Hiser-Haynes, Alliance for Workforce Development Representing Local Youth  Elizabeth Fernandez, Lassen Community College Student Senate ---PAGE BREAK--- Connecting Assets with Opportunities Lassen County 2012 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Page 4 2.2 Community Participation Community participation was a critical component of crafting the Lassen County CEDS. A diverse group of private and public sector people were contacted and interviewed to gather additional information and input to the initiatives and priorities stemming from the CEDS meetings, work sessions and presentations (July 3, August 17, August 29, September 11, 2012), and provide any additional input they wished. The following individuals provided comments and input and were also added to the distribution list to receive further updates on the CEDS:  Bob Pyle, Lassen County Supervisor  Brian Dahle, Lassen County Supervisor  Jim Wolcott, Lassen County Fair  Ron Barnes, High Desert State Prison  Robert Gower, California Correctional Cntr  Robert Kennedy, SIRCo  Jim Mackay, Susanville Indian Rancheria  Jeff Trump, Haws, Theobald & Auman (CPA)  Vicki Lozano, Mount Lassen Properties  Penny Artz, County Cleaners  Craig Hemphill, Lassen Ag Commissioner  Eileen Majors, Mountain Living Magazine  David Lile, U.S. Cooperative Extension  Seth Peterson, Sierra Cascade Nursery  Kerri Cobb, U.S. Bank  Traci Holt, AFWD  Joel Rathje, Lassen County Trails  Eloise Debruler, FCI Herlong  Bill Stewart, LMUD  George Robson, Robson Planning  Shelly Noack, Tri Counties Bank  Garrett Taylor, Lassen College The comprehensive make up of this planning group helps to ensures that the planning process reflects the needs and desires of stakeholders, local residents, and businesses. Figure 1 - Diversity of CEDS Committee and Community Participants Total % of Total Public / Private 26 / 26 50% / 50% Male / Female 34 / 18 65% / 35% Minority Representation 5 10% Youth Representation 1 2% ---PAGE BREAK--- Mono County Economic Development Strategy 26 Part 4 – Strategic Challenges and Opportunities There are a wide variety of challenges and opportunities that face Mono County. The following are strategic level challenges that confront the county from an economic development perspective. There are also unique opportunities that are available to take advantage of at this particular moment in time. Below is a summary of both those challenges and opportunities. Challenges • Mono County is a remote location with limited access from major population bases Analysis: Located on the eastern side of California, Mono County’s location creates significant challenges from an economic development perspective. Tourism, which is the largest part of the economy, is dependent primarily on the Southern California market, which is located approximately 300- 400 miles away via Highway 395. As such, Mono County is disadvantaged when compared to other Southern California-proximate competitor destinations. The county generates visitation to a lesser extent from Northern California. It is at a geographic disadvantage, as there are many competitive destinations, both in the Sierra as well as the coast, that are much easier to access. Seasonal accessibility is considered a deterrent for access from Northern California, as winter routes do take longer to travel. Beyond tourism, the location is also challenging for those businesses that need closer access to markets or air service to access geographically dispersed markets. • National and state economic uncertainty Analysis: Slowly, recession is giving way to an improved economic picture. As can be seen below, economic indicators for both the national and state economy are showing signs of improvement. However, many believe that economic trends are changing. As such, an economy based on tourism is always challenged given that travel spending is often discretionary spending and subject to consumers’ changing needs. Table 17: Key California Economic Indicators 2011 2012 2013 2014 U.S Gross Domestic Product 1.7 2.2 2.4 3.4 Unemployment CA 11.8% 10.9% 10.4% 9.5% Unemployment U.S. 9.0 8.2 7.9 7.3 Personal Income Growth CA 6.0 4.9 3.4 5.4 Personal Income Growth U.S. 5.1 3.7 4.2 5.0 Consumer Price Index CA 2.6 2.0 2.0 2.2 Consumer Price Index US 3.2 2.1 2.0 2.1 Source: State of California, Department of Commerce ---PAGE BREAK--- Mono County Economic Development Strategy 27 In addition, the lack of consistent economic growth constrains many businesses and/or organizations for increased job hiring. One additional important economic issue that has been an ongoing concern is the price of fuel, which can impact the travel decisions of price sensitive consumers. The price of gas in the primary Southern California feeder market is significantly higher than the U.S. average. It is not known at this time if this issue will be of short-term concern or if the issue presents a longer- term threat to destination travel. Figure 6: Gas Prices Source: Gas Buddy.com Should gas prices continue to increase, it could be a concern for Mono County given its reliance on tourism and auto travel