sign in sign up
<<
Home , Greater Cleveland, Milwaukee, Principal city

MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221 (2ND EDITION)

A COMPARISON OF THE TO ITS PEERS

SOUTHEASTERN REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION SOUTHEASTERN WISCONSIN REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION

Kenosha County Milwaukee County Ozaukee County Steve Bostrom Donna Brown-Martin Thomas H. Buestrin Aloysius Nelson Theodore Lipscomb, Sr. Jennifer K. Rothstein Robert W. Pitts Vacant Gustav W. Wirth, Jr., Secretary

Racine County Walworth County Washington County Waukesha County Mike Dawson Charles L. Colman, Chairman Jeffrey D. Schleif Michael A. Crowley, Vice-Chairman James A. Ladwig Nancy Russell, Treasurer Daniel S. Schmidt José M. Delgado Peggy L. Shumway Vacant David L. Stroik James T. Dwyer

Regional Land Use Planning Advisory Committee Regional Transportation Planning Advisory Committee

Julie A. Anderson, Director, Racine County Public Works and Donna Brown-Martin Director, Milwaukee County Department Chair Development Services Chair of Transportation Robert Bauman Alderman, of Milwaukee Fred Abadi, Ph. D., P.E. Director of Public Works, City of Waukesha Donna Brown-Martin Director, Milwaukee County Department Clement Abongwa, P.E. Director, Kenosha County Highways of Transportation Samir Amin City Engineer, City of Milwaukee Andy M. Buehler Director of Planning and Development, Kenosha County Julie A. Anderson Director, Racine County Public Works and Development Services Matthew A. Carran Director of Community Development, Village of Falls Mitch Batuzich Transportation Planner, Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Michael P. Cotter Director, Walworth County Land Use and Transportation Resource Management Department Shelly Billingsley Director of Public Works/City Engineer, Henry Elling Village Planner, Village of Summit City of Kenosha Paulette Enders Director of Development, City of Wauwatosa Daniel Boehm President and Managing Director, Milwaukee County Transit System Daniel F. Ertl, AICP Director Community Development, City of Brookfield Scott Brandmeier Director of Public Works/Village Engineer, Village of Fox Point Jason Fruth Planning and Zoning Manager, Waukesha County Allison Bussler Director of Public Works, Waukesha County Bob Harris Director of Planning and Development, Peter Daniels, P.E. City Engineer, City of West Allis City of Port Washington Jon E. Edgren, P.E. Director of Public Works/Highway Commissioner, Aaron Hertzberg Director of Economic Development, Ozaukee County Milwaukee County Julie Esch Deputy Director, Milwaukee County Department Kristi Johnson Community Development Manager, of Transportation City of Greenfield Doug Ferguson Senior Analyst, Metropolitan Vanessa L. Koster Planning Manager, City of Milwaukee Agency for Planning Jeffrey B. Labahn, AICP Director, Department of Community Carolynn Gellings, P.E. Engineering Services Manager, Development and Inspections, City of Kenosha Waukesha County Department of Public Works Joseph Liebau, Jr. Secretary’s Director – Southeast Region, Gail Good Director, Air Management Program, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Maria Pandazi City Planner, City of Waukesha Thomas M. Grisa, P.E. Director of Public Works, City of Brookfield Mark Piotrowicz Director, Department of Community Richard Hough Director of Public Works and Highway Development, City of West Bend Commissioner, Walworth County Public Works Department Brandi Richter District Conservationist, U.S. Natural Resources Conservation Service Nik Kovac Alderman, City of Milwaukee Matthew Sadowski, AICP Planning and Redevelopment Manager, Joseph Liebau, Jr. Secretary’s Director – Southeast Region, City of Racine Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Karen L. Sands Director of Planning, Research and Sustainability, Max Maréchal City Engineer, City of West Bend Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Kimberly Montgomery Director of Intergovernmental Relations, Steven J. Schaer, AICP Manager of Planning and Zoning, City of Milwaukee City of West Allis Jeffrey S. Polenske, P.E. Commissioner of Public Works, Douglas Seymour Director of Community Development, City of Milwaukee City of Oak Creek Ron J. Pritzlaff, P.E. Assistant Village Engineer, Debora M. Sielski Deputy Planning and Parks Administrator, Village of Mount Pleasant Manager of Planning Division, Washington County Planning and Parks Department John Rooney, P.E. Commissioner of Public Works/City Engineer, City of Racine Andrew T. Struck Director, Planning and Parks Department, Ozaukee County Scott M. Schmidt P.E., P.L.S. Highway Commissioner and County Surveyor, Washington County Highway Department Todd M. Stuebe, P.E., AICP Director of Community Development, City of Glendale David Simpson Director of Public Works, City of Wauwatosa Kurt Thiede Regional Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Brian M. Udovich, P.E. Highway Operations Manager, Jefferson County Highway Department Charles Wade Director of Planning and Economic Development, Wisconsin Department of Transportation John F. Weishan, Jr. 16th District Supervisor, Milwaukee County William Wheeler Community Planner, Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation Dennis Yaccarino Senior Budget and Policy Manager, City of Milwaukee MEMORANDUM REPORT NUMBER 221 (2ND EDITION)

A COMPARISON OF THE MILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITS PEERS

Prepared by the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission W239 N1812 Rockwood Drive P.O. Box 1607 Waukesha, Wisconsin 53187-1607 www.sewrpc.org

The preparation of this publication was financed in part through planning funds provided by the Federal Highway and Federal Transit Administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation and the Wisconsin Departments of Transportation, Natural Resources, and Administration. The contents of this report do not necessarily reflect the official views or policy of these agencies.

U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Federal Transit Administration

March 2020

A COMPARISON OF THE MILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITS PEERS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report provides a statistical comparison of the Milwaukee metropolitan area with 14 other metro areas in the midwest and 14 other metro areas throughout the nation (see Map 1). The purpose was to assess how the Milwaukee area compares with other areas on a number of key measures, including population growth and characteristics, the economy, and transportation. The comparison includes data on existing conditions as well as changes primarily between 2010 and 2018. Major findings of the comparison are noted below. These findings provide valuable information for consideration in developing long-range plans for Southeastern Wisconsin.

This report is the second edition of the comparison of the Milwaukee metro area to its peers. The first edition presented data from 2000 to 2013. Notable changes identified as part of the updated analysis include the Milwaukee area improving compared to other metro areas with respect to per capita income, percent and ranking of people in poverty, and ranking in unemployment rate. Comparisons where Milwaukee now rates less competitively than other metro areas include travel time delays and congestion costs. Despite these changes, the three primary conclusions discussed in the remainder of this summary are unchanged from the previous edition of this report.

• A Slow-growth Area – The Milwaukee metro area has had slower population growth than most metro areas. Of the 28 peers in this report, 17 grew by 6 percent or more from 2010 to 2018, compared to just over 1 percent growth for the Milwaukee area.

In terms of job growth, only the Buffalo, , and metro areas had slower job growth than the 9 percent increase in jobs in the Milwaukee area from 2010 to 2018. employment in the Milwaukee area has also continued its long-term decline, although it continues to account for 12 percent of total employment, ranking Milwaukee second in the midwest metro areas, and first among other metro areas.

Even though the Milwaukee area has experienced slower population and job growth, housing values and selling prices in the Milwaukee area are among the highest in the midwest and rank near the middle of metro areas outside the midwest.

• Strong Evidence of Disparities – Within the Milwaukee metro area’s population, there are significant disparities between whites and minorities—far more pronounced than the disparities in almost all other metro areas. Whites on average have significantly higher educational attainment levels and per capita income levels, and a far lower poverty rate. Similar disparities also exist between whites and minorities within the City of Milwaukee itself.

A COMPARISON OF THE MILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITS PEERS | iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

There are also significant disparities for education, per capita income, and poverty between City of Milwaukee residents and residents of the rest of the Milwaukee metro area. These geographical disparities in the Milwaukee area exceed the disparities between principal and their in almost all other metro areas.

• An Unbalanced Transportation System – Several indicators show that the highway system in the Milwaukee metro area performs well in comparison to other metropolitan areas. Travel time delay and congestion costs for auto commuters in the Milwaukee area are below the averages for both the midwest and the other metropolitan areas. The increase in travel time delay for auto commuters in the Milwaukee area over the past 35 years is also below average compared to midwest and other metro areas.

The Milwaukee area does not compare nearly as well with respect to public transit. While the Milwaukee area continues to have among the highest transit service levels per capita compared to midwest and other metro areas, it has experienced among the most severe decline in transit ridership—39 percent since 2010—compared to its peers. In addition, the amount of transit service provided grew more slowly than many peers during the same time period. The method of funding transit in the Milwaukee area is heavily dependent on State and Federal funds and is limited by State restriction on local government revenue sources. Over three-quarters of the peer metro areas have a local dedicated source of funding—typically a sales tax—which provides the bulk of their funding. Milwaukee has by far the largest transit system of its peers not supported by dedicated funding. The other peer metro area transit systems without dedicated funding provide 1/2 to 1/5 the transit service per capita provided in Milwaukee. This would suggest that action is needed to provide dedicated local transit funding, or at least increase State transit funding, to avoid Milwaukee’s transit levels shrinking to the much lower levels of those peers without dedicated funding.

iv | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221 (2ND EDITION) 2.23 2.14 4.00 32.2 0.22 6.9% 3.0% 5.1% 9.2% Buffalo Worst Denver -1.3% 27.5% 33.9% Chicago $1,388 -43.2% Memphis Pittsburgh Cleveland $27,969 Milwaukee Milwaukee Sacramento Sacramento San Antonio San Antonio Performing Oklahoma City 29 29 28 29 27 27 28 29

26 27 28 29 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 22

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Rank Among Peer Metro Areas Rank Among Peer 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 11

10

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Milwaukee Metro Area vs. Peer Metro Areas : Milwaukee Metro Area vs. Peer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Best 0.68 1.54 1.20 21.6 1.78 2.7% $804 Buffalo Denver Raleigh Raleigh 20.5% 48.0% 32.8% 16.8% 87.5% 98.7% 44.5% Portland Nashville Cleveland Columbus $42,116 Sacramento Minneapolis Lake City Salt Lake City Salt Lake City Grand Rapids Performing 1.09 1.76 2.25 25.6 0.76 7.4% 7.0% 3.6% $995 35.1% 17.8% 69.0% 67.8% 13.1% $34,288 Average < > > > > < > < > < > < < > < 1.69 2.14 4.00 23.0 0.95 1.3% 8.8% 3.2% 5.7% $884 36.0% 11.5% 73.1% 17.0% SUMMARY COMPARISON $35,106 Milwaukee

unless otherwise noted to Work in Minutes to Work of Public Transit Percent Operating Assistance from Local Funds Service Public Transit Change in Annual Percent Service Hours: Public Transit 2010-2018 Measure Change in Population: Percent 2010-2018 with of Adult Population Percent a Bachelor’s Degree or Higher of Metro of Remainder Ratio Area to City: Adults with a Bachelor’s Degree or Higher Capita Income Per of White to Minority Ratio Capita Income Per Change in Total Percent Employment: 2010-2018 Manufacturing Percent Employment Share of Total Unemployment Rate of City to Ratio of Metro Area: Remainder in Poverty People Median Gross Housing Rent of Home Sales Percent Affordable to Median- Income Time Travel Average Capita Hours Per Data from 2018

A COMPARISON OF THE MILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITS PEERS | v vi | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221 (2ND EDITION) TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION...... 1 2 METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLDS...... 2 3 METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: ECONOMY...... 5 4 METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: HOUSING...... 6 5 METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: TRANSPORTATION...... 7 6 METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: AIR QUALITY...... 8 7 PRINCIPAL CITY COMPARISONS...... 9 8 COMPARISON TO PREVIOUS EDITION...... 11 9 SUMMARY...... 12

A COMPARISON OF THE MILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITS PEERS | vii viii | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221 (2ND EDITION) 1 INTRODUCTION

One of the major functions of the Regional Planning Commission is to collect, analyze, and disseminate basic planning and engineering data. As part of this function, the Commission prepared this statistical comparison of the Milwaukee metropolitan area—the largest metropolitan area in Southeastern Wisconsin—with other metropolitan areas throughout the nation. This effort was undertaken at the request of the Commission’s Advisory Committees on Regional Land Use Planning and Regional Transportation Planning to help assess how this area compares with other areas of the nation in terms of such matters as population growth and characteristics, the economy, and transportation.

The first edition of this report was published in 2015, using the most up- to-date data available at that time. This document presents an update to the original report, in part to determine and summarize changes in these statistics in the past five years.

This effort involved a comparison of the Milwaukee metropolitan statistical area and 28 other metropolitan statistical areas in the nation. Metropolitan statistical areas are delineated throughout the nation by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget based largely upon population size and density and travel patterns. In general, each metropolitan statistical area includes one or more counties containing an urban core area of at least 50,000 people, as well as adjacent counties that have a high degree of social and economic integration with the urban core.

The Milwaukee metropolitan statistical area includes four of the seven counties that comprise the Region—Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Washington, This report compares and Waukesha. In this comparative analysis, the Milwaukee metropolitan the Milwaukee area to statistical area, which had an estimated population of 1.58 million people 14 metropolitan areas in 2018, is compared to the 14 other metropolitan statistical areas located within 500 miles of in the midwest (within 500 miles of Milwaukee) that have a population of Milwaukee and 14 other at least 1.0 million people. In addition, the Milwaukee area is compared to metropolitan areas from 14 other metropolitan statistical areas having a population of at least 1.0 the remainder of the million people that are geographically distributed throughout the nation (see Nation. Map 1). This edition of the report includes the same metropolitan areas as in the original report, with the addition of two metropolitan areas—Grand Rapids, , in the midwest comparison and Tucson, Arizona, in the national comparison—both of which have exceeded 1.0 million people since the 2010 decennial census.

In most cases, the data presented in the metropolitan area comparisons pertain to entire metropolitan statistical areas as delineated by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget in September 2018. Several data sets pertain to the primary urbanized area within the metropolitan statistical area.

In the tabular data, the metro areas are presented in rank order for the data item concerned. In each table, the ranking should be considered in the context of the range of the data presented. In tables where the data for the metro areas are tightly grouped, and where the range between low and high values is small, the rankings are less meaningful. In many cases, comparisons to the metro area averages, rather the rankings, may be more useful.

While this report focuses on metropolitan statistical areas as defined by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget, the report also presents information pertaining to the largest cities of the metropolitan areas considered.

A COMPARISON OF THE MILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITS PEERS | 1 Map 1 Metropolitan Statistical Areas in the with a 2018 Population of at Least 1.0 Million People

Seattle

Portland

Minneapolis Grand Buffalo Rapids Rochester Sacramento Milwaukee Salt Lake City Detroit Providence Hartford Chicago Cleveland San Jose New York Pittsburgh Denver Columbus Indianapolis Las Vegas City St. Louis Washington Louisville Riverside Richmond

Virginia Beach San Diego Raleigh Nashville Phoenix Oklahoma City Charlotte Memphis Tucson Atlanta Birmingham Dallas

Midwest Metropolitan Statistical Areas Austin Jacksonville Included in Comparisons San Antonio Houston New Orleans

Other Metropolitan Statistical Areas Orlando Across the Nation Selected for Comparison Tampa Other Metropolitan Statistical Areas with a Population of at Least 1.0 Million Not Selected for Comparison 500-Mile Radius from Milwaukee Metropolitan Area

Note: Metropolitan statistical areas are those delineated by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget in February 2018. Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census and SEWRPC

Information is provided comparing the City of Milwaukee, the largest city in the four-county Milwaukee metropolitan statistical area, with the largest cities of other metropolitan areas—for example, the Cities of Detroit, St. Louis, Cleveland, and Portland—within the midwest and across the country. The city-by-city data comparisons are included in the last set of tables in this report.

2 METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLDS

Overview The Milwaukee area Population growth in the Milwaukee metro area has been relatively slow since has grown slower than 2010, especially in comparison to other metro areas from across the nation. many other metro areas The Milwaukee area is similar to many other metro areas with respect to age, across the country. educational attainment, and per capita income. The proportion of the racial/ ethnic minority population for Milwaukee is higher than the average for the midwest metro areas but somewhat lower than the average for other metro areas. Disparities between the white and minority population levels in terms of educational attainment, per capita income, and poverty in the Milwaukee metro area are relatively high in comparison to other metro areas.

2 | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221 (2ND EDITION) • Population Change (Table 2) The Milwaukee area experienced relatively slow population growth since 2010, increasing by 1.3 percent between 2010 and 2018. Within the midwest, 12 of 15 metro areas experienced a population increase between 2010 and 2018, ranging from 0.4 percent in Chicago to 15.6 percent in Nashville. Three metro areas in the midwest— Buffalo, Cleveland, and Pittsburgh—experienced decreases in population.

