Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study
www.metropolitan.fiu.edu #prosperity305 @FIUMetroCenter
1 The Chairman’s Council for Prosperity Initiatives
Hon. Barbara J. Jordan Hon. Jean Monestime Hon. Daniella Levine-Cava
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 2 Purpose of the Study
Examine the Feasibility and Best Practices of Programs 1 to Improve Economic Opportunity And Self-Sufficiency
Social Enterprise Employee Owned Community Land Community Benefit Children’s Savings Incubators and Business Trusts Agreements Accounts Accelerators Cooperatives
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 3 Purpose of the Study
2 Build an Economic Justification for Action
When Moral Arguments Aren’t Enough
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 4 Prosperity Defined: What Makes a Prosperous Region?
A growing and stable The economy creates local economy – wealth jobs paying competitive is retained in wages that increase recessions rapidly with skills and experience Stable Economic ! Growth! Opportunity!
Economic Equity! Through hard work a Mobility! The benefits of family can climb the economic growth are economic ladder and shared by residents build wealth for across the income successive generations spectrum
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 5 Why Prosperity Matters
Prosperous Prosperous U.S. economic counties Counties competitiveness relies on the outperform maximize Benefits productivity & low-prosperity human capital – prosperity of its counties skills & talent metros
Limited Limited prosperity Prosperity Barriers to creates poses threats prosperity hurt additional Costs to workers low income public costs across the households and a drag on income the regional spectrum economy
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 6 Study Structure
Identify the Barriers What are the Program Action Agenda to Prosperity Economic Impacts of Feasibility Broader Prosperity?
What are the What works, Let’s Do This Costs of Inaction? at What Cost?
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 7 Conclusions
Despite Miami-Dade’s considerable assets the County’s 1 economy is less competitive and underperforming
In Miami-Dade County the Barriers to expanded prosperity 2 have been growing, rather than easing
Failing to address Miami-Dade County’s prosperity gap could 3 present a sustained, growing drag on the broader economy
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 8 Conclusions
The impacts and barriers to expanded prosperity in Miami-Dade 4 are not limited to the County’s lowest income earners
Programs to expand prosperity are a sound economic 5 investment
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 9 Miami-Dade’s Prosperity Gap: The Barriers to Prosperity
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 10 A Central Question
Is that still the case today?
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 11 A Central Question
Is that still the case today?
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 12 A National Trend
Real Median Household Income United States
2000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 $60,000
$58,000
$56,000 - 7.1% Loss in Median Income
$54,000
$52,000
$50,000 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Annual 1- Year American Community Survey(s) (Income in 2014 CPI-U-RS adjusted dollars)
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 13 A National Trend
Real Median Household Income Miami-Dade County
2000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 $52,000
$50,000 $48,000 - 13% $46,000 Loss in Median Income
$44,000
$42,000
$40,000
$38,000
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Annual 1- Year American Community Survey(s) (Income in 2014 CPI-U-RS adjusted dollars)
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 14 A National Trend
Change in Mean Household Income by Quintile, 2000 - 2014 United States
Lowest Second Third Fourth Highest Top 5 95/20 Fifth Fifth Fifth Fifth Fifth percent Ratio
14.5% - 200% Income Loss of 2 Lowest Quintiles vs. 3 Upper Quintiles
-0.8% -2.7% -4.2% -6.9% 14.5% -10.8% Increase in 95/20 Ratio 2000 - 2014 -16.4%
Source: U.S Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplements (Income(in(2014(CPI0U0RS(Adjusted(Dollars)( Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 15 A National Trend
Change in Mean Household Income by Quintile, 2000 - 2014 Miami-Dade County
Lowest Second Third Fourth Highest Top 5 Fifth Fifth Fifth Fifth Fifth percent 95/20 Ratio
-1.5% - 34.2% Income Loss of at the Middle
-5.3% -5.7% -7.1% -7.7%
-11.9% -1.5% Decrease in 95/20 Ratio -14.6% 2000 - 2014
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 16 A Tale of Two Economic Cycles
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 17 A Tale of Two Economic Cycles
Miami-Dade County
Median Income Change in Median Income
2000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 $52,000 1999-2007 2008 - 2014 1999 - 2014
$50,000
-2% $48,000
$46,000
$44,000
$42,000 -11% $40,000 -13%
$38,000 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Annual 1- Year American Community Survey(s) (Income in 2014 CPI-U-RS adjusted dollars)
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Annual 1- Year American Community Survey(s) (Income in 2014 CPI-U-RS adjusted dollars)
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 18 A Tale of Two Economic Cycles
Change in Mean Household Income by Quintile United States
2000 - 2007 2008 – 2014
Lowest Second Third Fourth Highest Top 5 Lowest Second Third Fourth Highest Top 5 Fifth Fifth Fifth Fifth Fifth percent 95/20 Ratio Fifth Fifth Fifth Fifth Fifth percent 95/20 Ratio