to access the region. • Lack of qualified work force Analysis: Finding qualified workers is challenging and Mono County is not alone in this issue. A recently completed survey by the Gallup organization found that “In spite of the slow economy and associated high unemployment rate, 53% of U.S. small-business owners in January reported finding it very (23%) or somewhat difficult (30%) to find the qualified employees they need.”3 It is also important to remember that a large portion of employment within Mono County, approximately 38%, is generated by the tourism-related sector (see previous section in this report). Also recall that approximately 36% of residents indicated they have a high school diploma or equivalent or less. As such, with limited training programs available, local potential employees may not in fact have the skills needed for local employment. 3 Jacobe, Dennis, “U.S. Small Businesses Struggle to Find Qualified Employees”, Gallup Economy, February 13, 2013, http://www.gallup.com/poll/160532/small-businesses-struggle-find-qualified-employees.aspx ---PAGE BREAK--- Mono County Economic Development Strategy 28 • Seasonal mindset Analysis: One of the key challenges in any tourism-based economy is the seasonality and the seasonal mindset. While sustainable year-round employment may be a desired goal of the county, it may not in fact be the desired goal of employees or employers. The overall seasonality of Mono County can be seen below. Figure 7: Mono County Seasonality (Visitors by Season) Source: Economic and Fiscal Impacts and Visitor Profile Study of Mono County Tourism 2009 Within this overall seasonality trend, there are many local businesses that are open year-round. There are also many that operate seasonally, either open during the summer and winter season or just the non-winter months. In some cases many of the commercial businesses in Walker, Bridgeport and Lee Vining are not open on a year-round basis. Many of these businesses close for several reasons. The most prominent reason is a lack of demand, as tourism slows significantly during the winter months. Additionally, there are several businesses that close seasonally because it has become part of their lifestyle. Given this dynamic, it is challenging to provide services and employment on a sustainable year-round basis. 225,744 285,244 585,484 418,774 0 100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000 600,000 700,000 Winter Spring Summer Fall ---PAGE BREAK--- Mono County Economic Development Strategy 29 • Tourism funding is limited Analysis: It is a given that tourism is the primary economic driver within Mono County. That said, there is limited funding for tourism promotion within the county’s current economic development budget allocation. Currently the county allocates approximately $200,000 for tourism promotion funding on an annual basis. This equates to $56 per available lodging unit in the unincorporated areas of the county. In contrast Santa Barbara allocates $756 per available lodging unit and South Lake Tahoe allocates $333 per available lodging unit4. These examples, while much bigger destinations, both compete for the Mono County visitor in Southern and Northern California. • Public land ownership Analysis: One of the biggest obstacles facing Mono County from a traditional economic development perspective is the fact that over 95% of the land is publicly owned. This compares with 90% in Inyo County and 85% in Alpine County. 5 Public ownership includes the Bureau of Land Management, United States Forest Service, National Park Service, and California State Parks. Given the lack of land available for traditional private development, economic development strategies for Mono County are significantly limited. Beyond tourism, land use is limited to ranching, farming, and some energy development. Given the regulatory and permitting process, the opportunity for further development is extremely narrow. Opportunities • Highway 395 Scenic Byway Designation Analysis: Perhaps one of the biggest opportunities for Mono County is the potential for a National Scenic Byway designation for Highway 395. National Scenic Byway is a road designation recognized by the United States Department of Transportation for containing one of six identified "intrinsic qualities": archeological, cultural, historic, natural, recreational, and/or scenic. The program was established by Congress in 1991 to preserve and protect the nation's scenic but often less- traveled roads and promote tourism and economic development. The National Scenic Byways Program (NSBP) is administered by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).6 4 Strategic Marketing Group 5 Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpine_County,_California 6 Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Scenic_Byway ---PAGE BREAK--- Mono County Economic Development Strategy 30 Table 18 below identifies current traffic levels on Highway 395. The potential exists to increase visitation to Mono County with the addition of the National Scenic Byway designation. Figure 8: Highway 395 