The Milwaukee area population growth rate of 1.3 percent between 2010 and 2018 was, along with Providence, the lowest growth rate compared to the metro areas from across the nation. All the areas experienced at least some population growth during this time, with Raleigh experiencing the highest growth rate (20.5 percent).

• (Table 3) Population density is provided for the primary urbanized area within the respective metropolitan statistical areas. The Milwaukee urbanized area had an overall population density of 2,547 people per square mile in 2018. This is just above the average density for midwest urbanized areas (2,454 people per square mile) and below the average for the other areas (2,735 people per square mile).

• Age Makeup (Tables 4-6) The median age of the Milwaukee area population in 2018 (37.9 years) was slightly lower than the average for the midwest metro areas (38.5 years) and slightly above the average for the other metro areas (37.4 years). The percent of the population aged 65 and older in Milwaukee (15.6 percent) matches the midwest average and is above the average for the other metro areas (14.7 percent).

• Race/Ethnicity (Tables 7-11) The racial/ethnic minority population comprised 33.8 percent of the total population of the Milwaukee metro area in 2018. This includes those people reported by the Census Bureau as being of Hispanic origin and/or a non-white race. Milwaukee’s minority population percentage was higher than the average for midwest metro areas (27.6 percent) and lower than the average for the other metro areas (40.3 percent).

• Educational Attainment (Tables 12-16) About 44.8 percent of adults age 25 and over in the Milwaukee metro area had a degree beyond high school (associate’s, bachelor’s, or graduate degree) in 2018. This is slightly higher than the average for the midwest metro areas (44.1 percent) and for the other areas (43.6 percent).

About 13.4 percent of adults in the Milwaukee area held a graduate degree in 2018, compared to the same average for the midwest metro areas and 13.0 percent for the other metro areas.

About 8.5 percent of adults in the Milwaukee area did not have a high school diploma or the equivalent in 2018, nearly the same as the average percentage for the midwest metro areas (8.6) and lower than the average for the other metro areas (10.3).

A COMPARISON OF THE MILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITS PEERS | 3 • Personal Income (Tables 17-18) Milwaukee’s annual per capita income of $35,106 in 2018 was slightly higher than the average for both the midwest metro areas ($34,738) and the other metro areas ($33,892).

The Milwaukee area experienced an increase of 5.8 percent in constant dollar per capita income between 2010 and 2018—compared to the average increase of 6.0 percent among the midwest metro areas and 3.9 percent among the other metro areas.

• Poverty (Table 19) About 13.2 percent of the total population in the Milwaukee area was below the poverty level in 2018. This compares to the average of 12.0 percent for the midwest metro areas and 12.5 percent for the other metro areas.

• Infant Mortality (Table 20) The Milwaukee area’s infant mortality rate in 2018—8.91 infant deaths per 1,000 live births—ranked the highest among the midwest areas, and was higher than the average rate for the other metro areas (6.62). These rates reflect records for counties with a population of at least 250,000 within each metropolitan statistical area.

• Households (Tables 21-23) The average household size in the Milwaukee metro area was 2.44 people in 2018. This compares to the average of 2.49 people per household for the midwest metro areas and 2.64 for the other metro areas. Milwaukee’s average household size was the smallest of the other metro areas.

About 61.8 percent of all households in the Milwaukee metro area in 2018 households, lower than the average for both the midwest and the other metro areas. The percentage of single-parent households (28.1 percent) was higher than the average for both the midwest metro areas (26.4 percent) and the other metro areas (26.9 percent).

• Racial/Ethnic Disparities (Tables 24-27) There are significant In all of the metro areas considered, there are differences in educational education and income attainment, personal income levels, and poverty rates between the disparities between white and the minority populations. In all metro areas, the percent of whites and minorities in minority adults without a high school diploma or equivalent exceeds the Milwaukee area— the percentage for the adult white population. This disparity is more pronounced in the Milwaukee metro area than most of the other greater disparities than midwest metro areas and many of the other metro areas across the nearly all other metro nation. The disparity between white and minority adults holding a areas. bachelor’s or greater degree is highest in the Milwaukee area.

In all metro areas, the per capita income for the white population exceeds that of the minority population. As measured by the ratio of white to minority per capita income, the income disparity in the Milwaukee metro area is the largest among both the midwest metro areas and the other metro areas.

In all metro areas, the incidence of poverty is greater for the minority population than the white population. The Milwaukee area disparity in this regard is the largest of all the metro areas considered.

4 | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221 (2ND EDITION) 3 METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: ECONOMY

Overview Recovery from the recession of the late 2000s is apparent in most of the metro areas, with increases in total employment, labor force, and gross domestic product (GDP), along with low unemployment rates. Milwaukee and all other metro areas saw an increase in constant dollar GDP since 2010, with more rapid growth generally occurring in the metro areas outside the midwest. Milwaukee’s GDP on a per capita basis is above the average for both the midwest and the other metro areas. Manufacturing remains a key sector of Milwaukee’s economic base, with the Milwaukee area’s proportion of manufacturing jobs among the highest of all metro areas considered.

• Change in Jobs (Table 29) All of the metro areas experienced job growth following the recession of the late 2000s. Milwaukee’s increase in jobs from 2010 to 2018 of 8.8 percent lags behind most of the midwest areas and all of the other metro areas, most of which have seen double-digit growth since 2010.

• Change in Labor Force (Table 30) Following the recession, most of the metro areas saw an increase in the size of the labor force between 2010 and 2018. With a slight gain of 0.9 percent, the Milwaukee area had among the smallest increase of all the metro areas experiencing an increase in labor force during this time.

• Change in Gross Domestic Product (Table 32) All of the metro areas experienced an increase in GDP (the market value of all goods and services produced) between 2010 and 2018, adjusted for inflation. GDP growth in metro areas across the nation was generally more robust than the midwest. The Milwaukee area increase of 9.3 percent in GDP ranked near the bottom compared to the midwest and the other metro areas.

• Gross Domestic Product Per Capita (Table 33) The Milwaukee metro area gross domestic product on a per capita basis was relatively high compared to many midwest and other metro areas. The Milwaukee metro area per capita GDP of about $65,800 in 2018 ranked fifth highest among both the midwest metro areas (where the average was $64,200) and the other metro areas (where the average was $60,800).

• Manufacturing Sector (Tables 34-36) Manufacturing has historically been a key component of the economic Despite a slower rate base in the Milwaukee metro area. As in most metro areas, the share of job growth than of jobs in manufacturing relative to total jobs in the Milwaukee metro most other metro area has decreased. Despite the reduction, manufacturing employment areas, Milwaukee continued to account for 11.5 percent of all jobs in the Milwaukee continues to have a area in 2018. This ranks second highest among the midwest metro larger percentage of areas, where the average share was 8.7 percent, and highest among its total employment the metro areas outside the midwest, where the average share was 5.6 percent. in manufacturing than almost all other metro About 17.1 percent of the Milwaukee metro area GDP was related to areas. manufacturing in 2018. This compares to the average of 14.8 percent for the midwest metro areas and 11.4 percent for the other metro areas.

A COMPARISON OF THE MILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITS PEERS | 5 • Unemployment Rate (Table 37) The Milwaukee metro area unemployment rate stood at 3.2 percent in 2018, down from the recessionary high level of 8.9 percent in 2009 and 2010. The Milwaukee area’s rate in 2018 was slightly lower than the average for the midwest metro areas (3.7 percent) and the metro areas outside the midwest (3.5 percent).

4 METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: HOUSING

Overview Growth in the Milwaukee area’s housing stock since 2010 has been relatively slow compared to other metro areas. Multifamily housing comprises a relatively large share of all housing in the Milwaukee area compared to other metro areas. The median value of owner-occupied housing and the median selling price for recent single-family home sales in Milwaukee are relatively high compared to the midwest metro areas, but are below the average for the other metro areas. Milwaukee ranks near or above average in terms of home sale price affordability.

• Change in Housing Stock (Table 38) The number of housing units of all types in the Milwaukee metro area increased by just 1.7 percent between 2010 and 2018. The Milwaukee area growth rate was in the lower half among the midwest metro areas and third lowest among the other metro areas.

• Housing Structure Type (Table 39) Multifamily housing—including housing in structures of two or more housing units—comprises a relatively large share of Milwaukee’s housing stock. About 44.8 percent of all housing units in the Milwaukee area were in two-or-more-unit structures in 2018, ranking second highest among the midwest metro areas and highest among the other metro areas.

• Housing Values and Rent (Tables 40-41) Although population The median value of all owner-occupied housing for the Milwaukee and jobs are growing metro area of $222,100 in 2018 ranked fourth highest among the slowly in the Milwaukee midwest metro areas and near the middle among the metro areas area, housing values outside the midwest. and sale prices are relatively high The median gross monthly rent for all renter-occupied housing in the Milwaukee metro area was $884 in 2018, ranking in the middle compared to most among the midwest metro areas and second lowest among the other metro areas. metro areas.

• Home Sale Prices (Table 42) The median price of recent (2018) single-family home sales for the Milwaukee metro area was $250,300—above average among the midwest metro areas and below average for the metro areas outside the midwest.

• Home Sale Price Affordability (Table 43) About 73.1 percent of recent (2018) home sales in the Milwaukee area are considered to be affordable to median-income families in the Milwaukee area. This is somewhat lower than the average of 77.2 percent for the midwest metro areas and higher than the average of 61.5 percent for the metro areas outside the midwest.

6 | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221 (2ND EDITION) 5 METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: TRANSPORTATION

Overview The average travel time to work in minutes for workers in the Milwaukee metro area is slightly lower than the average for both the midwest metro areas and metro areas outside the midwest. The proportion of workers who drive alone to work in the Milwaukee metro area is close to the average for both the midwest metro areas and the other metro areas. The proportion of Milwaukee metro area workers who take public transportation to work is slightly below the average for the midwest metro areas and slightly above the average for the other metro areas. The proportion of households with no personal-use vehicle available is above the average for midwest metro areas and ranks among the highest of the other metro areas. Travel time delays for auto commuters in the Milwaukee area are relatively low compared to other metro areas. Local funding in support of public transportation varies considerably among metro areas, with the Milwaukee area ranking low in this regard. However, relatively low operating costs and higher proportions of State assistance combine to allow the Milwaukee area to provide a higher- than-average amount of revenue-vehicle hours of service per capita.

• Travel to Work (Tables 44-49) The average travel time to work for workers in the Milwaukee metro Travel time delay and area was 23 minutes in 2018, slightly lower than the average of about congestion costs for 25 minutes for the midwest metro areas and about 26 minutes for the auto commuters in the other metro areas. Milwaukee area are relatively low compared The percentage of workers who drive to work alone in the Milwaukee to most other metro metro area is similar to a majority of the other metro areas. About areas. 81.5 percent of all Milwaukee metro area workers drove to work alone in 2018, compared to averages of 80.7 percent for the midwest metro areas and 79.3 percent for the other metro areas.

Among the metro areas considered, with the exception of Chicago, the percentage of workers who take public transportation to work is less than 7 percent. About 2.6 percent of Milwaukee metro area workers took public transit to work in 2018, compared to the average of 2.9 percent for the midwest metro areas and 2.1 percent for the other metro areas.

• Vehicle Availability (Tables 50 and 51) The percentage of households in the Milwaukee metro area having no personal-use vehicle (9.1 percent) is above the average for the midwest metro areas (8.0 percent) and ranks second highest among metro areas outside the midwest. Similarly, the percentage of households in the Milwaukee metro area having one or no personal-use vehicle (45.3 percent) is also above the average for the midwest metro areas (41.4 percent) and ranks highest among the other metro areas.

• Congestion (Tables 52-54) Travel time delays for Milwaukee area auto commuters are relatively low compared to many other midwest metro areas and metro areas across the nation, and have increased slower than most other metro areas over the last 35 years. The annual delay during peak travel times per auto commuter in the Milwaukee area—46 hours in 2017—compares to an average of 51 hours for midwest metro areas and 50 hours for other metro areas. This, in turn, is reflected in slightly lower congestion costs, considering the value of lost time and

A COMPARISON OF THE MILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITS PEERS | 7 excess fuel consumption. The annual congestion cost for Milwaukee area auto commuters in 2017 was estimated at $864, compared to an average of $971 for midwest metro areas and $921 for the other metro areas.

• Public Transportation (Tables 55-61) Compared to most A relatively small portion of the annual operating deficit for the other metro areas, the Milwaukee County Transit System—17 percent—was covered by local Milwaukee area has funds in 2018. This is the third lowest percent among the major public experienced less transit transit operators in the midwest metro areas and lowest among major service growth and public transit operators in metro areas across the nation. one of the most severe Of the midwest metro areas, only Milwaukee and Nashville do not declines in transit have a dedicated source of local funding for transit. Most of the other ridership. metro areas have a dedicated local funding source. Sales taxes are the most common form of dedicated local funding for transit.

The major transit operators in a majority of metro areas in both the midwest and other areas experienced ridership decline between 2010 and 2018. Milwaukee County Transit System experienced a 38.7 percent loss in this time period. This was the second largest decline among midwest metro areas and fourth largest among other metro areas. The ridership loss occurred despite a slight increase in service levels (5.7 percent). Despite not having dedicated local funding, Milwaukee remains above average in terms of vehicle revenue hours of public transit service per capita (0.95 hours per capita, compared to 0.76 hours per capita averages for both the midwest and the other metro areas). The other metro area transit systems that do not have dedicated local funding are at the bottom of transit service provided per capita, and provide considerably less transit service than Milwaukee County. The Milwaukee County Transit System operating expenses per capita ($110.63) are below the midwest average of $123.42 and the other areas average of $131.95.

6 METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: AIR QUALITY

Overview EPA sets National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for six common air pollutants, designating areas not meeting a particular standard as in “nonattainment.” EPA also classifies the level of severity of nonattainment, based on the parts per million of a particular pollutant, with classifications including marginal, moderate, serious, severe, and extreme. Historically, the Milwaukee metro area was in nonattainment for two air pollutants—ozone

and fine particulate matter (PM2.5). Currently, the Milwaukee metro area is in

attainment for PM2.5, and a portion of the Milwaukee area (Milwaukee and Ozaukee Counties) is classified as nonattainment-marginal for ozone.

Nonattainment areas for a particular standard must develop and implement a plan to meet the standard, or risk losing some forms of Federal funding. An implementation plan must demonstrate how an area will achieve or maintain a standard. Budgets are established for different types of emission sources at or below which the nonattainment or maintenance area will achieve or maintain the requisite standard. Once a nonattainment area demonstrates that it is consistently meeting the standard, EPA redesignates that area as in maintenance. Periodically, EPA reviews and promulgates new standards.

8 | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221 (2ND EDITION) It should be noted that many of the metro areas indicated in Table 62 as being in nonattainment or maintenance only have a portion of the metro area designated as such, with the remainder of the metro area in attainment.

• Ozone EPA recently updated the 2008 8-hour ozone standards with the 2015 8-hour ozone standards. Those areas that did not achieve attainment of the 2008 standards retain their nonattainment status for those standards. Nine of the metro areas within the midwest and 11 areas outside the midwest (including Milwaukee) were in attainment for the 2008 standards. Under the new 2015 standards, seven of the midwest metro areas and 11 of the other metros areas are in attainment. The Milwaukee area (Milwaukee and Ozaukee Counties) is classified as partial nonattainment-marginal under the 2015 standards. Of the metro areas in nonattainment for the 2015 standards, all are in marginal nonattainment except Columbus, which is in marginal maintenance, and Sacramento, which is in moderate nonattainment.

• PM2.5

EPA updated the 2006 PM2.5 standards—for which the Milwaukee area

was in maintenance—with the 2012 PM2.5 standards—for which the Milwaukee area is in attainment. Of the four midwest metro areas not in attainment under the 2006 standards, only the Cleveland area was designated nonattainment of and is now in maintenance status under the 2012 standards. All of the other metro areas currently meet the attainment standards.

7 PRINCIPAL CITY COMPARISONS

Overview Previous sections of this report compared the four-county Milwaukee metropolitan statistical area with other metropolitan statistical areas— each consisting of a cluster of one or more counties—in the midwest and throughout the nation. This section focuses on the principal cities of those respective metro areas. It provides a comparison of the City of Milwaukee and the principal cities of the other metro areas considered in this report.1

The comparisons of the City of Milwaukee with principal cities of other metro areas are presented in the last set of tables in this report. These comparisons cover many of the items previously examined at the metro area level. For many of these items, the City of Milwaukee’s ranking relative to other principal cities is similar to the metropolitan area rankings. Some of the more significant differences are noted in the following text.