12.6% 1% 12.6% Increase in 95/20 Ratio Increase in 95/20 Ratio
3.2% 2.6%
0.1% 0.1% 0.1%
-1.7% -1.9% -2.0% -3.6% -4.2% -5.5% -5.5%
-8.9%
Source: U.S Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplements Source: U.S Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplements (Income(in(2014(CPI0U0RS(Adjusted(Dollars)( (Income(in(2014(CPI0U0RS(Adjusted(Dollars)( Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 19 A Tale of Two Economic Cycles
Change in Mean Household Income by Income Quintile Miami-Dade County
2000 - 2007 2008 – 2014
Lowest Second Third Fourth Highest Top 5 Lowest Second Third Fourth Highest Top 5 Fifth Fifth Fifth Fifth Fifth percent 95/20 Ratio Fifth Fifth Fifth Fifth Fifth percent 95/20 Ratio
20.5%
11.3%
3.4% 2.8% 1.8%
-0.7% -2.1% -4.6% -7.9% -9.7% -10.8% -11.0% -10.9%
-23.6%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplements Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplements (Income in 2014 CPI-U-RS Adjusted Dollars) (Income in 2014 CPI-U-RS Adjusted Dollars)
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 20 A Tale of Two Economic Cycles
95/20 Ratio Miami-Dade County
41.0
39.0
37.0
35.0
33.0
31.0
29.0
27.0
25.0 2000 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplements (Income in 2014 CPI-U-RS Adjusted Dollars)
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 21 A Tale of Two Economic Cycles
Gini Index for US Counties 2006 - 2014 % Change County & 2014 Rank 2014 2006 2006-2014 1 New York County, New York 0.5939 0.599 -1% 2 Orleans Parish, Louisiana 0.5883 0.551 7% 3 Fairfield County, Connecticut 0.5491 0.542 1% 4 Lee County, Alabama 0.5434 0.494 10% 5 Tom Green County, Texas 0.5429 0.455 19% 6 Suffolk County, Massachusetts 0.5424 0.505 7% 18th 7 Essex County, New Jersey 0.5422 0.521 4% Most Income Unequal 8 Bibb County, Georgia 0.5410 0.465 16% 9 Clarke County, Georgia 0.5389 0.516 4% County in U.S. 10 White County, Arkansas 0.5382 0.460 17% 11 Westchester County, New York 0.5365 0.527 2% 12 McKinley County, New Mexico 0.5364 0.480 12% 13 Caddo Parish, Louisiana 0.5357 0.501 7% 14 Johnson County, Iowa 0.5347 0.482 11% 15 Fulton County, Georgia 0.5338 0.524 2% 16 Orange County, North Carolina 0.5289 0.530 -0% 17 Richmond city, Virginia 0.5263 0.513 3% 18 Miami-Dade County, Florida 0.5239 0.502 4% 19 District of Columbia, District of Columbia 0.5224 0.537 -3% 20 Collier County, Florida 0.5223 0.500 4%
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 22 A Tale of Two Economic Cycles
Mean Income as Percent of US Income, by Income Quintile, 2000 - 2014 Miami-Dade County Lowest Second Third Fourth Highest Top 5 Fifth Fifth Fifth Fifth Fifth Percent 120% Pre-2000
US#Mean#Income# 2000 Mean incomes lower than 100% 2007 2014 national averages 2000 2007 2014
80% 2007 2007 2007 2000 2007 2000 2014 2000 2014 2014 2014 60% 2000 to 2007 2000 Incomes gained ground against national averages 40%
20% 2008 Gains wiped out 0% Source: U.S Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplements (Income#in#2014#CPI4U4RS#Adjusted#Dollars)# Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 23 Pronounced Cyclical Job Loss
Total Non-Farm Employment Miami-Dade County
1,150,000
1,100,000
1,050,000
1,000,000
950,000
900,000 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Source: US Dept. of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 24 Low Wage Employment Growth
Fastest Growing Occupations Miami-Dade County Median 2014 Median Annual Occupation Hourly Employment Wage 61% Wage Jobs created since 2010 pay Office & Administrative Support 202,100 $14.48 $33,330 below the County average wage Sales & Related 145,320 $11.72 $37,890 Food Preparation & Serving 100,010 $9.22 $22,840 Transportation & Material Moving 78,940 $12.53 $36,130 Health Care Practitioners 65,240 $27.86 $72,450 Education, Training, Library 59,000 $22.76 $51,150
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 25 Stagnating Productivity
GDP Per Employee Change in GDP Per Employee Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach, FL MSA Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach, FL MSA
$95,000 2001-2006 2007-2014 25% GDP $93,000 20% $91,000
15% $89,000 Employment
$87,000 10% Productivity Employment
$85,000 5%
$83,000 0%
$81,000 GDP -5% $79,000 -10% Productivity $77,000 -15% $75,000 Source: US Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 (2014 CPI-U-RS adjusted dollars)
Source: US Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis (2014 CPI-U-RS adjusted dollars)
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 26 Stagnating Productivity
Seattle $127,195
San Francisco New York $134,441 Casper $ 128,866 $126,838 Stamford $ 151,859 $96,855 San Jose U.S. GDP per Worker $163,938 $144,234 Average Productivity of Top 10 Metros Midland $238,449 Lake Charles Houston$119,766 $133,174
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 27 Stagnating Productivity
Oshkosh $83,966 Rochester Green Bay $83,428 $83,937 Buffalo $83,317 $84,173 Miami Metro GDP per Worker
Huntington Beckley $84,376 $84,449 111th Owensboro Out of 382 Metros $84,350 Rocky Mount $83,826 Lowest Tyler Productivity of all $84,492 Metros with More
Miami than 2M Workers $84,173
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 28 Yet the parts of this country with the highest mobility rates — like Pittsburgh, Seattle and Salt Lake City — have rates roughly as high as those in Denmark and Norway, two countries at the top of the international mobility rankings. In areas like Atlanta and Memphis, by comparison, upward mobility appears to be substantially lower than in any other rich country, Mr. Chetty said.