Average Annual Daily Traffic Source: Caltrans • Increased focus on outdoor recreation Analysis: More and more consumers are participating in outdoor recreation. According to the recently published Outdoor Recreation Economy Report, outdoor recreation spending is approximately $646 billion in the United States and generates 6.1 million American jobs. Of that $646 billion, fully $524 billion was spent on trips and travel-related spending.7 Given that Mono County has significant opportunities to provide outdoor recreation to consumers, the market opportunity to attract visitors for recreational experiences is substantial. • June Lake ski resort closing Analysis: While the June Lake community has experienced a significant economic impact as a result of the closing of June Lake Ski Resort for the 2012-13 winter season (though it will be reopening for the 2013/14 season), it presents an opportunity to potentially rethink the future strategic direction of the area. As was mentioned previously, June Lake is one of the largest communities in the 7 The Outdoor Recreation Economy Report, Outdoor Industry Association, http://www.outdoorindustry.org/images/researchfiles/OIA_OutdoorRecEconomyReport2012.pdf 10,700 10,700 9,100 9,100 5,000 5,300 5,000 5,100 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 2008 2009 2010 2011 Inyo/Mono County Line Junction 89 ---PAGE BREAK--- Mono County Economic Development Strategy 31 unincorporated areas of Mono County in terms of Gross Regional Product. As such its economic future is critical to the local economy. The ski and snowboard market has been essentially flat for the past 20 years, generating approximately 50-55 million skier days. Thus any growth has to come at the expense of another resort. This type of market share change can be very costly. Looking ahead, projections for the industry are challenging in that under the best scenarios growth will be below current levels.8 Should Mammoth Mountain ever be sold there is no guarantee a new owner would operate June Mountain. So it’s important for the June Lake community and the county to begin the process of envisioning a new future and repositioning the area beyond ski and snowboarding. • Economic development as a higher priority Analysis: Historically, economic development has not been seen as a high priority within Mono County, and the reasons for this are varied. Given the challenges of the recession and its impact on the local economy, along with a Board of Supervisors that has expressed an interest in making economic development a higher priority, it effectively positions the county to take better advantage of this opportunity. • Air service Analysis: Though Mono County hosts three airports, including Bridgeport, Lee Vining and Mammoth, historically these airports have provided just general aviation services. Over the past three years the Town of Mammoth Lakes and Mammoth Mountain Ski Area have developed commercial service to the area. Deplanements have grown to over 10,000, with air service serving both Southern and Northern California and through other markets via connections in those markets. The growth and stability of this service offers important access for tourists, as well as those business owners who need access and find driving to Reno-Tahoe International Airport too far and time-consuming. The potential for increased services, combined with the potential of Digital 395 (see below), provide a unique opportunity to attract small businesses and telecommuting individuals looking for a high quality of life that Mono County can provide. • Digital 395 Analysis: The Digital 395 Middle Mile project goal is to construct a 583-mile fiber network that primarily follows U.S. Highway 395, the primary transportation corridor between Southern and Northern California through Mono County. The new service will provide upgraded internet access to a large area that includes two military bases (one in Mono County), 26,000 households and 2,500 8 Nate Frisco, RRC Associates, Presentation at “The Gathering,” Denver 2013 ---PAGE BREAK--- Mono County Economic Development Strategy 32 businesses, along with 47 K-12 schools, 13 libraries, two community colleges, two universities, 15 healthcare facilities and 104 government offices. The Sierra Nevada Aquatic Research Lab, the White Mountain Research Station and the California Institute of Technology Owens Valley Radio Observatory will also benefit.9 The project will potentially upgrade internet access through the unincorporated areas of Mono County via the Last Mile providers. Improved internet access for both traditional brick and mortar businesses, as well as digital businesses, can serve Mono County’s economic development interest by not only helping existing businesses streamline business processes and reach a wider marketplace, but to also serve to attract those independent and telecommuting service providers that can live anywhere. • Regional approach to economic development Analysis: In addition to taking a sector approach to economic development (tourism, professional services, etc.), Mono County has an