1 The largest city in each metropolitan statistical area identified by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget is designated a “principal city.” Other cities within a metropolitan area may qualify as a principal city if they meet certain criteria regarding population size and employment. This section of the report generally provides comparative data for the largest principal city of the metro areas considered. It should be noted that, for the Minneapolis metropolitan area, data are provided for the Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul combined. For the Kansas City metropolitan area, data are provided for Kansas City, , and Kansas City, Kansas, combined. In keeping with data reporting by the U.S. Census Bureau, for the Indianapolis metropolitan area, data are provided for Indianapolis City (balance); for the Louisville metropolitan area, data are provided for Louisville/Jefferson County Metro Government (balance); and for the Nashville metropolitan area, data are provided for Nashville-Davidson Metropolitan Government (balance).

A COMPARISON OF THE MILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITS PEERS | 9 • Population Change (Table 64) The City of Milwaukee was one of six principal cities in the midwest and one of two principal cities in the remainder of the country that lost population between 2010 and 2018, although the population decreased by less than 1 percent. The Milwaukee metro area experienced a slight gain in population during that time.

• Minority Population (Table 66) The percentage of minority population in the City of Milwaukee (65.5 percent) is about double the percentage of the Milwaukee metro area. Among the principal cities outside the midwest, Milwaukee ranks sixth highest in minority population, while the metro area ranks near the bottom.

• Educational Attainment (Table 67) Compared to most other A relatively low proportion of adults in the City of Milwaukee have a principal cities of the degree beyond high school compared to other principal cities. In 2018, metro areas included 32.4 percent of adults age 25 or more in the City of Milwaukee had in this report, the City a degree beyond high school—ranking third lowest among principal of Milwaukee has lower cities in the midwest and second lowest among other principal cities. educational attainment The Milwaukee metro area ranked sixth among both the midwest and other metro areas. and per capita income. • Per Capita Income (Table 68) Per capita income in the City of Milwaukee is relatively low compared to other principal cities. Milwaukee’s per capita income of $23,439 in 2018 ranked fourth lowest among principal cities in the midwest and lowest among other principal cities. The Milwaukee metro area ranked sixth among both the midwest and other metro areas.

• Housing Values (Table 77) The median value of owner-occupied housing in the City of Milwaukee in 2018 ($126,300) ranked near the bottom among both principal cities in the midwest, where the average was $157,400, and other principal cities across the country, where the average was $238,100. The Milwaukee metro area ranked fourth in the midwest and eighth among other metro areas.

The final four tables of this report (Tables 86-89) identify differences that exist within each metropolitan area—specifically, differences between the principal city and the remainder of the metro area—focusing on educational attainment, per capita income, and poverty. Disparities identified within the Milwaukee metro area—between the City of Milwaukee and the remainder of the Milwaukee metro area—are among the largest in the midwest and across the country, as described below.

• Educational Attainment—Principal City vs. Remainder of Metro Area (Tables 86 and 87) The percentage of City of Milwaukee adults lacking a high school diploma or the equivalent was over three times the percentage for the remainder of the Milwaukee metro area in 2018. This is the largest such disparity among all metro areas considered.

The percentage of adults with a bachelor’s degree or higher was significantly higher for the remainder of the Milwaukee metro area than the percentage for the City of Milwaukee. Milwaukee’s disparity in this regard is the third largest among midwest metro areas and

10 | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221 (2ND EDITION) the largest among other metro areas across the country. In about half of the metro areas considered, the percentage of adults with a bachelor’s degree or higher for the principal city is actually higher than the percentage for the remainder of the metro area.

• Per Capita Income—Principal City vs. Remainder of Metro Area (Table 88) The disparities in In most metropolitan areas, the per capita income for the principal city education, income, and is lower than the per capita income for the remainder of the metro area. poverty between the As measured by the ratio of the per capita income for the remainder City of Milwaukee and of the metro area to the principal city’s per capita income, Milwaukee its suburbs are greater had the second largest such disparity in 2018 among the midwest than nearly all other metro areas and the greatest disparity among the other metro areas. metro areas. • Poverty—Principal City vs. Remainder of Metro Area (Table 89) In all metropolitan areas, the incidence of poverty is greater in the principal city than the remainder of the metro area. The disparity between the poverty rates for the City of Milwaukee and the remainder of the Milwaukee metro area is significantly larger than all the other metro areas considered.

8 COMPARISON TO PREVIOUS EDITION

This report is the second edition of the comparison of the Milwaukee metro area to its peers. The first edition presented data from 2000 to 2013; this edition presents data primarily from 2010 to 2018. While the numeric value and ranking of the Milwaukee area within most of the tables remained largely consistent between editions of this report, there were some significant changes.

Per capita income increased for almost all metro areas from 2010 to 2018; previously, almost all of the metro areas saw a decrease in per capita income from 2000 to 2013. In the Milwaukee area, the percent change in per capita income rose from below average among all metro areas for 2000 to 2013, to at or above average for 2010 to 2018. Milwaukee also saw a corresponding decrease in the percent and ranking of people in poverty.

Almost all of the metro areas, including Milwaukee, saw a decrease in the affordability of housing between 2013 and 2018. However, the Milwaukee area did not change in rank regarding the percent of recent home sales considered to be affordable to median-income families.

The unemployment rate fell for all metro areas and principal cities between 2013 and 2018 and Milwaukee’s ranking in this category improved.

The percentage of workers using public transit in the Milwaukee area decreased, from 3.6 percent to 2.6 percent. Correspondingly, households with zero vehicles available dropped from 18.3 percent to 16.4 percent in the City of Milwaukee and travel time delays increased from 28 annual hours of delay in 2011 to 46 annual hours in 2017 in the metro area. Annual congestion costs for auto commuters in the Milwaukee area also increased, from $585 to $864, raising the Milwaukee ranking from near bottom to the middle among the other metro areas.

A COMPARISON OF THE MILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITS PEERS | 11 9 SUMMARY

This comparison of the Milwaukee metro area to midwest and other peer metro areas across the nation indicates that during the 2010s, the Milwaukee area experienced slower growth in population, households, and jobs, compared to other metro areas, with only a few exceptions.

No significant differences were identified between the Milwaukee area and other metro areas with respect to population age, minority population, educational attainment, per capita income, and poverty levels. However, the Milwaukee area has greater differences than nearly all metro areas with respect to the differences between white and minority population education, per capita income, and poverty.

With respect to measures of transportation congestion—work commute travel time, travel time delay, and change in travel time delay over the last 35 years—the Milwaukee metro area performed better than most other metro areas. Compared to other metro areas, the Milwaukee metro area has a lower percentage of people commuting to work by carpool, but falls within the upper half of metro areas for biking, walking, and using transit to work. Despite a decrease in the percentage of workers using public transit since the previous edition of this report, only eight metro areas have a higher percentage of workers using public transit than Milwaukee.

Almost all of the metro areas have a dedicated local funding source for transit. The Milwaukee metro area has no local dedicated funding source and local funds cover only about 17 percent of public transit operating expenses not covered by farebox revenue. The Milwaukee area remains above average in terms of vehicle revenue hours of public transit service per capita. However, the Milwaukee area experienced a larger decline in transit ridership and a smaller increase in service levels than nearly all other metro areas, with many other metro areas actually experiencing an increase in ridership.

EPA sets National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for six common air pollutants, including two affecting the Milwaukee metro area—ozone and

fine particulate matter (PM2.5). A portion of the Milwaukee area (Milwaukee and Ozaukee Counties) and half of the midwest areas, along with three of the other metro areas, currently do not meet EPA’s ozone standards. All metro

areas meet EPA’s PM2.5 standard, except Cleveland, which is designated in maintenance status, meaning it consistently meets the standard but did not previously.

When focusing on the largest cities within the metro areas, the City of Milwaukee’s ranking relative to other principal cities is similar to the metro area rankings in many respects. Some of the notable differences are found with respect to population change (slight loss in the City of Milwaukee and slight gain in the Milwaukee metro area); educational attainment (lower proportion of adults with a degree beyond high school in the City of Milwaukee); per capita income (lower in the City of Milwaukee); and owner- occupied housing value (lower in the City of Milwaukee).

Disparities between the City of Milwaukee and the rest of the Milwaukee area in terms of educational attainment, per capita income, and poverty exceed the central city-suburban disparities in other metropolitan areas.

12 | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221 (2ND EDITION) TABLES

A COMPARISON OF THE MILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITS PEERS | 13 14 | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221 (2ND EDITION) Population Density(People perSquareMileofLandArea):2018 Table 3 Percent ChangeinPopulation: 2010-2018 Table 2 Total Population: 2018 Table 1 Source: U.S Bureau of the Census Annual Estimates of Population ofPopulation Estimates oftheCensusAnnual Source: Bureau U.S Note:Data pertain tothe urbanized primary areawithin the metropolitan area. Source: oftheCe Bureau U.S. Source: oftheCensus Bureau U.S. 12 12 15 Pittsburgh Pittsburgh 15 Nashville 14 Louisville 13 Cincinnati 12 Grand 11 Rapids Cleveland 10 Pittsburgh 15 14 Cleveland Buffalo 13 Chicago 12 St. 11 Louis Detroit 10 15 Grand Rapids 14 Buffalo 13 Louisville 11 Nashville 10 Indianapolis 5 9 8 Cincinnati 7 Louisville City Kansas 6 5 Grand Rapids 4 Minneapolis Indianapolis 3 2 Columbus 1 Nashville 9 Cleveland 8 Columbus Kansas City 7 6 Cincinnati 5 Pittsburgh 4 St. Louis 3 Minneapolis 2 Detroit 1 Chicago inaoi/t al ,1 3Sacramento 9 Indianapolis 8 St. Louis 7 Kansas City 6 Buffalo 2,818 4 Detroit 3 Minneapolis/St. 2 Columbus Paul 1 Chicago vrg ,5 Average Average 2,454 Average 4.4 Average Average Average 2,675,421 Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Areas Metro Midwest nsus DecennialCensus Annual Estimates of Population ofPopulation Estimates Annual 1,576,113 ,9,9 1Denver 9,497,790 ,8,4 6Providence 2Charlotte 2,189,442 4,326,442 ,4,1 2,142,419 ,0,2 4Portland 2,804,724 ,3,5 14 Birmingham 1,130,152 ,2,4 5Sacramento 2,324,743 ,6,0 15 Tucson 1,069,405 ,0,4 2,106,541 ,3,9 11 Memphis 1,932,099 ,2,9 3San Antonio 3,629,190 ,9,1 13 Salt Lake City 10 Raleigh 1,296,815 2,048,428 ,5,0 9Olhm iy 1,396,445 9Oklahoma City 2,057,009 2,547 2,547 1,921 14 Charlotte Charlotte 14 1,921 2,130 13 Raleigh Raleigh 13 2,130 2,281 10 Providence Providence 10 2,281 2,152 12 Richmond Richmond 12 2,152 ,0 4Portland 1Denver 2,807 3,538 1,894 15 Birmingham Birmingham 15 1,894 ,2 2Salt Lake City 3,024 2,227 11 Memphis Memphis 11 2,227 ,8 7Tucson 2,380 ,5 2,451 ,3 8Oklahoma City 2,330 2,317 9 Jacksonville 9Jacksonville 2,317 56 1Raleigh 15.6 08 2San Antonio 10.8 -0.5 13 Memphis Memphis 13 -0.5 -1.3 14 Providence Providence 14 -1.3 10 -1.0 1.3 1.3 8.5 3 Charlotte Charlotte 3 8.5 . 7Portland 3.5 0.6 11 Tucson Tucson 11 Richmond 10 0.6 0.7 6.6 6 Salt Lake City City Salt Lake 6 6.6 0.4 12 Birmingham Birmingham 12 0.4 8.1 5 Jacksonville 5 Jacksonville 4Denver 8.1 8.4 . 7Oklahoma City 4.9 A COMPARISON OFTHEMILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITSPEERS and Annual Estimates of Population Population of Estimates Annual and 5 San Antonio Antonio San 5 12 Richmond 9 Sacramento Sacramento 9

14 14 7 6 8 Jacksonville 8 Jacksonville Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Areas Other Metro

1,576,113 1,303,621 1,760,140 2,932,415 2,569,213 1,534,701 2,478,996 1,151,801 1,039,073 1,621,337 2,345,210 2,518,036 1,350,064 1,362,540 1,222,540 2,547 2,547 2,171 2,171 2,204 2,204 2,079 2,079 2,020 2,020 2,047 2,047 2,735 2,735 1,453 1,453 4,067 3,423 3,423 2,279 3,958 2,488 3,994 4,064 2,231 12.4 12.4 15.9 11.4 17.5 14.1 14.1 15.3 20.5 11.4 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.9 1.9 6.0 6.0 2.1 2.1 9.9 9.9 9.1 9.1 7.9 7.9 |

METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLDS 15 16 | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221(2ND EDITION) METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLDS Population MedianAge:2018 Table 4 Percent ofTotal Population UnderAge18:2018 Table 6 Percent ofTotal Population Age65andOver:2018 Table 5 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Average 22.6 Average Average 23.1 22.6 Average 15 Pittsburgh Pittsburgh 15 Buffalo 14 Cleveland 13 St. 11 Louis 11 Detroit Louisville 10 Columbus 15 Nashville 14 Indianapolis 13 Minneapolis 12 Grand 10 Rapids Chicago 10 Rapids Grand 14 Columbus 14 Nashville 13 Indianapolis 12 Minneapolis 11 Kansas 10 City 8 8 7 9 Chicago Chicago 9 Cincinnati 7 6 Louisville 5 St. Louis 4 Detroit 3 Buffalo 2 Cleveland Pittsburgh 1 9 Chicago 7 Nashville Cincinnati 6 5 Columbus Minneapolis 4 Grand 3 City Kansas Rapids 2 Indianapolis 1 Kansas 9 City Cincinnati 8 6 Louisville 5 Detroit 4 St. Louis 3 Buffalo 2 Cleveland Pittsburgh 1 vrg 56 Average 15.6 Average Average 38.5 Average Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community Survey nsus American Community nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community 37.9 37.9 23.0 23.0 15.6 13.3 14 Raleigh Raleigh 14 13.3 Oklahoma 13 City 36.5 22.3 10 Denver Denver 10 22.3 23.6 4 Oklahoma Oklahoma 4 City 23.6 20.2 14 Tucson Tucson 14 20.2 Raleigh 10 37.3 27 9Birmingham 22.7 21.1 13 Portland Portland 13 21.1 San 12 Antonio 14.0 20.0 1 Tucson Tucson 1 20.0 18.9 15 Providence Providence 15 18.9 22.1 12 Richmond Richmond 12 22.1 Charlotte 11 14.6 43.1 1 Providence Providence 1 43.1 23.3 6 Charlotte Charlotte 6 Salt 1 Lake 23.3 City 24.7 36.1 15 Salt Lake City City Salt Lake 15 36.1 80 38.0 36.7 12 Denver Denver 12 36.7 23.8 3 Memphis Memphis 3 23.8 Portland 8 15.1 13.7 13 Denver Denver 13 13.7 64 16.4 13.2 15 Salt 15 Lake City 13.2 San 14 Antonio 36.1 24.2 2 San Antonio Antonio San 2 24.2 3Birmingham 18.1 37.6 10 Memphis Memphis 10 37.6 37.7 9 Charlotte Charlotte 9 37.7 22.1 11 Jacksonville 11 Jacksonville 22.1 Oklahoma 10 City 14.6 14.9 9 Memphis Memphis 9 4Jacksonville 14.9 16.5 4Jacksonville 40.1 09 3Tucson 40.9 35 5Raleigh 23.1 23.5 96 4Richmond 39.6 92 6Portland 39.2 85 2Providence 18.5 14 2Birmingham 41.4 60 5Richmond 16.0 8 Sacramento Sacramento 8 8 Sacramento Sacramento 8 Sacramento 7

7 7 5 Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro

37.9 37.9 23.0 23.0 15.6 19.7 19.7 24.8 24.8 36.9 36.9 40.3 40.3 32.8 32.8 22.5 22.5 35.3 21.4 21.4 12.2 12.2 13.5 13.5 24.7 24.7 36.6 36.6 20.8 20.8 36.9 14.0 14.0 27.5 27.5 14.9 19.8 13.1 13.1 21.6 21.6 12.9 23.8 23.8 37.5 37.5 22.9 22.9 15.4 10.8 10.8 13.9 37.4 37.4 14.7 14.7 37.4 34.9 34.9 38.8 16.2 22.4 22.4 22.6 39.0 25.2 25.2 38.4 15.6 38.8 38.8 24.1 39.1 15.8 15.8 17.1 Black/African AmericanPopulation (Non-Hispanic) asPercent ofTotal Population: 2018 Table 9 White Population (Non-Hispanic)asPercent ofTotal Population: 2018 Table 8 Racial/Ethnic MinorityPopulation asPercent ofTotal Population: 2018 Table 7 Note: The minority population includes pers includes population minority The Note: Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source:

Average 14.1 Average 15.0 15.0 Average 14.1 Average Average 59.7 72.4 Average 13 13 15 Pittsburgh Pittsburgh 15 Cincinnati 14 Rapids Grand 13 Buffalo 12 Louisville 11 Minneapolis 10 15 Grand Rapids Rapids Grand 15 Pittsburgh 14 Minneapolis 13 Buffalo 12 Kansas 10 City Cincinnati 10 Chicago 15 Detroit 14 Cleveland 12 Indianapolis 11 Nashville 10 3 4 9 St. Louis 8 Kansas City 7 Columbus Nashville 6 5 Indianapolis Cleveland 4 2 Detroit 1 Chicago 9 Columbus 8 Kansas City 7 St. Louis Minneapolis 6 5 Louisville 4 Buffalo Rapids Grand 3 Cincinnati 2 Pittsburgh 1 9 Louisville Nashville 8 Indianapolis 7 6 Columbus 5 Chicago 3 St. Louis 2 Cleveland 1 Detroit race,than onerace. ormore as Black or African American, American Indian/Alaska Nati Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest vrg 2. 27.6 Average nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community Survey nsus American Community Survey nsus American Community 16.2 16.2 15.0 8 Oklahoma Oklahoma 8 City 15.0 11.8 12 Providence Providence 12 11.8 54 15.4 12.0 10 San 10 Antonio 12.0 21 1Memphis 22.1 81 3Birmingham 18.1 12.0 11 Denver Denver 11 12.0 55 6Raleigh 5Jacksonville 15.5 16.0 44 9Sacramento 14.4 93 2Richmond 19.3 33.8 33.8 66.2 66.2 28.0 6 Charlotte Charlotte 6 28.0 72.0 10 Charlotte Charlotte 10 72.0 30.5 4 Sacramento Sacramento 4 30.5 24.3 10 Oklahoma Oklahoma 10 City 24.3 69.5 12 Sacramento Sacramento 12 69.5 75.1 5 Oklahoma Oklahoma 5 City 75.1 23.0 23.0 71.6 11 Richmond Richmond 11 71.6 24.9 10 Denver Denver 10 24.9 75 1San Antonio 47.5 85.1 1 Providence Providence 1 85.1 21.6 13 Salt Lake City City Salt Lake Providence 15 13 14.9 21.6 66.1 14 Memphis Memphis 14 66.1 39 2Memphis 33.9 78.4 3 Salt Lake City City Salt Lake 3 78.4 79.0 2 Portland Portland 2 79.0 21.0 14 Portland Portland 14 21.0 64 9Birmingham 26.4 36 7Birmingham 73.6 70 77.0 52.5 15 San 15 Antonio 52.5 78 7Raleigh 27.8 22 9Raleigh 72.2 27.7 8 Jacksonville 8Jacksonville 27.7 72.3 8 Jacksonville 8Jacksonville 72.3 84 5Richmond 28.4 57 5Denver 75.7 ons reportedtheHi inasbeing of census 8.6 13 Tucson Tucson 13 8.6 8.1 14 Portland Portland 14 8.1 6.3 15 Salt Lake City City Salt Lake 15 6.3 A COMPARISON OFTHEMILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITSPEERS

4 Charlotte Charlotte 4 3Tucson 13 Tucson Tucson 13

ve, Asian, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, some other some other Islander, Hawaiian/Pacific Native Asian, ve, 12 12 7 4 Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee spanic origin and/or reporting their race and/orreporting their spanic origin Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Average 40.3 40.3 Average 16.2 16.2 10.1 10.1 22.1 22.1 28.3 47.0 20.9 20.9 29.2 19.2 33.8 33.8 66.2 66.2 43.1 43.1 25.4 25.4 74.6 74.6 28.9 28.9 48.3 48.3 71.1 71.1 51.7 51.7 39.5 39.5 63.7 63.7 27.4 27.4 60.5 60.5 72.6 72.6 36.3 36.3 57.0 57.0 36.3 36.3 51.3 51.3 33.5 33.5 36.5 63.5 48.7 66.5 43.0 56.9 63.7 37.5 37.5 62.5 62.5 39.2 60.8 1.8 1.8 5.2 5.2 2.8 2.8 3.3 3.3 6.4 6.4 5.4 5.4 6.8 |

METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLDS 17 18 | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221(2ND EDITION) METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLDS Asian Population (Non-Hispanic)asPercent ofTotal Population: 2018 Table 10 Percent ofTotal AdultPopulation withaDegreeBeyondHighSchool: 2018 Table 12 Hispanic Population (ofanyRace)asPercent ofTotal Population: 2018 Table 11 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Note:Data pertain to adults 25 years of age and over 15 Louisville Louisville 15 Detroit 14 Cleveland 13 Cincinnati 12 Indianapolis 11 Pittsburgh 15 St. 14 Louis Cincinnati 13 12 Columbus Detroit 11 Louisville 10 Louisville 15 Cleveland 14 Pittsburgh 13 St. 10 Louis Nashville 10 Rapids Grand 10 5 6 2 8 Kansas City 8 Cincinnati Indianapolis 6 6 Buffalo 4 Columbus 3 Detroit 2 Minneapolis 1 Chicago 9 Nashville Nashville 9 9 Grand Rapids St. 8 Louis City Kansas 6 Columbus 5 4 Chicago Pittsburgh 3 2 Buffalo 1 Minneapolis 9 Buffalo 7 Minneapolis 7 Cleveland 6 Indianapolis 5 Nashville Kansas 4 City Grand 3 Rapids 1 Chicago Average 7.0 Average 16.9 16.9 Average 7.0 Average 4.3 Average 3.6 Average Average 44.1 Average Average 43.6 44.1 Average Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Areas Metro Midwest nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community Survey nsus American Community nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community 10.9 10.9 24 1San Antonio 22.4 44.8 44.8 39.1 14 San 14 Antonio 39.1 41.4 13 Oklahoma Oklahoma 13 City 41.4 43.2 10 Providence Providence 10 43.2 42.9 11 Tucson Tucson 11 42.9 44.1 8 Sacramento Sacramento 8 Portland 3 44.1 45.8 42.3 12 Birmingham Birmingham 12 42.3 57 4Richmond 45.7 40.7 14 Memphis Memphis 14 40.7 45.1 5 Charlotte Charlotte 5 44.8 45.1 59 2Denver 45.9 43.2 9 Jacksonville 9Jacksonville 43.2 31 1Raleigh 53.1 3.9 3.9 2.1 15 Birmingham Birmingham 15 Providence 11 2.1 2.7 2.3 14 Memphis Memphis 14 2.3 . 1Sacramento 6.8 2.5 13 San 13 Antonio 2.5 2.7 2.7 . 3.3 2.7 12 Tucson Tucson 12 2.7 . 3Raleigh 4.6 . 5Salt Lake City 3.3 . 8Richmond 2.8 . 4Denver 4.4 . 2Portland 6.6 2.8 9 Jacksonville 9Jacksonville 2.8 5.0 10 Raleigh Raleigh 10 5.0 1.8 15 Birmingham Birmingham 15 Charlotte 11 1.8 4.6 3.3 13 Richmond Richmond 13 3.3 3.0 14 Memphis Memphis 14 3.0 9.7 3 Denver Denver 3 9.7 9.2 4 Sacramento Sacramento 4 9.2 . 5Salt Lake City 5.2 7.4 . 7Providence 6.0 . 8Portland 6.0 4.3 12 Jacksonville 12Jacksonville 4.3 . 6Oklahoma City 6.8 with an associate's, bachelor's, or graduatedegree. 10 Oklahoma City City Oklahoma 10 2Tucson 5 Charlotte Charlotte 5 6 Salt Lake City City SaltLake 6

7 6 9 Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Areas Other Metro 10.9 10.9 23.2 23.2 10.8 10.8 10.5 10.5 21.8 21.8 55.6 37.6 13.4 18.2 13.7 12.2 13.3 44.8 44.8 40.4 40.4 38.4 38.4 35.6 35.6 35.6 35.6 49.2 49.2 38.9 38.9 40.0 44.8 44.8 44.2 44.2 45.5 45.4 45.4 41.5 41.5 52.6 56.8 3.9 3.9 3.0 3.0 3.2 3.2 2.1 2.1 4.5 4.5 1.4 5.7 5.7 6.6 6.6 2.5 2.8 2.8 4.0 4.0 3.8 4.2 5.8 4.0 6.7 9.2 3.7 as TheirHighestLevelofEducation:2018 Percent ofTotal Degree AdultPopulation withaBachelor’s Table 14 Percent ofTotal AdultPopulation withaGraduateDegree:2018 Table 13 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Note:Data pertain to adults 25 years of age and over. Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Note:Data pertain to adults 25 years of age and over. 15 Louisville Louisville 15 Buffalo 14 Detroit 13 Cleveland 12 St. 11 Louis Cincinnati 10 Rapids Grand 15 Louisville 14 Indianapolis 13 Detroit 12 10 Nashville Cleveland 10 6 8 9 Cincinnati Cincinnati 9 Kansas 7 City Columbus 6 Pittsburgh 5 4 St. Louis 3 Minneapolis 2 Buffalo 1 Chicago 9 Pittsburgh 9 Pittsburgh Rapids Grand 8 Indianapolis 6 4 Nashville Chicago 4 Kansas 3 City 2 Columbus 1 Minneapolis Average 21.9 Average Average 22.0 21.9 Average Average 13.0 13.4 Average Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Areas Metro Midwest nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community 22.6 22.6 13.4 11.9 14 Memphis Memphis 14 Charlotte 10 11.9 12.8 18.3 15 San 15 Antonio 18.3 19.9 12 Providence Providence 12 19.9 18.8 14 Memphis Memphis 14 18.8 40 14.0 19.0 13 Tucson Tucson 13 19.0 Birmingham 13 Oklahoma 12 City 12.4 12.7 13.2 9 Sacramento Sacramento 9 13.2 26 22.6 20.8 10 Oklahoma Oklahoma 10 City 20.8 22.4 8 Salt Lake City City Salt Lake 8 9Jacksonville 21.5 22.4 20.6 11 Birmingham Birmingham 11 20.6 San Antonio 15 11.3 55 1Raleigh 15.5 12.8 11 Jacksonville 11Jacksonville 12.8 13.9 6 Salt 6 Lake City 13.9 13.6 6 Tucson Tucson 6 13.6 23.1 4 Charlotte Charlotte 4 23.1 38 2Denver 23.8 23.5 3 Portland Portland 3 23.5 42 4Richmond 2Denver 14.2 14.9 48 3Portland 14.8 31 5Richmond 23.1 78 1Raleigh 27.8 A COMPARISON OFTHEMILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITSPEERS 7 Sacramento Sacramento 7 8Providence

5 6 Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Areas Other Metro 13.4 13.4 22.6 22.6 19.1 19.1 10.6 10.6 22.1 22.1 17.8 17.8 11.9 11.9 11.0 11.0 10.0 10.0 18.5 18.5 11.3 19.4 19.4 19.3 19.3 12.1 12.1 24.9 24.9 17.5 17.5 22.2 22.2 13.1 13.1 13.1 13.1 24.2 24.2 11.4 11.4 14.7 16.5 12.8 28.3 20.2 20.2 23.5 17.7 15.1 30.3 |

METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLDS 19 20 | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221(2ND EDITION) METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLDS Percent ofTotal aHighSchoolDiplomaorEquivalent:2018 AdultPopulation Without Table 16 as TheirHighestLevelofEducation:2018 Percent ofTotal AdultPopulation withanAssociate’sDegree Table 15 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Note:Data pertain to adults 25 years of age and over. Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Note:Data pertain to adults 25 years of age and over. 15 Pittsburgh Pittsburgh 15 Minneapolis 14 Rapids Grand 13 St. 11 City Kansas Louis 11 10 Columbus Chicago 15 Nashville 14 Columbus 13 Kansas 12 City Indianapolis 11 Cincinnati 10 9 8 7 Cincinnati Cincinnati 7 7 Buffalo Cleveland 6 5 Detroit 4 Nashville 3 Louisville 2 Indianapolis 1 Chicago 9 Cleveland 7 Louisville 6 Detroit 5 St. Louis Grand 4 Rapids Pittsburgh 3 2 Minneapolis 1 Buffalo Average 8.9 Average 8.6 8.6 Average 8.9 Average Average 8.6 Average 10.3 10.3 Average 8.6 Average Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Areas Metro Midwest nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community 10.3 3 Salt Salt 3 Lake City 10.3 10 1San Antonio 11.0 22 1 Sacramento 12.2 00 4Tucson 10.0 02 2Providence 2Memphis 10.2 10.4 10.5 2 Jacksonville 2Jacksonville 10.5 8.8 8.8 8.5 8.5 9.1 6 Charlotte Charlotte 6 9.1 7.3 14 Richmond Richmond 14 7.3 5.6 15 Raleigh Raleigh 15 5.6 . 5Birmingham 9.8 . 7.6 8.6 8 Oklahoma Oklahoma 8 City 8.6 Charlotte 4 9.6 6.2 14 Portland Portland 14 6.2 Tucson 9 8.3 . 5Portland 9.0 9.3 7.8 12 Denver Denver 12 7.8 San 11 Antonio 8.0 7.5 13 Oklahoma Oklahoma 13 City 7.5 7.8 11 Salt Lake City City Salt Lake 11 7.8 Memphis 15 7.2 7.8 12 Denver Denver 12 7.8 . 9Providence 8.7 . 7Richmond 8.6 7.9 10 Jacksonville 10Jacksonville 7.9 . 6Raleigh 8.9 9 Sacramento Sacramento 9 8Birmingham

13 13 6 Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Areas Other Metro 10.6 10.6 10.4 10.4 10.3 10.3 11.0 14.9 10.5 11.7 12.1 12.1 8.8 8.8 9.3 9.3 9.5 9.5 7.3 7.3 7.2 7.2 7.8 8.5 9.2 7.7 7.7 8.1 8.1 8.6 9.9 8.5 8.8 9.8 8.5 8.5 7.6 7.6 7.9 7.9 8.7 8.6 8.6 9.3 Percent ofTotal Population BelowthePoverty Level:2018 Table 19 Percent ChangeinPer CapitaIncome:2010-2018 Table 18 Per CapitaIncome:2018 Table 17 Source: Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census American Community Survey Survey Community American Census ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Source: Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: inflation. for Adjusted Note: Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: 15 Minneapolis Minneapolis 15 City Kansas 14 Grand 13 Rapids Pittsburgh 12 Chicago 11 Indianapolis 15 Columbus 14 Minneapolis 13 Kansas 12 City Detroit 11 10 Nashville Rapids Grand 15 Louisville 14 Buffalo 13 Indianapolis 12 Detroit 11 Columbus 10 5 9 6 7 Cincinnati Cincinnati 7 7 Chicago 6 Louisville 5 Buffalo St. Louis 3 3 Cleveland Pittsburgh 2 Grand 1 Rapids 9 Cincinnati 8 Cleveland 7 Nashville Kansas 5 City 4 St. Louis 3 Pittsburgh 2 Chicago 1 Minneapolis 9 St. 9 Louis 9 Nashville 8 Cincinnati Indianapolis 7 Columbus 6 4 Louisville 3 Buffalo 2 Detroit 1 Cleveland Average 12.0 Average 12.5 12.5 Average 12.0 Average 3.9 Average 6.0 Average $33,892 Average $34,738 Average Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community Survey nsus American Community $35,106 $35,106 $32,095 14 Memphis Memphis 14 $32,095 $32,691 13 Tucson Tucson 13 $32,691 3,0 2 Portland $38,105 $32,723 12 Oklahoma Oklahoma 12 City $32,723 $31,769 15 San Antonio San Antonio 15 Birmingham 11 $31,769 $33,733 $33,830 10 Salt 10 Lake City $33,830 $35,354 5 Sacramento Sacramento 5 $35,354 3,6 4Richmond $35,569 3,7 7Providence $34,879 $34,173 9 Jacksonville 9Jacksonville $34,173 3,1 3Raleigh $35,911 3,5 8Charlotte $34,355 1Denver $40,772 13.2 13.2 21 12.1 11.6 2 Denver Denver 2 11.6 11.6 10 Richmond Richmond 10 11.6 10.8 12 Portland Portland 12 10.8 10.0 13 Raleigh Raleigh 13 10.0 12.9 6 Sacramento Sacramento 6 2Tucson 12.9 14.3 11.8 1 Portland Portland 1 11.8 11.2 11 Charlotte Charlotte 11 11.2 16 9Providence 8Jacksonville 11.6 11.8 37 3San Antonio 13.7 36 4Birmingham 1 Memphis 13.6 14.5 -1.7 15 Memphis Memphis 15 -1.7 5.8 5.8 2.8 13 Richmond Richmond 13 2.8 8.5 15 Denver Denver 15 8.5 Tucson 11 5.1 . 7Raleigh 6.6 6.6 8 San San 8 Antonio 6.6 9.7 14 Salt Lake City City Salt Lake 14 9.7 . 7.8 4.2 12 Charlotte Charlotte 12 4.2 . 5 Sacramento 7.1 5.4 10 Jacksonville 10Jacksonville 5.4 2.7 14 Birmingham Birmingham 14 2.7 . 3Salt Lake City 7.8 . 6Providence 6.8 A COMPARISON OFTHEMILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITSPEERS 5 Oklahoma City City Oklahoma 5