Especially intriguing is the fact that children who moved at a young age from a low- mobility area to a high-mobility area did almost as well as those who spent their entire childhoods in a higher-mobility area. But children who moved as teenagers did less well.
That pattern makes economists more confident that the characteristics of different regions — as opposed to something inherent and unchangeable in the local residents — are helping cause the varying mobility rates.
Low Vertical Income Mobility Chances of Ending Up in the Top Fifth, For a Child ...... Raised in the Bottom Fifth ... Raised in the Top Fifth Bottom(parents’ income less than $25k) 5th Top(parents’ income 5th more than $107k)
San Jose, Calif. Pittsburgh Listed best 11% 38% San Francisco: to worst San Francisco 11% 37% Northern N.J. Seattle 10% 37% Baltimore Pittsburgh: 38% San Diego 11% 10% 36% Philadelphia Pittsburgh 10% Sacramento 10% 36% New York Boston 10% 36% Houston New York 10% 36% Minneapolis 36% Washington, D.C. Connecticut 10% 35% Los Angeles 35% St. Louis 35% Cincinnati Washington, D.C. 9% 35% Fort Worth Northern N.J. 9% 35% Chicago Minneapolis 9% 35% Boston Portland, Ore. 9% Buffalo Fort Worth 9% 34% Dallas Houston 8% 34% Cleveland Denver 8% 33% Seattle Connecticut 8% 32% Denver Phoenix 8% 31% 31% San Francisco Philadelphia 8% 31% San Jose, Calif. Miami 7% 31% Detroit Buffalo 7% Miami: 7% Tampa, Fla. Tampa, Fla. 7% 31% San Diego Baltimore 6% 30% Sacramento Dallas 6% 30% 30% Portland, Ore. Chicago 6% 30% Atlanta Phoenix St. Louis 6% 30% Cincinnati 5% Cleveland 5% 29% Los Angeles Detroit 5% Atlanta 4% 29% Miami Miami: 29% New York Times Lines are scaled byMiami-Dade population; the 30 most County populous areas are shown. Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 29
Lawrence Katz, a labor economist who did not work on the project, said he was struck by the fact that areas with high levels of income mobility were also those that established high school earliest and have long had strong school systems. Mr. Katz, a Harvard economist and former Clinton administration official, called the work “certainly the most comprehensive analysis of intergenerational mobility in the contemporary U.S.” Advanced industries’ share of total employment varies significantly across major metropolitan areas
● ● ●
● ● ● ●●●● ●● ●● ●● ● ● ●● Advanced industries’ share of total employment varies significantly● ● ● across major metropolitan● areas●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●●● ●● ●● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ●● ●● ● ● ● ● ●●● ●● ● ● Low Leading● Sector● Job Creation Rates● ●● ● ● ● ● Advanced Industry ● ● ●● ●● ●● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● Share of Total ● ● ● ●● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● Share of Workers● in STEM Occupations● ● Advanced Industry● ●Employment Employment ● ● ● ● Advanced Industry ● Top 100 Largest Metro● Areas● ● Top 100 Largest Metro Areas● ● ● ●● ●● ● Share of Total ● ● ●● ● ● Employment by Quintile ( ● ● ● ● ● ●( ● by Quintile ● ● ● ● ● ● 2.0 to 5.9 percent ● ● ● 2.0 to 5.9 percent ● ● 5.9 to 7.7 percent ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●●●● ● 7.7 to 9.0 percent ● ● ● 9.1 to 10.2 percent ● 5.9 to 7.7 percent ● ● ● ● ●● ● ● 10.3 to 30.0 percent ● ●● ● 7.7 to 9.0 percent Advanced industries’ share of total employment varies significantly across major metropolitan areas ●●
● ● ●
● ● 9.1 to 10.2 percent ● ● ● ● ●● ●●● ●● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ●● O VERALL, THE NUMBER OF EXTREMELY DENSE CONCENTR●● ●● ATIONS OF ADVANCED ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ● Advanced Industry ● ● ● ● ● ● INDUSTRY ACTIVITY HAS DECLINED. In 1980, 59 of the● country’s● ● ● 100Share of Total largest metropolitan● areas had ● ● ● ● ● ● ● Employment (● ● ● by Quintile ● ● ● ● ● 2.0 to 5.9 percent ● 10.3 to 30.0 percent ● ● 5.9 to 7.7 percent ● ● ● ● ● ● 7.7 to 9.0 percent ● at least 10 percent of their workforce in advanced industries. By 2013, only 23●●● major● metro areas contained such ● ● 9.1 to 10.2 percent ● ● ● ● ● 10.3 to 30.0 percent