opportunity to collaborate both locally and regionally (including Inyo County, the Town of Mammoth Lakes, Bishop and Native American tribes). Mono County can take advantage and promote its assets, including its geographic location, natural setting and recreational opportunities, and work with other partners throughout the eastern side of the Sierra in leveraging resources, such as staff and funding. Mono County can pursue regional approaches to economic development across the eastern slope that allows the county to focus on the unique needs of each region. The approaches should also be large enough to leverage opportunities to promote new jobs and spur economic growth. A regional approach offers an important opportunity to engage local stakeholders. By considering economic development on a regional level and working with local businesses, chambers of commerce, economic development, education and workforce entities, Mono County and its partners can develop a strategy that encompasses specific retention, expansion and growth models for each community. 9 Digital395.com ---PAGE BREAK--- Mono County Economic Development Strategy 33 Part 5 – Economic Development Strategy Goal and Objectives Economic Development Strategy Goal Develop a more diverse and sustainable year-round economy by strengthening select economic sectors and by pursuing business retention, expansion and attraction in Mono County. Economic Development Strategy Objectives 1. Make economic development a priority throughout the county. 2. Expand tourism and marketing efforts. 3. Integrate Digital 395 into the local communities. 4. Secure the Highway 395 National Scenic Byway designation. 5. Provide education, training and resources to help retain and expand current businesses. 6. Be a catalyst for business idea sharing and networking. 7. Review ways to reduce the regulatory burden. 8. Develop regional food systems over the long term. 9. Develop targeted business attraction. 10. Identify funding sources to support the economic development strategy. 11. Develop a regional economic development corporation. Photo: Flickr user Keith Skelton Photo http://www.flickr.com/photos/keithskeltonphoto/ ---PAGE BREAK--- Economic Development Plan Teton County, Idaho May 2013 ---PAGE BREAK--- Teton County, Idaho Economic Development Plan May 2013 2 Table of Contents 3 Executive 4 i. Background 5 A. Agricultural 6 B. Bedroom Community: Financial 8 C. Development 11 D. Emerging Lifestyle/Tourism 13 II. Scanning the Environment ‐ Where Are We 23 IV. Economic Growth Goals and Strategies: 24 A. Focus Area: Business Recruitment and Development 25 B. Focus Area: Physical Asset 34 C. Focus Area Tourism and 38 D. Focus Area: Protect and Foster Lifestyle 40 V. Evaluation 43 VI. 44 VII. 51 A. Potential Business Recruitment and Development Center Coordinator Job Description 51 Appendix B. Business Recruitment and Development Center Sample Bylaws 54 ---PAGE BREAK--- Teton County, Idaho Economic Development Plan May 2013 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Steering Committee: Pete Koson; Shannon Brooks‐Hamby; Hyrum Johnson; Bob Foster; Gloria Hoopes; Jeff Naylor; Bill Knight; Doug Self; Erica Rice; Anna Trentadue; Brian Gibson; John Bingham; Lynda Skujins; Tony Goe; Wayne Maness County Staff: Angie Rutherford Participating Organizations: Teton County, Idaho Cities of Driggs, Victor and Tetonia Teton Valley Chamber of Commerce Teton Valley Business Development Center Teton Valley Marketing Alliance Teton Valley Foundation Downtown Driggs Community Association Driggs Urban Renewal Agency Valley Advocates for Responsible Development Consulting Team: Gabe Preston and Andrew Klotz, RPI Consulting In association with Bob Shepard and Brian Cole, Building Communities ---PAGE BREAK--- Teton County, Idaho Economic Development Plan May 2013 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Teton Valley is a rural community nestled in the southern Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. The history of the Valley is similar to many western communities in that it originated with Native American populations shifting to white homesteading farmers. The primarily agricultural economy lasted through much of the 1900s. The loss of the freight railroad to the Valley in 1981 made it harder for farmers to send their crops to market. In the late 1990s, the economy began to shift to a recreation and real estate‐based economy. In 2010, 36% of the total personal income in Teton County was non‐labor income that funneled directly into household mailboxes and bank accounts in the form of retirement income, investment dividends, social security and other similar sources. Today, much of the economic growth has been based primarily on lifestyle provided by Teton Valley’s physical beauty and recreational opportunities. In the late 1990s and early 2000s, Teton Valley experienced a tremendous residential housing boom. That boom collapsed with the national recession in 2007 leaving the community with many vacant lots and homes and generally devalued real estate prices. Since that time, the community and its