9 Oklahoma City City Oklahoma 9

6 7 4 Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro $35,106 $35,106 $28,016 $28,016 $27,969 $27,969 $29,410 $29,410 $30,902 $30,902 $35,194 $35,194 $33,158 $33,158 $30,642 $30,642 $35,443 $38,987 $42,116 $34,960 $34,639 $33,478 $38,365 13.2 13.2 14.1 14.1 11.3 11.3 13.3 11.2 11.2 12.2 12.2 16.2 15.4 12.1 14.4 18.8 12.8 12.8 11.4 11.4 10.1 -5.2 -5.2 -0.2 -0.2 -2.4 -2.4 5.8 5.8 8.8 8.8 8.9 8.9 9.8 8.0 8.0 0.6 0.6 3.9 3.9 0.4 0.4 4.0 4.0 5.5 4.2 4.5 2.8 |

METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLDS 21 22 | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221(2ND EDITION) METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLDS Infant MortalityRate(InfantDeathsper1,000LiveBirths):2018 Table 20 Average NumberofPeople perHousehold:2018 Table 21 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Prevention and Centers for Source: Disease Control Note: Ratesfor counties are witha population of least at 250,0 11 11 15 Pittsburgh Pittsburgh 15 Buffalo 14 Cleveland 13 St. 12 Louis Cincinnati 10 15 Minneapolis Minneapolis 15 Buffalo 14 Grand 13 Rapids Kansas 12 City Chicago 11 Pittsburgh 10 1 8 Louisville 8 Detroit 7 Kansas City 6 Columbus 4 Minneapolis 4 Indianapolis 3 Nashville Grand Rapids 2 1 Chicago 9 Nashville 8 Louisville 7 Indianapolis 6 St. Louis 5 Cleveland 4 Cincinnati 3 Columbus 2 Detroit vrg .9 Average 2.64 Average 2.49 vrg .3 Average 6.62 Average 6.73 (Chicago MSA); Westmoreland County, PA (Pittsburg fo the for available not Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community llowing counties with a 2018level of population at least 250,000: McHenry County, IL 2.44 8.91 .4 1Salt Lake City 2.64 4.76 14 Sacramento Sacramento 14 4.76 2.29 14 Tucson Tucson 14 2.29 6.37 10 Charlotte Charlotte 10 6.37 2.33 13 Providence Providence 13 2.33 4.74 15 Tucson Tucson 15 4.74 .3 2.23 .8 2Memphis 8.28 2.42 10 Richmond Richmond 10 2.42 .0 8Oklahoma City 2.50 2.48 10 Denver Denver 10 2.48 .9 4Richmond 7.79 4.77 13 Denver Denver 13 4.77 .6 6Memphis 2.56 .4 8.24 5.51 12 Portland Portland 12 Providence 11 5.51 5.90 .3 San Antonio 1 3Sacramento 2.59 2.63 .9 7Salt Lake City 7.09 7.20 6 Jacksonville 6Jacksonville 7.20 .0 9Birmingham 2.50 2.53 7 Jacksonville 7Jacksonville 5Charlotte 4Raleigh 2.53 2.57 2.57 .0 9Raleigh 8San Antonio 5Oklahoma City 6.60 6.94 7.78 h MSA); andPlacer County,CA(SacramentoMSA).

1Birmingham

00 personsrespective the within MSA's.were However,data 15 15 10 Portland Portland 10 3 Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro 2.44 8.91 2.52 2.52 2.56 2.56 4.28 4.28 5.03 5.27 3.92 3.92 2.51 2.51 4.22 4.22 5.61 5.61 2.56 2.56 2.56 2.56 2.61 8.27 9.83 9.74 2.58 2.76 3.01 3.01 6.57 2.63 2.64 6.92 6.00 7.53 2.65 2.62 7.19 Percent ofTotal FamilyHouseholdsHeadedbySingleParents: 2018 Table 23 Percent ofTotal FamilyHouseholds:2018 Table 22 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: mo one or are in there which those are households Family Note: 12 12 15 Minneapolis Minneapolis 15 Rapids Grand 14 Pittsburgh 13 Kansas 12 City Nashville 11 St. 10 Louis Cleveland 15 Buffalo 14 Pittsburgh 13 Detroit 11 Columbus 10 4 9 St. Louis Louisville 8 7 Minneapolis Cincinnati 6 5 Indianapolis Kansas 4 City Chicago 3 2 Nashville Rapids Grand 1 9 Indianapolis Indianapolis 9 Cincinnati 8 Louisville6 6 Chicago 5 Columbus 3 Buffalo 2 Detroit 1 Cleveland Average 26.4 Average Average 26.9 26.4 Average 64.9 Average 63.4 Average members that are related to the householder. householder. the to related are that members adoption. Non-family households includ Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Areas Metro Midwest nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community 28.1 28.1 61.8 64.1 8 Oklahoma Oklahoma 8 City 64.1 25.3 11 Birmingham Birmingham 11 25.3 Tucson 15 59.4 23.0 13 Raleigh Raleigh 13 23.0 95 59.5 26.7 9 Sacramento Sacramento 9 26.7 26.6 10 Charlotte Charlotte 10 26.6 Denver 13 59.9 26.8 8 Oklahoma Oklahoma 8 City 6San Antonio 26.8 27.4 21.8 14 Salt Lake City City Salt Lake 14 Portland 15 21.7 21.8 68.6 1 Salt Lake City City Salt Lake 1 68.6 62.8 11 Portland Portland 11 62.8 64.3 6 San San 6 Antonio 64.3 64.6 4 Sacramento Sacramento 4 64.6 62.9 10 Memphis Memphis 10 62.9 64.8 3 Charlotte Charlotte 3 64.8 76 5Tucson 27.6 24.7 12 Denver Denver 12 24.7 29.5 2 Jacksonville 2Jacksonville 29.5 37 9Richmond 5Jacksonville 63.7 64.4 74 27.4 42 7Birmingham 64.2 85 3Richmond 28.5 03 1 Memphis 30.3 62 2Raleigh 66.2 e those in which the householder lives and e those which alone do those not in which have the householder any A COMPARISON OFTHEMILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITSPEERS 4Providence Providence 12

re persons related to the househ 14 14 7 Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Areas Other Metro older by birth, , or 28.1 28.1 61.8 61.2 61.2 21.6 21.6 25.8 63.2 62.5 62.5 65.2 65.2 69.9 69.9 22.1 22.1 62.0 62.0 27.7 27.7 21.0 21.0 22.5 26.2 26.2 63.8 63.8 26.0 26.0 66.5 66.5 67.0 67.0 64.0 66.2 66.2 28.7 29.2 66.3 66.3 29.3 29.1 65.4 67.8 29.9 29.9 35.7 |

METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLDS 23 24 | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221(2ND EDITION) METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLDS Ratio of Minorities to Whites Without aHighSchoolDiploma:2018 Ratio ofMinoritiestoWhitesWithout Table 24 Ratio of Whites to Minorities with a Bachelor’s DegreeorHigher:2018 Ratio ofWhitestoMinoritieswithaBachelor’s Table 25 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Note: Ratio calculated by dividing the of percent white adults with a or degree bachelor's higher by percent of adults minority Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: adul minority of percent the dividing by calculated Ratio Note: 15 Pittsburgh Pittsburgh 15 Cincinnati 14 12 Detroit Columbus 12 Louisville 15 Detroit 14 12 Columbus Cincinnati 12 Pittsburgh 11 St. 10 Louis 2 1 1 Minneapolis 7 St. 7 Louis Nashville 7 7 Louisville 7 Indianapolis 7 Buffalo 6 Minneapolis 4 Kansas City Grand 4 Rapids 3 Chicago 2 Cleveland 9 Nashville 8 Indianapolis 7 Cleveland 6 Buffalo City Kansas 5 4 Chicago Rapids Grand 3 Average 3.0 Average 3.7 3.7 Average 3.0 Average Average 1.5 Average 1.6 1.6 Average 1.5 Average with a bachelor'sdegree or higher. white adults without a sc high Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Areas Metro Midwest nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community Survey nsus American Community hool equivalent.diploma or 4.5 4.5 2.0 2.0 1.4 10 Charlotte Charlotte 10 1.4 1.7 15 Birmingham Birmingham 15 1.7 1.1 13 Sacramento Sacramento 13 1.1 . 1San Antonio 1.7 3San Antonio 4.1 1.9 12 Charlotte Charlotte 12 Memphis 11 1.9 2.0 1.4 10 Oklahoma Oklahoma 10 City 1.4 Tucson 1 1.6 2.1 10 Oklahoma Oklahoma 10 City 2.1 4.3 4.3 1.2 13 Portland Portland 13 1.2 Providence 14 1.8 . 5Salt Lake City 5Memphis 1.4 1.6 5Portland 3.2 3.5 1.3 10 Raleigh Raleigh 10 1.3 1.3 13 Jacksonville 13Jacksonville 1.3 . 8Providence 1.4 7Sacramento 2.5 1.9 13 Jacksonville 13Jacksonville 1.9 . 8Birmingham 1.4 . 1Denver 6.0 . 1Denver 1.8 9Richmond 2.2 . 5Richmond 1.5 7Raleigh 2.6 3 Salt Lake City City Salt Lake 3

2 Tucson Tucson 2

ts without a high school diplom school high a without ts 5 1 Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Areas Other Metro a or equivalent by percent of percent by equivalent or a 4.5 4.5 2.0 2.0 4.7 4.7 1.9 1.9 2.5 2.5 1.3 1.3 1.6 1.6 1.4 1.4 2.4 2.4 1.3 1.3 2.8 1.4 1.4 2.0 2.0 4.7 4.9 4.9 4.5 1.4 1.4 3.1 3.7 1.7 8.1 1.5 1.7 1.7 2.0 2.0 1.3 1.5 3.7

Ratio ofMinoritiestoWhitesinPoverty: 2018 Table 27 Ratio ofWhitetoMinorityPer CapitaIncome:2018 Table 26 Note: Ratio calculated by dividing white per ca per white dividing by calculated Ratio Note: Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: perc the dividing by calculated Ratio Note: Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: 11 St. 11 Louis Pittsburgh 11 Nashville 11 Detroit 11 11 Cincinnati 15 Grand Grand 15 Rapids Nashville 14 Detroit 12 12 Columbus Cincinnati 11 Chicago 10 1 1 8 Louisville 8 Kansas City 8 Columbus 5 Indianapolis Grand 5 Rapids 5 Buffalo 3 Minneapolis 3 Cleveland 2 Chicago 8 Louisville City Kansas 8 6 Pittsburgh 6 Indianapolis 5 St. Louis 4 Cleveland 3 Minneapolis 2 Buffalo Average 1.8 Average 1.8 1.8 Average 1.8 Average Average 2.8 Average 2.4 2.4 Average 2.8 Average Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community ent of minority population in poverty by percent ofwhite population in poverty. 2.1 2.1 4.1 4.1 1.6 9 Richmond Richmond 9 1.6 2.2 14 Portland Portland 14 2.2 1.6 9 Sacramento Sacramento 9 1.6 1.8 2 Tucson Tucson 2 1.8 2.1 14 Sacramento Sacramento 14 2.1 . 7Salt Lake City 2Denver 1.7 2.0 1.6 9 Raleigh Raleigh 9 1.6 2.3 13 San 13 Antonio Birmingham 11 2.3 2.5 . 9Birmingham 1.7 1.6 15 Portland Portland 15 1.6 2.6 10 Tucson Tucson 10 2.6 . 2Memphis 2.7 3.5 . 5Charlotte 3.1 . 2San Antonio 1.8 . 7Providence 1.8 . 7Salt Lake City 4Providence 2.7 3.3 . 7Denver 2.8 2.3 11 Jacksonville 11Jacksonville 2.3 . 2 Memphis 1.9 1.6 9 Jacksonville 9Jacksonville 1.6 . 9Charlotte 1.7 . 5Richmond 2.8 . 2Oklahoma City 1.9 . 3Raleigh 3.4 pita income by minori by income pita A COMPARISON OFTHEMILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITSPEERS

7 Oklahoma City City Oklahoma 7

ty per capita income. ty per capita income. 1 1 Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro 2.1 2.1 4.1 4.1 2.1 2.1 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.9 1.9 2.3 2.3 1.5 1.5 2.0 2.0 2.2 2.2 1.9 2.6 2.6 1.7 1.9 2.3 1.7 1.8 3.0 1.8 2.1 1.9 2.3 2.7 1.7 1.9 2.8 |

METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLDS 25 26 | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221(2ND EDITION) METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: ECONOMY Total Employment(Jobs):2018 Table 28 Percent ChangeinLaborForce:2010-2018 Table 30 Percent ChangeinTotal Employment:2010-2018 Table 29 Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis Analysis of Economic Bureau U.S. Source: Analysis of Economic Bureau U.S. Source: Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics of Labor Bureau U.S. Source: 10 10 12 12 15 Buffalo Buffalo 15 14 Cleveland St.Louis 13 Chicago 12 Pittsburgh 11 Buffalo 15 Pittsburgh 14 Cleveland 13 St. 11 Louis Buffalo 15 Grand 14 Rapids Louisville 13 11 Cleveland Indianapolis 10 Average 4.5 Average 8.5 8.5 Average 4.5 Average 19.8 Average 15.1 Average 9 Nashville 9 Nashville 8 Cincinnati 7 Columbus Kansas City 6 5 Pittsburgh 4 St. Louis 3 Minneapolis 2 Detroit 1 Chicago 9 Cincinnati 8 Detroit City Kansas 7 6 Minneapolis 5 Louisville 4 Columbus Indianapolis 3 Grand Rapids 2 1 Nashville Cincinnati 9 9 Chicago Kansas 8 City 7 Minneapolis Louisville 6 5 Detroit 4 Indianapolis 3 Columbus Grand 2 Rapids 1 Nashville vrg ,5,8 Average 1,120,781 1,750,288 Average Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Local Area Unemployment Statistics Statistics Unemployment Area Local 1,067,853 1,355,155 10 Oklahoma Oklahoma 10 City 1,355,155 ,8,6 1Denver 6,186,561 ,9,1 8Salt Lake City 1,398,413 2Charlotte 2,628,870 ,0,9 7Providence 1,401,496 1,408,379 1,36 ,9,8 4San Antonio 1,797,783 ,0,2 5Sacramento 1,504,020 ,4,1 3Portland 2,546,419 ,5,1 11 Raleigh 1,351,016 829,070 13 Memphis Memphis 13 829,070 678,201 15 Tucson Tucson 15 678,201 734,356 14 Birmingham Birmingham 14 734,356 16.2 6 Salt 6 Lake City 16.2 11.7 3 Charlotte Charlotte 3 11.7 13.1 10 Oklahoma Oklahoma 10 City 13.1 31 9Richmond 13.1 Charlotte 2 26.5 13.8 8 Sacramento Sacramento 8 13.8 16.4 5 Jacksonville 5Jacksonville 3Denver 16.4 19.5 27 San Antonio 2 12.7 50 7Portland 15.0 87 4 San Antonio 18.7 88 1Raleigh 18.8 1Raleigh 32.8 -5.4 14 Providence Providence 14 -5.4 13 -1.3 -1.6 0.9 0.9 8.8 8.7 13 Memphis Memphis 13 8.7 0.2 11 Tucson Tucson 11 0.2 Tucson 14 8.2 . 8Portland 3.5 . 6.9 9.3 11 Providence Providence 11 9.3 . 9Richmond 1.8 4.8 7 Oklahoma City City Oklahoma 7 4Denver 4.8 7.6 0.1 12 Birmingham Birmingham 12 0.1 . 5Salt Lake City 7.1 7.0 6 Jacksonville 6Jacksonville 7.0 6,725 9 Jacksonville 9Jacksonville 6,725 14 Memphis Memphis 14