sizable concentrations ●● O VERALL, THE NUMBER OF EXTREMELY DENSE CONCENTRATIONS OF ADVANCED INDUSTRY ACTIVITY HAS DECLINED. In 1980, 59 of the country’s 100 largest metropolitan areas had at least 10 percent of their workforce in advanced industries. By 2013, only 23 major metro areas contained such sizable concentrations
The United States is losing ground to other countries on advanced industry competitiveness
The United States has the most productive advanced industries in the world, behind only energy-intensive Norway. However, Miami-Dade Countythis competitiveness appears to be eroding: ●● T HE NATION’S DECLINING CONCENTRATION IN ADVANCED INDUSTRIES AND ITS NEGA- 30 Prosperity Initiatives FeasibilityTIVE TR AStudyDE BALANCE IN THE SECTOR DO NOT BODE WELL.Since 2000, the sector’s employment and output as a share of the total U.S. economy has shrunk, and the nation’s standing on these measures now lags The United States is losing groundworld leaders.to Equally worrisome is otherthe balance of trade in the sector. Although advanced industriescountries export $1.1 trillion on worth of goods and services each year and account for roughly 60 percent of total U.S. exports, the United States ran a $632 billion trade deficit in the sector in 2012, in line with similar yearly balances since 1999. To be sure, a handful of individual advanced industries such as royalties and other intellectual property and aerospace manufacturing enjoy trade surpluses that exceeded $60 and $80 billion in 2012. However, numerous areas of historical strength such as communications equipment, computer equipment, motor vehicles, and pharmaceuticals now run sizeable deficits, as do advanced industry competitivenesshigh-value R&D services and computer and information services
6 THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION | AMERICA’S ADVANCED INDUSTRIES ●● O VERALL, THE NUMBER OF EXTREMELY DENSE CONCENTRATIONS OF ADVANCED The United States has the most productive advanced industries in the world, behind only energy-intensive Norway. However, INDUSTRY ACTIVITY HAS DECLINED.this competitiveness In appears1980, to be 59 eroding: of the country’s 100 largest metropolitan areas had
●● T HE NATION’S DECLINING CONCENTRATION IN ADVANCED INDUSTRIES AND ITS NEGA- at least 10 percent of their workforce in advancedTIVE TR industries.ADE BALANCE IN THEBy SECTOR2013, DO only NOT BODE 23 WmajorELL.Since 2000,metro the sector’s areas employment contained such and output as a share of the total U.S. economy has shrunk, and the nation’s standing on these measures now lags sizable concentrations world leaders. Equally worrisome is the balance of trade in the sector. Although advanced industries export $1.1 trillion worth of goods and services each year and account for roughly 60 percent of total U.S. exports, the United States ran a $632 billion trade deficit in the sector in 2012, in line with similar yearly balances since 1999. To be sure, a handful of individual advanced industries such as royalties and other intellectual property and aerospace manufacturing enjoy trade surpluses that exceeded $60 and $80 billion in 2012. However, numerous areas of historical strength such as communications equipment, computer equipment, motor vehicles, and pharmaceuticals now run sizeable deficits, as do The United States is losinghigh-value ground R&D services and computer to and information other services countries on advanced industry competitiveness6 THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION | AMERICA’S ADVANCED INDUSTRIES
The United States has the most productive advanced industries in the world, behind only energy-intensive Norway. However, this competitiveness appears to be eroding:
●● T HE NATION’S DECLINING CONCENTRATION IN ADVANCED INDUSTRIES AND ITS NEGA- TIVE TRADE BALANCE IN THE SECTOR DO NOT BODE WELL.Since 2000, the sector’s employment and output as a share of the total U.S. economy has shrunk, and the nation’s standing on these measures now lags world leaders. Equally worrisome is the balance of trade in the sector. Although advanced industries export $1.1 trillion worth of goods and services each year and account for roughly 60 percent of total U.S. exports, the United States ran a $632 billion trade deficit in the sector in 2012, in line with similar yearly balances since 1999. To be sure, a handful of individual advanced industries such as royalties and other intellectual property and aerospace manufacturing enjoy trade surpluses that exceeded $60 and $80 billion in 2012. However, numerous areas of historical strength such as communications equipment, computer equipment, motor vehicles, and pharmaceuticals now run sizeable deficits, as do high-value R&D services and computer and information services
6 THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION | AMERICA’S ADVANCED INDUSTRIES Rapidly Rising Housing Costs
3rd Most Unaffordable Housing Market in the Nation 6 : 2.1 Median Home Price to Income Ratio The Nation's Least Affordable Housing Markets, 2014 Percentage of Households Paying 30 Percent or More of Annual Income for Housing
Cost Cost Total Total Cost % Cost Burdened Burdened County Housing Burdened Burdened 12% Owner Renter Units Households Households Households Households Loss of owner households with mortgage Bronx County, New York 518,149 41.7% 57.7% 262,312 54.6% Passaic County, New Jersey 176,210 45.9% 58.2% 83,542 51.5% Miami-Dade County, Florida 994,596 42.9% 61.6% 427,758 51.3%
Franklin city, Virginia 3,878 35.8% 62.4% 1,820 50.8% Dukes County, Massachusetts 17,347 53.6% 39.5% 2,951 50.5% 37.2% Kings County, New York 1,012,536 44.8% 52.6% 465,164 50.3% Los Angeles County, California 3,462,075 41.7% 57.0% 1,616,829 49.9% Severely Cost-Burdened Essex County, New Jersey 313,452 45.1% 53.6% 138,101 49.7% Monroe County, Florida 52,861 41.2% 60.8% 13,901 48.9% Renter households Queens County, New York 841,367 42.2% 53.6% 379,081 48.6% Atlantic County, New Jersey 127,104 43.6% 57.0% 48,496 47.9% Santa Cruz County, California 104,871 39.0% 59.4% 44,774 47.5% Lake County, California 35,576 38.5% 62.0% 12,650 47.3% Norfolk city, Virginia 95,699 36.4% 54.9% 40,469 46.8% 62% Broward County, Florida 812,817 40.8% 57.5% 311,972 46.7% Housing & Transportation Cost as % HH Income
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 31 Poverty & Distress
Comparative Poverty Rates
2000 2005 2010 2014
20.4% 20.4%
18.0% 17.8%
15.3% 15.5% 13.3% 12.4%
U.S. Miami-Dade
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Annual 1- Year American Community Survey(s)
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 32 Concentrated Poverty & Distress
The Prosperity Initiative Neighborhood Distress Index
Composite Economic Distress Composite Education Distress Composite Housing Distress Index Index Index Gladeview 7 North Miami 1 Gladeview 7 Brownsville/Liberty City 12 West Grove 2 Brownsville/Liberty City 10 Little Haiti Little Havana 3 26 Allapattah 12 Florida City Florida City 4 32 Florida City 13 Overtown/Downtown 35 Homestead 18 Brownsville/Liberty City 5 North Miami 37 North Miami 21 Homestead 6 Allapattah 40 Little Haiti 24 Allapattah 7 Golden Glades 41 Cutler Ridge/Perrine 24 Little Haiti 8 Homestead 42 Golden Glades 27 Golden Glades 9 West Grove 42 Overtown/Downtown 34 Gladeview 10 Little Havana 45 Little Havana 36 South Miami 11 Cutler Ridge/Perrine 48 West Grove 41 Cutler Ridge/ Perrine 12 NMB/Norland 48 South Miami 45 NMB/Norland 13 South Miami 70 North Miami Beach 48 Overtown / Downtown 14