leaders have been working to identify a more sustainable path to economic prosperity. As a result, several different organizations exist or have formed to work on varying aspects of economic development. Those organizations are working to become better coordinated and to improve communication among them. New organizations have formed to work on economic development and the community has a strong group of programs designed to improve the vitality of Teton Valley. Communication between the public and private sectors is improving and an overarching strategy and coordination has begun. This plan for economic development will coordinate organizations and increase communication so that the community is moving strategically toward a more positive economic future. In order to progress economically, the Valley needs new basic economic activity that will bring consumer spending and investment from outside of the local economy and reinvestment from internal sources. The connection to the Jackson Hole economy will continue to be an important driver for the local economy, but it must be modified. The Valley needs to increase the size and vitality of its own primary economic activities. This Economic Growth Plan outlines several strategies for accomplishing this fundamental goal. Some strategies center on creating and attracting new businesses and business clusters, while others center on fostering growth in established industries such as tourism and agriculture. For local retail businesses to succeed, they need volume. The Teton Valley market must be strengthened with visitors and new residents to create the volume that will grow businesses. In addition to increasing market volume, the pattern of development needs to be conducive to bringing people downtown into the main commercial centers. This includes a development ---PAGE BREAK--- Teton County, Idaho Economic Development Plan May 2013 5 pattern that focuses on infill of the downtowns with both commercial businesses and residential opportunities to create traffic in commercial areas. The purpose of this living document is to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of economic development efforts within the Valley by providing a set of unified and focused strategies. With the available resources among the public and private sectors, the plan can be used to focus investments of time, energy and strategic assets. Additionally, coordinating the development of infrastructure and other asset investments can increase the effectiveness of their implementation. A realistic economic growth strategy must acknowledge the economic history (i.e. where we’ve been) and underlying economic conditions of a community and its surroundings (i.e. where we are) in order to clearly identify where the community can be in the future. Some economic circumstances in Teton Valley present barriers, while others present opportunities. Focusing on unrealistic goals will hinder progress. This plan is intended to provide a path forward to sustainable economic growth and relies on coordination among all the groups, private and public, working on economic development. I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Teton Valley is a rural community nestled between the Big Hole Mountains to the west, the Palisade Range to the South and the Tetons to the east and includes the towns of Victor, Driggs, Tetonia, ID and Alta, WY. Shoshone‐Bannock, Northern Paiute, Blackfoot and Crow Indian tribes populated the Valley in the early 19th century and it was also the site of the annual Rocky Mountain Fur Rendezvous in 1829 and 1832. In the mid 1800s, the completion of the transcontinental railroad and the Homestead Act brought an influx of Mormon homesteaders. Today, there are fifth generation descendants of the early settlers that reside in the Valley. Since 1990 there has been a significant in migration of people from all over the country who are attracted to the scenic beauty and recreational opportunities of Teton Valley. As part of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, Teton Valley is rich in recreational resources. Teton Valley is located near Yellowstone National Park and Grand Teton National Park and is home to a rich population of wildlife including bald eagles, Sandhill cranes, deer, elk, black bears, cougars, wolverines, grizzly bears and wolves. The Teton River, which runs through the center of the Valley, is a blue ribbon trout fishery. The South Fork and Henry’s Fork of the Snake River are both less than 30 minute’s drive. Fishing is world class as are many other recreational attractions include hiking and horseback riding opportunities, a growing network of mountain biking opportunities, incredible downhill and backcountry skiing, hunting, backpacking, outdoor photography, snowmobiling, ATV touring and dirt bike riding. Grand Targhee Resort in Alta, WY was established in 1966 by East Idahoans as a cooperative of 900+ members to “benefit the community and economy of the region.” The resort was officially dedicated by Idaho Gov. Don Samuelson, even though the resort is located in Wyoming,