10 Sacramento Sacramento 10 Birmingham 12

12 12 15 12 Richmond Richmond 12 6 Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro 1,067,853 1,638,822 2,094,120 1,488,836 1,384,512 1,613,028 863,932 863,932 669,420 669,420 527,392 527,392 889,459 864,428 864,428 935,281 946,278 953,646 874,705 11.0 11.0 25.0 25.0 11.9 11.9 29.7 29.7 15.3 15.3 10.6 10.6 16.8 16.8 11.4 11.4 21.8 21.8 17.2 15.7 27.9 26.2 16.9 20.5 31.2 23.4 25.2 25.2 13.5 11.0 11.0 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 0.9 0.9 8.8 1.6 1.6 9.3 9.3 0.9 0.9 4.4 4.4 7.5 8.7 Percent ChangeinGrossDomesticProduct:2010-2018 Table 32 Gross DomesticProduct(inmillionsofdollars):2018 Table 31 Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis Analysis of Economic Bureau U.S. Source: inflation. for Adjusted Note: Analysis of Economic Bureau U.S. Source: Note: The metropolitan area gross domestic product is the market 13 13 12 12 15 St. 15 Louis Buffalo 14 Indianapolis 12 Cleveland 11 Chicago 10 15 Grand Grand 15 Rapids Buffalo 14 Louisville 13 11 Columbus Nashville 10 Average 15.9 Average 22.9 22.9 Average 15.9 Average Average 177,361 Average 108,745 108,745 Average 177,361 Average 9 Cincinnati 9 Cincinnati Louisville 8 Pittsburgh 7 Kansas 6 City Minneapolis 5 4 Detroit 3 Columbus Grand 2 Rapids 1 Nashville 9 Kansas City 8 Cleveland 7 Indianapolis Cincinnati 6 5 Pittsburgh 4 St. Louis 3 Minneapolis 2 Detroit 1 Chicago in a year. Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest 103,732 103,732 132,202 10 Raleigh Raleigh 10 132,202 4,5 141,053 8,6 1Denver 689,465 6,3 2Charlotte 267,731 3,0 9Richmond 132,704 6,3 4Sacramento 169,839 4,6 7Salt Lake City 140,762 5,4 5San Antonio 152,841 3,7 8Providence 134,370 2,2 129,328 6,9 3Portland 263,691 72,094 13 Memphis Memphis 13 72,094 68,990 14 Birmingham Birmingham 14 68,990 61,615 15 Tucson Tucson 15 61,615 14.7 8 Sacramento Sacramento 8 14.7 11.3 11 Richmond Richmond 11 11.3 19.9 5 Oklahoma Oklahoma 5 City 19.9 15.2 7 Salt 7 Lake City 15.2 10 4Portland 21.0 23.4 2 Raleigh Raleigh 2 23.4 15.7 6 Charlotte Charlotte 6 15.7 13.3 10 Birmingham Birmingham 10 13.3 24 3Denver 22.4 14.6 9 Jacksonville 9Jacksonville 14.6 68 1San Antonio 36.8 9.3 9.3 . 6.2 4.7 15 Providence Providence 15 Tucson 12 4.7 9.6 A COMPARISON OFTHEMILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITSPEERS 13 Memphis Memphis 13

value of all final goods and services produced in the area 14 14 11 Jacksonville 11 Jacksonville 12 Oklahoma City City Oklahoma 12 6 Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro 103,732 103,732 169,863 214,158 145,480 133,634 164,420 76,749 76,749 83,666 83,666 44,876 44,876 81,017 81,017 62,881 62,881 83,187 83,187 85,793 94,307 87,415 32.0 32.0 13.0 13.0 27.7 27.7 37.5 27.0 27.0 13.3 13.3 28.7 28.7 32.5 33.0 41.4 22.6 22.6 9.3 9.3 6.7 6.7 9.5 9.5 9.9 9.9 |

METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: ECONOMY 27 28 | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221(2ND EDITION) METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: ECONOMY Gross DomesticProductPer Capita:2018 Table 33 Percentage Point ChangeinManufacturing ShareofTotal Employment:2010-2018 Table 35 Percent ManufacturingShareofTotal Employment:2018 Table 34 Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis Analysis of Economic Bureau U.S. Source: Analysis of Economic Bureau U.S. Source: of “place on estimatesbased product are domestic Gross Note: Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis Analysis of Economic Bureau U.S. Source: 11 11 14 Indianapolis Indianapolis 14 Chicago 13 Pittsburgh 12 City Kansas 10 Columbus 14 Kansas 13 City Pittsburgh 12 11 Nashville Chicago 10 Louisville 15 Rapids Grand 14 St. 13 Louis 12 Buffalo Columbus 11 Detroit 10 Average $64,248 Average $60,767 $60,767 Average $64,248 Average Average 0.2 Average -0.2 -0.2 Average 0.2 Average 5.6 Average 8.7 Average -- St. Louis -- St. Louis 5 2 9 Kansas City City Kansas 9 8 Cincinnati 7 Cleveland 6 Pittsburgh 4 Nashville 3 Indianapolis 2 Chicago 1 Minneapolis 8 Columbus 8 Cleveland Minneapolis 6 6 Buffalo 5 Nashville 4 Cincinnati 3 Louisville Grand 2 Rapids 1 Detroit 9 Indianapolis 8 Buffalo Minneapolis 7 6 Cincinnati 5 Cleveland 4 Louisville Detroit 3 Rapids Grand 1 “place of residence.” residence.” “place of Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest $65,815 $65,815 $55,593 15 Tucson Tucson 15 $55,593 $61,883 10 Memphis Memphis 10 $61,883 7,9 2Denver $72,592 $57,616 14 San Antonio San Antonio 14 $57,616 $60,555 13 Providence Providence 13 12 $60,555 $61,045 $61,941 9 Oklahoma City City Oklahoma 9 $61,941 $61,394 11 Birmingham Birmingham 11 $61,394 6,2 8Raleigh $64,424 6,1 3Portland 1Salt Lake City $68,717 $72,658 6,2 7Sacramento 6 Richmond 4Charlotte $65,323 $65,745 $68,424 -0.4 -0.4 11.5 11.5 01 6Sacramento -0.1 02 9 Charlotte -0.2 -0.5 11 Richmond Richmond 11 -0.5 -0.1 6 Tucson Tucson 6 -0.1 -0.3 -0.3 -0.6 13 Salt 13 Lake City -0.6 02 8San Antonio -0.2 -0.7 -- Denver --Denver -0.7 N/A -- Providence --Providence N/A 68 16.8 10.3 3 Charlotte Charlotte 3 10.3 N/A -- Providence --Providence N/A . 3Oklahoma City Birmingham 2 1Raleigh 0.3 1.7 1.9 . 3Portland 3Jacksonville 0.0 1.4 6.1 11 San 11 Antonio 6.1 . 6Memphis 8.9 5.8 13 Sacramento Sacramento 13 Richmond 10 5.8 7.0 6.5 11 Jacksonville 11Jacksonville 6.5 . 4Salt Lake City 9.9 . 5Birmingham 9.5 5.6 -- Denver -- Denver 5.6 . 8Raleigh 8.0 . 9Oklahoma City Tucson 7 7.1 8.2

2Portland 11 Memphis Memphis 11

work performance” and population estimates are based on estimatespopulationbased are and performance” work 5 9 1 Jacksonville Jacksonville Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro $65,815 $65,815 $43,189 $43,189 $56,849 $56,849 $53,071 $53,071 $53,915 $58,016 $58,016 $54,594 $54,594 $73,031 $54,204 $61,404 $65,811 $66,115 $66,325 $62,033 $77,140 -0.4 -0.4 11.5 11.5 -0.2 -0.5 -0.5 -0.1 -0.2 -0.2 -0.1 -0.4 -0.6 -0.6 -0.3 -0.5 -0.5 -0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.0 0.0 0.1 7.2 7.2 3.7 3.7 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 8.6 5.4 4.1 3.7 5.8 6.5 4.5 5.3 5.3 Unemployment Rate:2018 Table 37 Percent ofGrossDomesticProductRelated toManufacturing:2018 Table 36 Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics of Labor Bureau U.S. Source: Analysis of Economic Bureau U.S. Source: 11 11 14 Nashville Nashville 14 Minneapolis 14 Grand 13 Rapids Indianapolis 11 Pittsburgh 13 Columbus 12 10 Nashville Kansas 10 City Average 3.7 Average 3.5 3.5 Average 3.7 Average 11.4 Average 14.8 Average - St.Louis -- Louisville -- 4 9 Buffalo 8 Chicago Cleveland 7 6 Minneapolis Cincinnati 5 3 Detroit Indianapolis 2 Grand 1 Rapids 9 St. 9 Louis 9 Kansas City 8 Columbus 7 Louisville Cincinnati 5 5 Chicago 3 Pittsburgh 3 Detroit 2 Buffalo 1 Cleveland Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Areas Metro Midwest Local Area Unemployment Statistics Statistics Unemployment Area Local N/A -- Denver Denver -- N/A N/A -- Providence Providence -- N/A 17.1 17.1 14.9 7 Salt 7 Lake City 14.9 25 8San Antonio Charlotte 5 12.5 15.6 21.5 88 3Memphis 18.8 10.2 12 Sacramento Sacramento 12 11Jacksonville 10.2 10.4 24.4 1 Portland Portland 1 24.4 10.4 10 Birmingham Birmingham 10 10.4 19 9Richmond 11.9 51 6Tucson 15.1 3.2 3.2 2.7 15 Salt 15 Lake City 2.7 3.4 10 San 10 Antonio 3.4 2.7 14 Oklahoma Oklahoma 14 City 2.7 . 5Sacramento 4.0 3.0 11 Richmond Richmond 11 3.0 4.0 6 Charlotte Charlotte 6 2Providence 4.0 4.3 3.2 11 Denver Denver 11 3.2 . 8Raleigh 3.4 . 4 Portland 4.3 . 2Memphis 4.6 3.8 8 Jacksonville 8Jacksonville 7Birmingham 3.8 3.9 . 1Tucson 5.1 9.6 13 Oklahoma Oklahoma 13 City 9.6 A COMPARISON OFTHEMILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITSPEERS 4Raleigh

11 11 2 Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Areas Other Metro N/A N/A N/A N/A 17.1 17.1 10.3 10.3 17.8 12.5 12.5 13.6 14.6 11.9 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.0 3.0 3.2 3.2 3.1 3.1 3.6 3.6 3.7 3.3 3.3 4.1 3.5 3.9 3.4 4.1 4.5 3.4 4.9 4.9 9.2 9.2 9.4 5.4 5.4 9.3 6.1 |

METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: ECONOMY 29 30 | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221(2ND EDITION) METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: HOUSING Percent ChangeinHousingUnits:2010-2018 Table 38 Median Value HousingUnits:2018 ofOwner-Occupied Table 40 Multifamily HousingasPercent ofTotal HousingUnits:2018 Table 39 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Source: oftheCe Bureau U.S. Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: of estimate respondent's ACS the upon based are Values Note: 11 11 15 Buffalo Buffalo 15 Cleveland 14 Pittsburgh 13 Indianapolis 12 Cincinnati 11 Louisville 10 Grand 15 Rapids Louisville 14 St. 13 Louis Detroit 12 Kansas 11 City Pittsburgh 10 Louisville 15 Cleveland 14 Detroit 13 Chicago 12 St. 10 Louis Average 6.8 Average 11.5 11.5 Average 6.8 Average Average $196,000 Average Average $259,200 $196,000 Average Average 31.5 32.7 Average 4 2 9 Buffalo 8 Cincinnati Pittsburgh 7 City Kansas 6 5 Minneapolis 4 Columbus 3 Indianapolis 2 Nashville Grand 1 Rapids 9 Detroit 9 Detroit St.Louis 8 Grand 7 Rapids Kansas 6 City Columbus 5 Chicago 3 Nashville 2 Minneapolis 1 Indianapolis 9 8 Nashville Cincinnati 7 6 Cleveland 5 Columbus Buffalo 4 3 Minneapolis 1 Chicago would sell forit weresale. if for Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Areas Metro Midwest nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community nsus DecennialCensus nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community $222,100 $222,100 $178,500 10 Charlotte Charlotte 10 $178,500 $261,900 2 Sacramento Sacramento 2 $261,900 $158,000 14 Oklahoma Oklahoma 14 City $158,000 $155,500 15 Memphis Memphis 15 $155,500 $270,600 1 Denver Denver 1 $270,600 $160,300 13 Birmingham Birmingham 13 $160,300 $189,500 7 Richmond Richmond 7 $189,500 $169,200 12 San 12 Antonio Tucson 11 $169,200 $173,500 1070 $180,700 $196,000 6 Raleigh Raleigh 6 Providence 5 $196,000 $196,700 $180,300 9 Jacksonville 9Jacksonville $180,300 Portland 3 $247,800 31.2 1 Charlotte Charlotte 1 31.2 45 3Denver 14.5 00 2Raleigh 20.0 44.8 44.8 26.6 14 Oklahoma Oklahoma 14 City 26.6 37.6 4 Salt 4 Lake City 37.6 28.8 10 Memphis Memphis 10 28.8 29.1 9 Sacramento Sacramento 9 29.1 26.9 13 Charlotte Charlotte 13 26.9 31.8 7 Tucson Tucson 7 31.8 25.5 15 Birmingham Birmingham 15 San 12 Antonio 25.5 27.2 60 5Portland 36.0 29.4 8 Jacksonville 8Jacksonville 29.4 46.8 28.4 11 Richmond Richmond 11 28.4 78 3Denver 37.8 38 6Raleigh 33.8 1.7 1.7 0.5 15 Richmond Richmond 15 0.5 2.5 7 Oklahoma Oklahoma 7 City 2.5 0.8 13 Providence Providence 13 0.8 . 1.4 2.1 10 Memphis Memphis 10 2.1 3.9 6 San Antonio Antonio San 8 Tucson 6 2.3 3.9 . 9 Sacramento 2.2 1.6 12 Salt 12 Lake City 1.6 . 5Portland 7.8 9.7 4 Jacksonville 4Jacksonville 9.7 and Annual Estimates of Housing Units Units Housing of Estimates Annual and 4 Salt Lake City City SaltLake 4 2Providence

how much the property (house property much the how 13 13 11 Birmingham 1 8 Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Areas Other Metro and lot or condominium unit) unit) or condominium lot and $222,100 $222,100 $160,900 $160,900 $157,700 $157,700 $169,400 $169,400 $215,500 $215,500 $415,700 $415,700 $420,600 $246,100 $246,100 $288,700 $288,700 $182,000 $182,000 $198,100 $329,200 $329,200 $397,500 $397,500 $267,600 $267,600 $217,200 $217,200 42.2 42.2 10.8 17.6 44.8 44.8 28.1 28.1 21.4 21.4 22.7 22.7 35.2 35.2 29.9 29.9 26.7 26.7 29.0 29.0 25.7 25.7 27.8 27.8 44.7 34.6 29.6 29.6 40.4 32.4 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 7.5 7.5 0.7 0.7 4.4 4.4 3.9 3.9 4.1 4.5 5.0 8.1 9.0 9.5 Percent ofHomeSalesAffordabletoMedian-Income Families:2018 Table 43 :2018 Median SalesPriceofSingle-Family Table 42 Median GrossRentHousing:2018 ofRenter-Occupied Table 41 Source: NationalAssociation Realtors of Association National Source: Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: fuels. and of utilities cost the includes rent Gross monthly Note: 10 10 14 Chicago Chicago 14 Columbus 13 City Kansas 12 Detroit 10 Buffalo 13 Cleveland 12 Cincinnati 11 St. 10 Louis Cleveland 15 Buffalo 14 Pittsburgh 13 Louisville 11 Cincinnati 11 Grand 10 Rapids Average 77.2 Average Average 61.5 77.2 Average Average $274,100 $205,500 Average $1,061 Average $922 Average -- Pittsburgh -- Pittsburgh -- Detroit -- Nashville -- Nashville 4 9 9 Louisville Indianapolis 8 Grand 7 Rapids Columbus 6 Kansas 5 City Chicago 3 Nashville 2 Minneapolis 1 St. 8 Louis 7 Indianapolis Detroit 6 Columbus 5 City Kansas 4 3 Nashville Minneapolis 2 1 Chicago 9 Minneapolis 8 Louisville Grand 7 Rapids Cincinnati 6 5 Buffalo St. Louis 2 Pittsburgh 2 2 Cleveland Indianapolis 1 Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest of Home Builders/Wells Fargo Builders/WellsFargo Home of nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community $250,300 $250,300 $153,300 12 Tucson Tucson 12 $153,300 $260,500 2 Portland Portland 2 $260,500 $152,800 13 Birmingham Birmingham 13 $152,800 $273,400 1 Denver Denver 1 $273,400 $194,600 7 Richmond Richmond 7 $187,100 $194,600 $177,500 10 Charlotte Charlotte 10 $177,500 $174,300 11 San 11 Antonio $174,300 $180,100 9 Jacksonville 9Jacksonville $180,100 $201,800 6 Raleigh Raleigh 6 $201,800 $259,400 3 Sacramento Sacramento 3 $259,400 $206,500 5 Providence Providence 5 $206,500 $1,090 2 Sacramento Sacramento 2 $1,090 110 1Denver $1,110 101 3Portland $1,081 73.1 73.1 78.6 6 Tucson Tucson 6 Birmingham 3 78.6 Oklahoma 1 City 82.1 87.5 81.5 6 Charlotte Charlotte 6 81.5 73.1 11 San 11 Antonio 73.1 76.5 8 Jacksonville 8Jacksonville 76.5 21 82.1 72.5 13 Denver Denver 13 72.5 73.0 12 Salt Lake City City Salt Lake 12 73.0 17 5Memphis 81.7 62.6 14 Portland Portland 14 62.6 49 9Providence 74.9 21 2Richmond 82.1 N/A 15 Sacramento Sacramento 15 N/A $884 $884 $804 15 Oklahoma Oklahoma 15 City Birmingham 12 $804 $850 $832 13 Tucson Tucson 13 $832 89 $809 $891 8 Charlotte Charlotte 8 Richmond 6 $891 $927 $850 11 Memphis Memphis 11 $850 $947 5 Raleigh Raleigh 5 $947 $878 10 Providence Providence 10 $878 $968 4 Salt Lake City City Salt Lake 4 $968 $907 N/A 15 Oklahoma Oklahoma 15 City N/A N/A 14 Memphis Memphis 14 N/A A COMPARISON OFTHEMILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITSPEERS San Antonio 9 4 Salt Lake City City SaltLake 4 10 Raleigh Raleigh 10 7 Jacksonville 7Jacksonville