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 33 Concentrated Poverty & Distress
Composite Prosperity Initiative Neighborhood Distress Index
Owner Renter Total Population Economic Education Housing Housing Total Distress Below Index Distress Distress Distress Population Index Poverty Index Index Gladeview 7 7 15 10 39 11,510 5,180 Brownsville/Liberty City 12 10 15 5 42 36,974 15,899 Allapattah 40 12 7 7 66 36,260 13,054 Florida City 32 13 17 4 66 38,794 15,130 Little Haiti 26 24 15 8 73 48,548 17,963 Homestead 42 18 8 6 74 30,827 10,173 NMB/Norland 48 21 8 13 90 14,653 3,077 West Grove 42 41 9 2 94 12,128 3,275 Little Havana 45 36 11 3 95 34,334 14,764 North Miami 37 48 11 1 97 36,398 11,283 Golden Glades 41 27 20 9 97 39,638 12,684 Overtown/Downtown 35 34 24 14 107 14,071 5,910 Cutler Ridge/Perrine 48 24 23 12 107 36,494 8,394 South Miami 70 45 20 11 146 21,279 1,915
Totals 411,908 34%
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 34 Concentrated Poverty & Distress
Most Distressed Neighborhoods
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 35 Persistent Poverty & Distress Communities Left Behind
NW 215TH ST NW 215TH ST
E E
V V
MIAMI GARDENS A MIAMI GARDENS A I 75 EXT I 75 EXT
MIAMI-DADE S MIAMI-DADE S
W DIXIE HWY W DIXIE HWY N N
LI LI
L L
O O
C C
SR 826EXT SR 826EXT N KROME AVE NORTH MIAMI COUNTY COUNTY N KROME AVE NORTH MIAMI W OKEECHOBEE RD W OKEECHOBEE RD 2000 GOLDEN GLADES/ OPA-LOCKA 96TH ST 2014 GOLDEN GLADES/ OPA-LOCKA 96TH ST
LITTLE HAITI/ MIAMI SHORES LITTLE HAITI/ MIAMI SHORES
GLADEVIEW GLADEVIEW
KROME AVE KROME KROME AVE KROME
BROWNSVILLE/LIBERTY CITY BROWNSVILLE/LIBERTY CITY
FLORIDA TPKE EXT TPKE FLORIDA FLORIDA TPKE EXT TPKE FLORIDA NW 36TH ST I 195 NW 36TH ST I 195
ALLAPATAH ALLAPATAH SR 826 826 EXT SR OVERTOWN/DOWNTOWN 826 EXT SR OVERTOWN/DOWNTOWN SR 836 RAMP SR 836 RAMP
SW 8TH ST SW 8TH ST LITTLE HAVANA LITTLE HAVANA
KROME AVE Poverty Rate KROME AVE WEST GROVE WEST GROVE
SR 874 EXT SR 874 EXT SOUTH MIAMI SOUTH MIAMI
Residents Living Below Poverty Residents Living Below Poverty CUTLER RIDGE/PERRINE CUTLER RIDGE/PERRINE
5% or less5.1% - 10% 10.1% - 25%25.1% - 50.1%50% or more 5% or less5.1% - 10% 10.1% - 25%25.1% -50.1% 50% or more
Major Roads and Highways Major Roads and Highways
SW 177TH AVE 177TH SW SW 177TH AVE 177TH SW HOMESTEAD AREA HOMESTEAD AREA
FLORIDA CITY FLORIDA CITY
SW CARD SOUND RD SW CARD SOUND RD
S DIXIE HWY S DIXIE HWY SW 392ND ST Source: Census Data 2000 ´ SW 392ND ST Source: 5 year estimates ACS 2014 ´ Provided by The Metropolitan Center Provided by The Metropolitan Center
Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community user community
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 36 Persistent Poverty & Distress Communities Left Behind
NW 215TH ST NW 215TH ST
E E
V V
MIAMI GARDENS A MIAMI GARDENS A I 75 EXT I 75 EXT
S S
W DIXIE HWY W DIXIE HWY N N
LI LI
MIAMI-DADE L MIAMI-DADE L
O O
C C
N KROME AVE SR826 EXT NORTH MIAMI N KROME AVE SR 826EXT NORTH MIAMI COUNTY W OKEECHOBEE RD COUNTY W OKEECHOBEE RD GOLDEN GLADES/ OPA-LOCKA 96TH ST GOLDEN GLADES/ OPA-LOCKA 96TH ST 2000 2014 LITTLE HAITI/ MIAMI SHORES LITTLE HAITI/ MIAMI SHORES
GLADEVIEW GLADEVIEW
KROME AVE KROME KROME AVE KROME
BROWNSVILLE/LIBERTY CITY BROWNSVILLE/LIBERTY CITY
FLORIDA TPKE EXT TPKE FLORIDA FLORIDA TPKE EXT TPKE FLORIDA NW 36TH ST I 195 NW 36TH ST I 195
ALLAPATAH ALLAPATAH SR 826 826 EXT SR SR 826 EXT 826 SR OVERTOWN/DOWNTOWN OVERTOWN/DOWNTOWN SR 836 RAMP SR 836 RAMP
SW 8TH ST SW 8TH ST Household LITTLE HAVANA LITTLE HAVANA
KROME AVE KROME AVE WEST GROVE WEST GROVE
Income SR 874 EXT SR 874 EXT SOUTH MIAMI SOUTH MIAMI
Median Household Income*
$24,598.00 or less Median Household Income CUTLER RIDGE/PERRINE CUTLER RIDGE/PERRINE $24,598.00 or less $24,598.01 - $45,218.00 $24,598.01 - $45,218.00 $45,218.01 - $71,613.00 $45,218.01 - $71,613.00 $71,613.01 - $112,285.00 $71,613.01 - $112,285.00 $112,285.01 or more
$112,285.01or more SW 177TH AVE 177TH SW
SW 177TH AVE 177TH SW *Income figures are adjusted for inflation HOMESTEAD AREA Major Roads and Highways HOMESTEAD AREA Major Roads and Highways
FLORIDA CITY FLORIDA CITY
SW CARD SOUND RD SW CARD SOUND RD
SW 392ND ST S DIXIE HWY SW 392ND ST S DIXIE HWY Source: Census 2000 Data ´ Source: ACS 2014 Estimates ´ Provided by The Metropolitan Center Provided by The Metropolitan Center
Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community user community
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 37 Persistent Poverty & Distress Communities Left Behind
NW 215TH ST NW 215TH ST
E E
V V
MIAMI GARDENS A MIAMI GARDENS A I 75 EXT I 75 EXT
MIAMI-DADE S MIAMI-DADE S
W DIXIE HWY W DIXIE HWY N N
LI LI
L L
O O
C C
SR 826EXT SR 826EXT COUNTY N KROME AVE NORTH MIAMI COUNTY N KROME AVE NORTH MIAMI W OKEECHOBEE RD W OKEECHOBEE RD 2000 GOLDEN GLADES/ OPA-LOCKA 96TH ST 2014 GOLDEN GLADES/ OPA-LOCKA 96TH ST
LITTLE HAITI/ MIAMI SHORES LITTLE HAITI/ MIAMI SHORES
GLADEVIEW GLADEVIEW
KROME AVE KROME AVE KROME
BROWNSVILLE/LIBERTY CITY BROWNSVILLE/LIBERTY CITY
FLORIDA TPKE EXT TPKE FLORIDA EXT TPKE FLORIDA NW 36TH ST I 195 NW 36TH ST I 195
ALLAPATAH ALLAPATAH SR 826 826 EXT SR SR 826 826 EXT SR OVERTOWN/DOWNTOWN OVERTOWN/DOWNTOWN Unemployment SR 836 RAMP SR 836 RAMP SW 8TH ST SW 8TH ST LITTLE HAVANA LITTLE HAVANA Rate KROME AVE WEST GROVE KROME AVE WEST GROVE
SR 874 EXT SR 874 EXT SOUTH MIAMI SOUTH MIAMI
Unemployment Rate Unemployment Rate CUTLER RIDGE/PERRINE CUTLER RIDGE/PERRINE
5% or less5.1% - 10% 10.1% - 20%20.1% - 30.1%30% or more 5% or less5.1% - 10% 10.1% - 20%20.1% -30.1% 30% or more
Major Roads and Highways Major Roads and Highways
SW 177TH AVE 177TH SW AVE 177TH SW HOMESTEAD AREA HOMESTEAD AREA
FLORIDA CITY FLORIDA CITY
SW CARD SOUND RD SW CARD SOUND RD
S DIXIE HWY S DIXIE HWY SW 392ND ST Source: Census 2000 Data ´ SW 392ND ST Source: ACS 2014 5 year estimates ´ Provided by The Metropolitan Center Provided by The Metropolitan Center
Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community user community
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 38 Persistent Poverty & Distress Communities Left Behind
NW 215TH ST NW 215TH ST
E E
V V
MIAMI GARDENS A MIAMI GARDENS A I 75 EXT I 75 EXT
MIAMI-DADE S MIAMI-DADE S
W DIXIE HWY W DIXIE HWY N N
LI LI
L L
O O
C C
SR 826EXT SR 826EXT N KROME AVE NORTH MIAMI COUNTY N KROME AVE NORTH MIAMI COUNTY W OKEECHOBEE RD W OKEECHOBEE RD 2000 GOLDEN GLADES/ OPA-LOCKA 96TH ST 2014 GOLDEN GLADES/ OPA-LOCKA 96TH ST
LITTLE HAITI/ MIAMI SHORES LITTLE HAITI/ MIAMI SHORES
GLADEVIEW GLADEVIEW
KROME AVE KROME KROME AVE KROME
BROWNSVILLE/LIBERTY CITY BROWNSVILLE/LIBERTY CITY
FLORIDA TPKE EXT TPKE FLORIDA FLORIDA TPKE EXT TPKE FLORIDA NW 36TH ST I 195 NW 36TH ST I 195
ALLAPATAH ALLAPATAH SR 826 826 EXT SR SR 826 826 EXT SR OVERTOWN/DOWNTOWN OVERTOWN/DOWNTOWN Children in SR 836 RAMP SR 836 RAMP
SW 8TH ST SW 8TH ST LITTLE HAVANA LITTLE HAVANA
KROME AVE Poverty KROME AVE WEST GROVE WEST GROVE
SR 874 EXT SR 874 EXT SOUTH MIAMI SOUTH MIAMI
Children Living Below Poverty Children Living Below Poverty CUTLER RIDGE/PERRINE CUTLER RIDGE/PERRINE
5% or less5.1% - 10% 10.1% - 25%25.1% - 50.1%50% or more 5% or less5.1% - 10% 10.1% - 25%25.1% -50.1% 50% or more
Major Roads and Highways Major Roads and Highways
SW 177TH AVE 177TH SW SW 177TH AVE 177TH SW HOMESTEAD AREA HOMESTEAD AREA
FLORIDA CITY FLORIDA CITY
SW CARD SOUND RD SW CARD SOUND RD
S DIXIE HWY S DIXIE HWY SW 392ND ST Source: Census Data 2000 ´ SW 392ND ST Source: ACS 2014 5 year estimates ´ Provided by The Metropolitan Center Provided by The Metropolitan Center
Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community user community
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 39 The High Cost of Inaction
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 40 Scale & Scope: How Many Residents Are Impacted?
Miami-Dade County
534,720! 411,908! Population of 14 Persons Live Below Poverty Most Distressed Communities
267,544! 605,911 Households Earning less than Households Earn $75,000 Less Than $25,000 72% of all Households
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 41 The High Cost of Inaction 1 2 Increasing costs to the County: policing County’s growing prosperity gap social services risks becoming a permanent and health care services structural affordable housing costs lost property taxes lost spending power
3 4 5
Pushing the costs of services to A sustained, growing drag on the low-income families to the broader regional economy – Hurting young talent, even in County could become limiting stunting economic high-skill occupations unsustainable diversification
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 42 The Economic Impact of Expanding Prosperity
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 43 The Economic Impact of Expanding Prosperity Economy-Wide Benefits
Raising incomes for 5% to 10% of the lowest income households to the Area Median Income:
$400M to $563M to $22M to $800M of 3,000 to $947M new $44.6M in new annual 6,000 new commodity new annual economic jobs demand per tax revenue output year
• Securities and investments • Nursing and residential care facilities 771 to 1,500 • Real estate • Medical and diagnostic labs jobs in in high- • Offices of physicians • Outpatient & ambulatory care services wage, high skill • Dentists & other health practitioners • Home health care services sectors • Private hospitals
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 44 The Building Blocks of Prosperity
Expanding the pipeline of higher wage Focused investment in historically job opportunities and growing distressed neighborhoods economic diversification
Preparation: increase the skills, Targeted wealth building through education, and capacity of residents to business ownership for the region’s take those jobs underserved population
Building wealth through asset Address housing market imbalances ownership that erode income and wealth
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 45 Action Agenda
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 46 Program Feasibility
Programs Evaluated
Social Enterprise Employee Owned Community Land Community Benefit Children’s Savings Incubators and Business Trusts Agreements Accounts Accelerators Cooperatives
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 47 Prosperity Initiative Pilot Program
2 Year Pilot Program
Provide Seed Capital for Five Prosperity Initiative Programs
Cost: $9.5 - $10.5 Million
2,300 Households Positively Impacted
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 48 Social Enterprise Accelerator Program
3 Social Impact Accelerators - 10,000 sf each 32 businesses per year $20,000 seed capital invested per entering client company
• County’s accelerator ecosystem has matured – accelerators a proven investment • Engage UM and FIU • Don’t re-create the wheel: partner with existing, high-performing accelerators Program • Invest in sector and/or issue focused accelerators Recommendations • Locate accelerators in Miami-Dade’s most distressed neighborhoods – accelerators create new companies and are significant job generators • Focus on accelerators cultivating local talent – local entrepreneurs are motivated to build and keep their business in the County
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 49 Community Land Trust Program
Seed Community Land Trust to develop and/or acquire 100 units of affordable housing
• Approve a specific role for Community Land Trusts to function inside of the County’s comprehensive affordable housing plan: acquisition; development & property management • Expand the capacity of existing CLT or CDC Program Recommendations • Revise County tax assessment policy for CLT-developed affordable housing to ensure fair treatment of resale-restricted homes; • Target CLT activity where it is needed most — the fourteen highly distressed neighborhoods • Assign the partner CLTs lead responsibility to coordinate County-wide Land Bank development.
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 50 Community Benefit Agreement Ordinance
Enact Statutory Requirement for mandatory Community Benefits Agreement
• A clear, non-negotiable (rather than discretionary) threshold for development projects required to enter into a CBA • Ideally any project obtaining public benefits should be subject to a CBA • Clearly specified benefit targets detailed as part of the enabling ordinance Program • Clear and comprehensive public engagement procedures, involving all affected parties Recommendations • Public benefits tied to clear public and community needs • Include benefits that can be easily measured, monitored and enforced • Clear and non-negotiable conditions for a waiver or opt-out: Require cash payment into a public fund commensurate with the size of the Project.
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 51 Children’s Savings Account Program
Seed funding to develop a Children’s Savings Account Program Create Sec. 529 savings accounts for 1,000 children per year Seed each account with $500
• Augment Florida’s 529 programs - established and popular savings account platform with established administrative infrastructure • Extend income qualifications up to and/or above the area median household income Program • Structure Immediate Tax Benefit Incentives for Match Donors Recommendations • Address Special Needs of Miami-Dade: language, seed money, and no existing relationships with financial institutions • Require Financial Literacy as Condition of Grant Funding • Tie savings match funding to clearly stated educational milestones (GPA, PSAT, SAT test taking) • Provide Automatic CSA Enrollment: Provide a 529 account and seed funding for every child of born into every income qualifying family in the County
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 52 Employee Owned Business Cooperative Program
Seed funding to develop five Employee Owned Business Cooperatives employing 10 workers each
• Organize and cultivate technical expertise: accelerator catering to worker cooperative start-ups? • Target distressed neighborhoods Program • Develop funding addressing financial challenges faced by EOBs: long-term debt financing, Recommendations operating capital, low or no interest debt financing, loan guarantees, interest rate write-downs, and equipment financing • Partner with existing financial institutions • Acquire existing businesses to convert to Employee Owned Business Cooperatives
Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study 53 Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study
www.metropolitan.fiu.edu #prosperity305 @FIUMetroCenter
54 Miami-Dade County Prosperity Initiatives Feasibility Study
www.metropolitan.fiu.edu #prosperity305 @FIUMetroCenter
56