14 14 4 8 Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro $250,300 $250,300 $223,000 $223,000 $177,900 $177,900 $395,700 $395,700 $292,500 $292,500 $449,900 $449,900 $207,300 $207,300 $258,800 $258,800 $159,500 $159,500 $228,100 $228,100 $331,700 $331,700 $241,500 $241,500 $283,600 $283,600 $365,000 $365,000 $247,000 $247,000 $1,100 $1,100 $1,332 $1,332 $1,133 $1,133 $1,042 $1,042 $1,128 $1,128 $1,002 $1,388 $1,082 $1,082 $1,323 73.1 73.1 33.9 33.9 80.1 80.1 74.7 74.7 56.5 56.5 66.2 66.2 61.6 61.6 66.2 66.2 54.5 54.5 44.3 44.3 36.0 36.0 65.5 65.5 68.8 76.4 65.0 $884 $884 $956 $956 $892 $892 $879 $879 $893 $893 $887 $887 |

METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: HOUSING 31 32 | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221(2ND EDITION) METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: TRANSPORTATION Average Travel TimetoWork inMinutes:2018 Table 44 Percent ofTotal Workers Who CarpooltoWork: 2018 Table 46 Percent ofTotal Workers WhoDrivetoWork Alone:2018 Table 45 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: 10 10 13 13 13 15 Buffalo Buffalo 15 St. 14 Louis Kansas City 12 Cleveland 11 Chicago 15 Pittsburgh 14 Minneapolis 13 Nashville 12 Columbus 11 Buffalo 15 Rapids Grand 14 Kansas 12 City Louisville 10 Columbus 10 Average 25.2 Average Average 25.8 25.2 Average Average 8.1 Average 9.2 9.2 Average 8.1 Average Average 79.3 80.7 Average 9 Cleveland Cincinnati 8 7 Indianapolis 6 Minneapolis 5 St. Louis 4 Pittsburgh Detroit 3 Nashville 2 1 Chicago 9 Indianapolis 9 Chicago 8 Minneapolis 6 Columbus 6 Cincinnati Pittsburgh 5 4 Louisville 3 Detroit Grand Rapids 2 1 Nashville 8 Cleveland Cincinnati 8 7 Grand Rapids 6 Buffalo 5 Louisville 4 Detroit Indianapolis 3 2 St. Louis Kansas 1 City Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community Survey nsus American Community nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community 23.0 23.0 81.5 81.5 28.1 1 Sacramento Sacramento 1 28.1 80.9 12 Sacramento Sacramento 12 80.9 Richmond 11 23.8 21.6 14 Salt 14 Lake City 21.6 77.4 13 Denver Denver 13 77.4 76.6 14 Salt 14 Lake City 76.6 27.3 3 Charlotte Charlotte 3 27.3 83.4 3 Oklahoma Oklahoma 3 City 83.4 81.6 8 Charlotte Charlotte 8 81.6 22.1 14 Oklahoma City City Oklahoma 14 22.1 26.8 4 Jacksonville 4Jacksonville 26.8 22 1Denver 32.2 24.9 8 San San 8 Antonio 4Portland 24.9 26.2 36 2Birmingham 83.2 83.6 81.3 11 Tucson Tucson 11 81.3 Tucson 10 23.8 23.5 12 Memphis Memphis 12 23.5 83.8 1 Memphis Memphis 1 83.8 69.8 15 Portland Portland 15 69.8 45 9Providence 7Birmingham 24.5 25.4 22 5Providence 82.2 21 6Richmond 82.1 82.0 7 Jacksonville 7Jacksonville 82.0 16 8San Antonio 81.6 55 4Raleigh 25.5 7.5 7.5 7.9 11 Richmond Richmond 11 7.9 8.3 5 Sacramento Sacramento 5 8.3 . 8Oklahoma City 8.0 . 6.8 . 3Tucson 8.6 . 6Memphis 8.2 6.9 14 Denver Denver 14 6.9 . 1Salt Lake City 9.2 . 7Raleigh 8.2 7.8 . 8Portland 8.0 9.1 . 8Birmingham 8.1 . 4Charlotte 8.5 12 Jacksonville 12Jacksonville 12 Providence Providence 12

10 Raleigh Raleigh 10 San Antonio 2

13 13 15 15 4 Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro 10.0 11.2 12.0 23.0 23.0 81.5 81.5 75.0 75.0 22.9 22.9 25.0 28.0 28.0 82.9 82.9 76.6 76.6 22.9 24.2 86.1 86.1 27.4 74.5 74.5 79.0 79.0 79.2 79.2 70.4 70.4 76.8 76.8 25.3 84.8 26.6 26.6 26.9 28.0 80.3 80.3 81.2 26.9 26.9 26.8 81.3 79.2 26.0 26.9 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 8.7 8.7 9.2 9.2 8.2 8.2 8.8 8.5 8.8 9.0 8.8 9.4 8.9 Percent ofTotal Workers Who Walk to Work: 2018 Table 49 Percent ofTotal Workers WhoBike toWork: 2018 Table 48 Percent ofTotal Workers WhoTake PublicTransportation toWork: 2018 Table 47 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: 15 Kansas Kansas 15 City Louisville 13 Indianapolis 13 Detroit 12 Nashville 11 10 St. Louis Nashville 15 St. 10 Louis Kansas 10 City Indianapolis 10 Detroit 10 Cincinnati 10 Nashville 15 Kansas 13 City Indianapolis 13 Detroit 12 Rapids Grand 11 Average 2.1 Average 1.9 1.9 Average 2.1 Average 0.6 Average 0.3 Average 2.1 Average 2.9 Average 5 3 6 7 Pittsburgh Louisville7 7 Columbus Rapids Grand 4 4 Cleveland 4 Buffalo 2 Chicago 1 Minneapolis Louisville 8 8 Columbus Cincinnati 8 7 St. Louis 5 Cleveland 4 Buffalo 3 Minneapolis 2 Pittsburgh 1 Chicago 9 Cleveland Grand Rapids 6 Columbus 6 Cincinnati 6 4 Minneapolis 3 Chicago 2 Buffalo 1 Pittsburgh Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community Survey nsus American Community Survey nsus American Community 21 1Portland 12.1 2.3 2.3 0.5 1.5 11 Charlotte Charlotte 11 1.5 0.1 15 Birmingham Birmingham 15 0.1 1.3 14 Birmingham Birmingham 14 1.3 1.3 13 Raleigh Raleigh 13 1.3 1.4 11 Richmond Richmond 11 1.4 . 2Tucson 0.7 0.4 0.4 . 3Denver 2.8 0.2 13 Raleigh Raleigh 13 Oklahoma 9 City 0.2 0.2 2.2 6 Oklahoma Oklahoma 6 City 2.2 . 2Providence 3.0 0.2 9 Providence Providence 9 0.2 . 1 Portland 3.4 0.2 13 Charlotte Charlotte 13 0.2 2.2 6 Tucson Tucson 6 2.2 1.2 14 Memphis Memphis 14 1.2 1.8 10 Jacksonville 10Jacksonville 1.8 . 9Memphis 4Denver 0.3 0.3 0.4 . 1Portland 0.8 2.2 . 9Sacramento 1.9 2.4 0.3 7 Jacksonville 7Jacksonville 0.3 0.2 9 San San 9 Antonio 0.2 . 5Richmond 0.4 2.6 2.6 1.7 10 Charlotte Charlotte 10 1.7 0.8 14 Oklahoma Oklahoma 14 City 0.8 1.3 11 Raleigh Raleigh 11 1.3 0.9 13 Memphis Memphis 13 0.9 1.7 8 San San 8 Antonio 1.7 1.4 . 7Tucson 2.1 3.1 0.9 14 Birmingham Birmingham 14 0.9 . 9Richmond 1.7 . 5Providence 2.7 . 3Salt Lake 2Denver City 4.5 5.6 A COMPARISON OFTHEMILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITSPEERS 5 Salt Lake City City Salt Lake 5 5 Salt Lake City City Salt Lake 5 Sacramento 3

11 Jacksonville 11Jacksonville San Antonio 8

4 4 8 6 Sacramento Sacramento 6 Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro 2.6 2.6 2.3 2.3 0.5 0.7 0.7 1.3 1.3 0.9 0.9 0.2 0.7 0.0 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.9 0.9 0.6 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.4 0.9 0.9 0.2 0.2 0.6 0.6 2.2 2.2 0.1 0.1 1.3 1.3 2.2 2.2 0.1 0.1 1.8 1.8 2.1 2.1 0.9 1.5 1.7 2.4 2.1 0.9 6.1 3.0 0.2 0.2 3.8 1.8 2.1 3.4 2.0 0.7 1.7 2.4 1.6 0.2 3.2 0.6 |

METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: TRANSPORTATION 33 34 | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221(2ND EDITION) METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: TRANSPORTATION Percent ofTotal HouseholdswithNoVehicles: 2018 Table 50 Annual HoursofTravel TimeDelayperAutoCommuter:2017 Table 52 Percent ofTotal HouseholdswithNoVehicles orOneVehicle: 2018 Table 51 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Source: Texas A&M Transportation In Transportation A&M Texas Source: Note:Data pertain tothe urbanized primary areawithin the metropolitan area. 10 10 15 Grand Grand 15 Rapids St. 10 Louis Pittsburgh 10 Louisville 10 10 Cleveland Nashville 15 Grand 14 Rapids Kansas 13 City Minneapolis 12 Indianapolis 11 Cincinnati 10 Nashville 15 Kansas 14 City Indianapolis 13 Rapids Grand 12 Columbus 11 Average 51 Average 50 50 Average 51 Average 5 5 8 Minneapolis 8 Minneapolis 8 Louisville 8 Cincinnati 7 St. Louis 6 Detroit 4 Cleveland Pittsburgh 3 2 Chicago 1 Buffalo 9 Kansas Kansas 9 City Indianapolis 7 Buffalo 7 Columbus 6 Cincinnati 5 Minneapolis 4 Nashville 3 2 Detroit 1 Chicago 9 Columbus Louisville 8 7 St. Louis Detroit 6 Pittsburgh 4 2 Cleveland 2 Chicago 1 Buffalo Average 41.4 Average Average 38.8 41.4 Average 6.5 Average 8.0 Average Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Areas Metro Midwest nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community Survey nsus American Community stitute, 2019 Urban Mobility Report Mobility stitute, 2019Urban 10.6 3 Tucson Tucson 3 10.6 19 11.9 24 1Providence 12.4 04 4 Memphis 10.4 45.3 45.3 39.9 8 Oklahoma Oklahoma 8 City 39.9 33.3 14 Salt 14 Lake City 33.3 36.9 12 Richmond Richmond 12 36.9 38.5 11 Charlotte Charlotte 11 38.5 45.7 4 Memphis Memphis 4 45.7 35.5 14 Raleigh Raleigh 14 Sacramento 10 35.5 39.4 71 2Tucson 47.1 44.1 6 San San 6 Antonio 44.1 06 7Portland 40.6 36.8 13 Birmingham Birmingham 13 36.8 09 50.9 97 9Denver 39.7 71 3Providence 47.1 46 46 58 3 Sacramento Sacramento 3 58 48 7 Oklahoma Oklahoma 7 City 1Portland 48 73 56 4 Charlotte Charlotte 4 56 46 13 Raleigh Raleigh 13 46 46 46 41 15 Richmond Richmond 15 41 46 14 Birmingham Birmingham 14 46 48 8 Memphis Memphis 8 Tuscon 5 2Denver 48 52 61 50 6 San 6 Antonio 50 6 46 47 8 Providence Providence 8 47 9.1 9.1 4.3 15 Raleigh Raleigh 15 4.3 5.6 13 Oklahoma Oklahoma 13 City 5.6 . 8Birmingham 7.2 5.7 12 Salt Lake City City Salt Lake 12 5.7 . 6Richmond 8.8 5.4 14 Charlotte Charlotte 14 5.4 . 7San Antonio 7.3 6.3 11 Denver Denver 11 6.3 . 8Sacramento 7.2 7.2 10 Jacksonville 10Jacksonville 7.2

5 Jacksonville 5Jacksonville 4Portland

10 10 10 Jacksonville 10 Jacksonville 12 Salt Lake City City SaltLake 12 2 1 Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Areas Other Metro 45.3 45.3 32.8 32.8 37.2 37.2 43.5 43.5 32.8 32.8 36.2 36.2 36.4 36.4 35.9 35.9 36.5 41.6 41.6 39.5 39.5 44.9 38.7 36.6 44.5 9.1 9.1 5.2 5.2 5.1 5.1 7.8 7.8 4.1 4.1 4.6 4.6 6.9 6.4 5.4 5.4 7.6 6.1 6.1 9.9 5.8 7.6 46 46 48 48 48 48 42 42 50 50 59 59 35 35 40 45 45 52 52 57 61 51 51 46 66 Annual CongestionCost(DollarsperAutoCommuter):2017 Table 54 Change inAnnualHoursofTravel TimeDelayperAutoCommuter:1982-2017 Table 53 Source: Texas A&M Transportation In Transportation A&M Texas Source: cost Note: Congestion is the value of the extra travel time and the extra fuel consumed by vehicles traveling at slower speeds. In Transportation A&M Texas Source: Note:Data pertain tothe urbanized primary areawithin the metropolitan area. 10 10 15 Grand Grand 15 Rapids Louisville 14 Indianapolis 13 Kansas 12 City St. 11 Louis Detroit 15 14 Louisville St. 12 Louis Indianapolis 12 Average $971 Average $921 $921 Average $971 Average 37 Average 35 Average 9 1 Chicago Grand 9 Rapids 9 Columbus Pittsburgh 8 Kansas 7 City Buffalo 6 5 Nashville Cleveland 4 Cincinnati 2 2 Chicago Minneapolis 1 9 Pittsburgh Pittsburgh 9 Buffalo 8 7 Cleveland 6 Minneapolis 5 Columbus Cincinnati 4 3 Detroit Nashville 2 Data pertainto the primary urbanized areathe within metropolitanarea. Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Areas Metro Midwest stitute, 2019 Urban Mobility Report Mobility stitute, 2019Urban stitute, 2019 Urban Mobility Report Mobility stitute, 2019Urban $1,217 2 Charlotte Charlotte 2 $1,217 141 1Portland $1,431 $1,110 4 Sacramento Sacramento 4 $1,110 119 3Denver $1,129 104 5San Antonio $1,054 $864 $864 $726 14 Memphis Memphis 14 $726 $965 8 Oklahoma Oklahoma 8 City $965 $908 9 Salt 9 Lake City $908 $813 13 Raleigh Raleigh 13 $813 $716 15 Richmond Richmond 15 $716 $848 11 Providence Providence 11 $848 $837 12 Birmingham Birmingham 12 $837 90 $970 90 $980 33 33 40 3 Charlotte Charlotte 3 40 38 6 Oklahoma Oklahoma 6 City 38 35 8 Salt Salt 8 Lake City 35 33 9 Tuscon Tuscon 9 33 28 15 Richmond Richmond 15 28 42 3 Sacramento Sacramento 3 42 30 13 Birmingham Birmingham 13 San 11 Antonio 30 30 44 1 Portland Portland 1 44 2 2Denver 42 9 29 9 5Providence 39 36 7 Memphis Memphis 7 36 3 9Raleigh 33 A COMPARISON OFTHEMILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITSPEERS

10 Tuscon Tuscon 10

11 11 13 Jacksonville 13 Jacksonville 7 6 Jacksonville 6 Jacksonville Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Areas Other Metro $1,269 $1,269 $1,118 $1,118 $1,163 $1,305 $864 $864 $651 $651 $828 $828 $833 $833 $794 $794 $842 $842 $819 $819 $641 $641 $831 $831 $964 $893 33 33 38 38 43 43 36 36 39 39 32 32 35 35 46 46 33 33 26 26 43 43 32 41 44 35

|

METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: TRANSPORTATION 35 36 | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221(2ND EDITION) METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: TRANSPORTATION

for MajorPublicTransit Operators:2019 Types ofTransit ServiceandDedicatedFundingSources Table 55 San Antonio VIA Metropolitan Transit Transit VIAMetropolitan Antonio San Utah Transit Authority Salt Lake City District Transit Regional Sacramento Richmond Greater Transit Company Raleigh) (Go Transit CapitalArea Sacramento Richmond Rhode Island Public Transit Authority Raleigh Providence Portland Oklahoma Memphis AreaAuthority Transit Milwaukee Memphis District Transportation Regional Jack Jacksonville System Transit Area Charlotte Denver Charlotte Birmingham Bi-State Development Ag St. Louis County Allegheny of PortAuthority Pittsburgh Nashville MetroTransit Minneapolis City ofRiver Authority Transit Milwaukee Au Transportation City Area Kansas Louisville City Kansas Indianapolis Partnership Transit Interurban Grand Rapids Detroit Authority Transit Central Columbus Southwest OhioRegional TransitAuthor Cleveland Rail Light and Bus Cincinnati Authority Transportation Frontier Niagara Chicago Buffalo Tucson Sun Tran and Sun Link Link Sun and SunTran Tucson City City Area Area Central Oklahoma Transportation and and Transportation Oklahoma Central Milwaukee County Transit System System Transit County Milwaukee System Transit County Milwaukee Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation Transportation Metropolitan Tri-County Birmingham-Jefferson County Authority, Transportation Regional Public Indianapolis of Department of Detroit City Regional Northeast Authority, Transit Chicago Parking Authority Parking Authority District of (Tri-Met) (Tri-Met) Oregon District of Transit Authority Authority Transit Metropolitan Corporation Transportation Transportation Regional for Authority Mobility Suburban Corporation, Transportation Detroit Transportation, Transit Authority Pace (), Corporation Railroad Commuter Regional sonville Transportation Authority Authority Transportation sonville Major Operator(s) Transit Major Operator(s) Transit ency (Metro) Bus and Light Rail Light Busand (Metro) ency Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro thority Bus and Bus Rapid Busand Bus thority t BsadBsRpdTast 0.3% Tax Payroll Rapid Busand Bus Transit ity Bus, BusRapid Light Transit, Bus, BusRapid Light Transit, Bus, BusRapid Light Transit, Bus, BusRapid Transit, and Bus and Property Tax Property Transit Rapid Bus and Bus Bus and Bus RapidBus and Bus Tran RapidBus and Bus Tran Hybrid Rail, and Streetcar Streetcar Rail, and Hybrid Heavy Rail, and Light Rail Rail Light and Rail, Heavy Rail, Rail, and Commuter Rail Types of Transit ServiceTypes ofTransit ServiceTypes ofTransit Rail and Commuter Rail Rail Commuter Rail and Bus and Commuter Rail Rail Commuter and Bus Rail, and Inclined Plane Bus, BusRapid Transit, Bus, BusRapid Transit, Automated Guideway Guideway Automated Monorail/Automated Monorail/Automated Commuter Rail, and and Rail, Commuter Bus and Monorail/ Bus and Ferryboat Ferryboat and Bus Bus and Light Rail Rail Light and Bus Bus and Light Rail Rail Light and Bus Bus and Streetcar Streetcar and Bus Bus and Streetcar Bus, Light Rail, Heavy Rail Rail Heavy Guideway Guideway Light Rail Bus and Bus Bus Bus Bus Bus Bus Bus Bus Bus Bus -- Bus rni 0.5% Sales Tax Transit i 0.5% Sales Tax sit 0.5% Sales Tax sit a a

Table continued on next page. page. on next continued Table St. Clair County, Additional Additional County, Clair St. St. Louis County and City. and County St. Louis Property and Sales Taxes 0.5 to 0.625% Sales Tax Sales 0.625% to 0.5 Local Gas Tax and 0.5% 0.5% and Gas Tax Local Mortgage Recording Tax Mortgage Sales Taxes for CapitalSales Taxesfor 0.77737% Payroll Tax 0.75% Sales Tax from 0.125% Sales Tax and 1.0% Sales Tax from from Tax Sales 1.0% Dedicated Funding Dedicated Dedicated Funding Dedicated 1.0% Sales Tax and and Tax Sales 1.0% Statewide Gas Tax 0.25% Income Tax $0.05 Sales Tax Sales $0.05 0.2% Payroll Tax Tax Payroll 0.2% 0.44% Sales tax tax Sales 0.44% 1.0 % Sales Tax Tax Sales % 1.0 1.0% Sales Tax Tax Sales 1.0% 0.5% Sales Tax Tax Sales 0.5% Property Tax Property other Taxes other Sales Tax Sales Sales Tax Sales Tax Source of of Source Source of of Source Sales Tax Sales Tax Projects ------h c i

g d e

k

b b

j f

Table 55(Continued) f e d c b a k j i h g Source: Federal Transit Administration, Administration, Source: Federal Transit A 0.5 percent sales tax for transit is imposed in theportio in isimposed for transit percent salestax A0.5 Auth Transit Utah in the by county vary rates tax Sales Dedicated funding for transit available to Metro Transit or coun Transit-related sales taxes are as follows: 1.25 percent in Cook County and 0.5 percent in DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry, McHenry, Lake, Kane, inDuPage, percent 0.5 and County inCook percent 1.25 follows: as are taxes sales Transit-related Under State law, the Regional Transportation Authority of Pima Pima of Authority Transportation Regional the law, State Under In July 2018, 1.47mills In OnDecember 10, 2019, thecitizens ofOkla The Port Authority of Allegheny County is funded by dedica by funded is County Allegheny of Authority Port The in tax property a of form the in funding dedicated has (SMART) Transportation Regional for Authority Mobility Suburban The that do not have transitsystems The adedicated sourceof portion a least at for guideway dedicated exclusive, an have service Transit Rapid Bus providing as listed areas Metropolitan including Metro Transit; 3) a percent0.25 sales tax in Anoka, Dakota and Washington Counties and a percent0.5 sales tax in dedicated taxes of 10 percent on alcoholic drinks and $2 per vehicle rental; and funds provided by the Allegheny Regional Regional Allegheny the by provided funds and rental; vehicle per $2 and drinks alcoholic on percent 10 of taxes dedicated under statutes; and 4) property taxes levied by county regional railroad authorities, which counties are authorized t authorized are counties which authorities, railroad regional by county levied taxes property 4) and statutes; Minnesota under th tax the administer jointly which Counties, Ramsey and Hennepin statewid transit for dedicated proceeds the of percent 40 sales—with vehicle on motor percent tax—6.5 sales vehicle motor state whic Communities,” Levy Capital in “Transit property on levied create under Minnesota statutes. underMinnesota statutes. create Transit Authority, Metra, and Pace according to statutory formulas. formulas. to statutory according and Pace Metra, Authority, Transit distribu are taxes sales transit-related The Counties. Will and transit, through 2028. Transportation District in the City of San Antonio. An addition An Antonio. San of City the in District Transportation of their route, or operate in managed lanes or on shoulders along freeways. Many metro areas also have some taxi and taxi some have also areas metro Many freeways. along shoulders on or lanes in managed operate or route, of their systems including 1 percent sales tax, $1pe 1percentsalestax, systems including every four years.The currentrateis0. Ci the (excluding Counties Wayne and Oakland, effect inMacomb, paratransit have all and services, vanpool Authority is not authorized to levy property taxes. Th taxes. property levy to authorized isnot Authority 20 year ofimplementing purposes for the 20years the next Transportationbringing District, Asset District. were levied tosupp werelevied the total sales tax for transit in thatarea percent. for transitto 0.625 in thetotal tax sales 1 cent per dollar of property value. value. ofproperty per dollar 1 cent National Transit Database and SEWRPC SEWRPC and Database Transit National services for persons ort current services. current ort homa City voted to continue a one cent voted tocontinuea City homa r tire, $2 per vehicle rental, and 3 perc 3 and rental, vehicle per $2 tire, r A COMPARISON OFTHEMILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITSPEERS e Authorityissue bonds may backed by excise taxes. ority service area, ranging from 1/2 to 2/3 of one cent. area,ority service1/2 of one ranging to2/3 from funding are primarily funded through local property tax levy. levy. tax property local through funded primarily are funding multi-modal plan as approved by voters on May 16,2006.TheMay on voters by approvedplan as multi-modal al 0.125 percent sales tax for transit is imposed in the Advance the in imposed is transit for tax percentsales 0.125 al ted statesalestaxesa and use h together comprise themoreurbanized of thearea region; 2) ties inthe metro area includes: 1) Metro Council property tax ns of thetransitsystemservice areaAdvanced outside the ted by the Regional Transportation Authority to the Chicago theChicago to Authority Transportation Regional the by ted with disabilities. disabilities. with County is authorizedCounty is levya ½-centexcise to tax over collected rough the Counties Transit Improvement Board,as authorized ty of Detroit). The tax rate tax rate The Detroit). ty of sales tax tofund enhancements, including ent of vehicle leases; Allegheny County County Allegheny vehicle leases; of ent llocated to Pennsylvania transit transit Pennsylvania to llocated is subject to voter approval approval tovoter subject is es e, e, d o

|

METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: TRANSPORTATION 37 38 | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221(2ND EDITION) METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: TRANSPORTATION Deficit FundedwithLocalFunds:2018 Percent ofPublicTransit Total AnnualOperating Table 56 Deficit FundedwithStateFunds:2018 Percent ofPublicTransit Total AnnualOperating Table 57 b b Source: Federal Transit Administration, Administration, Source: Federal Transit Source: Federal Transit Administration, Administration, Source: Federal Transit a tota the of portion the is deficit operating annual The Note: a tota the of portion the is deficit operating annual The Note: Providence is served by a statewide public transit agency. agency. transit public a statewide by served is Providence source. revenue dedicated a statewide from funding their of majority a receive areas metro Pittsburgh and Minneapolis The Providence is served by a statewide public transit agency. agency. transit public a statewide by served is Providence source. revenue dedicated a statewide from funding their of majority a receive areas metro Pittsburgh and Minneapolis The 13 13 14 St. 14 Louis Cleveland 14 Kansas 13 City Columbus 12 Cincinnati 11 Louisville 10 Minneapolis 15 Pittsburgh 14 Buffalo 12 Grand 11 Rapids Detroit 10 3 9 Louisville 8 Nashville 7 Indianapolis Cincinnati 6 5 Chicago City Kansas 4 Cleveland 3 2 St. Louis 1 Columbus 9 Nashville Nashville 9 8 Indianapolis Chicago 7 6 Detroit Grand 5 Rapids 4 Buffalo Pittsburgh 2 Minneapolis 1 miscellaneous revenues. This table indicates the portion of the annual operating deficit that is funded with state funds funds state with funded is that deficit operating annual the of portion the indicates table This revenues. miscellaneous rather than federal ratherThor funds.thanstatefederal th of portion the indicates table This revenues. miscellaneous rather than federal or local funds. Th or local funds. federal than rather area. metro each in included operators transit public major the for 55 Table See See Table 55 for the major public transit operators included in each metro area. area. metro each in included operators transit public major the for 55 Table See Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Areas Metro Midwest a a

a a 83.6 83.6 9.2 National Transit Database and SEWRPC SEWRPC and Database Transit National National Transit Database and SEWRPC SEWRPC and Database Transit National 17.0 17.0 63.8 63.8 90.1 3 Charlotte Charlotte 3 90.1 40.7 12 Sacramento Sacramento 12 40.7 56.5 10 Oklahoma Oklahoma 10 City 56.5 77.8 6 Salt 6 Lake City 77.8 53 7Sacramento Raleigh 6 35.3 42.8 79 5Denver 77.9 31 5Providence 43.1 82.6 4 San Antonio Antonio San 4 82.6 76.1 2 Richmond Richmond 2 76.1 Memphis 14 13.1 52.2 11 Providence 11 52.2 21.0 8 Charlotte Charlotte 8 21.0 32 8Portland 2Tucson73.2 91.7 77 7Birmingham 1Jacksonville 77.7 98.7 14.9 9 Jacksonville 9Jacksonville 14.9 31 9Raleigh 73.1 e financial information reflects all serv all reflects information financial e e financial information reflects all serv all reflects information financial e 9.4 10 Oklahoma Oklahoma 10 City 9.4 0.3 13 Salt 13 Lake City 0.3 2.4 11 Denver Denver 11 2.4 0.3 13 San 13 Antonio 0.3 1.1 12 Portland Portland 12 1.1 0.5 13 Tucson Tucson 13 Birmingham 13 0.5 1.0 13 Richmond Richmond 13 4Memphis

l operating cost not covered by covered not cost operating l l operating cost not covered by covered not cost operating l e annual operating deficit that deficit operating annual e 15 15 1 Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee ices provided by the transit system. system. transit the by provided ices ices provided by the transit system. system. transit the by provided ices Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Areas Other Metro b b 64.2 64.2 9.9 9.9 farebox revenues and certain certain and revenues farebox farebox revenues and certain certain and revenues farebox is funded with local funds funds local with funded is 63.8 63.8 24.8 24.8 15.6 17.0 17.0 81.1 81.1 82.1 82.1 58.3 58.3 64.0 64.0 65.9 61.6 61.6 82.3 87.5 84.6 84.6 69.6 74.7 88.3 88.3 69.3 0.0 0.0 9.8 9.8 4.2 4.2 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.1 8.1 8.2 0.0 0.0 4.5

Percent ChangeinAnnualRevenue ServiceHours forPublicTransit: 2010-2018 Table 59 (Annual Unlinked Passenger Trips): 2010-2018 Percent ChangeinRidershipforPublicTransit Table 58 Source: Federal Transit Administration, Administration, Source: Federal Transit area. metro each in included operators transit major the for 55 Table See Note: Administration, Source: Federal Transit area. metro each in included operators transit major the for 55 Table See Note: 10 10 14 15 Detroit Detroit 15 Kansas 14 City Cincinnati 13 Buffalo 12 Pittsburgh 11 Detroit 15 Cincinnati 13 Louisville 12 Cleveland 11 Kansas 10 City Average 15.8 Average 10.0 10.0 Average 15.8 Average -16.4 Average -10.3 Average 9 St. 9 Louis 8 Buffalo 7 Pittsburgh 6 Chicago 5 Indianapolis Grand 4 Rapids 3 Nashville Columbus 2 1 Minneapolis 9 Cleveland Grand 8 Rapids 7 Louisville 6 Indianapolis Minneapolis 5 4 St. Louis 3 Columbus 2 Chicago Nashville 1 Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Areas Metro Midwest National Transit Database and SEWRPC SEWRPC and Database Transit National SEWRPC and Database Transit National -38.7 -38.7 -21.3 11 Tucson Tucson 11 -21.3 3. -30.8 -48.5 15 Richmond Richmond 15 Sacramento 13 -48.5 -32.1 -15.7 10 Providence Providence 10 -15.7 44.5 1 Salt 1 Lake City 44.5 22.0 5 Oklahoma Oklahoma 5 City 22.0 99 2Portland 39.9 18.7 8 Charlotte Charlotte 8 7Jacksonville 18.7 20.0 10.1 2 Salt 2 Lake City 10.1 29 4Tucson 3Denver 22.9 35.9 71 1Birmingham 17.1 07 6Raleigh 20.7 -7.5 9 San 9 Antonio 8Portland -7.5 -7.0 -8.9 15 Memphis Memphis 15 -8.9 40 7Raleigh -4.0 5.7 5.7 7.6 4 Charlotte Charlotte 4 7.6 3.4 11 Providence Providence 11 2.2 3.4 1.8 13 Birmingham Birmingham 13 1.8 0.2 14 Richmond Richmond 14 0.2 3.2 6 Jacksonville 6Jacksonville 3.2 . 5Denver 3.6 . 3Oklahoma City 8.9 . 9San Antonio 7.4 A COMPARISON OFTHEMILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITSPEERS

14 Memphis Memphis 14 10 Sacramento Sacramento 10

12 12 12 12 Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Areas Other Metro -38.7 -38.7 -24.2 -24.2 -19.0 -19.0 -43.2 -43.2 -75.2 -75.2 -83.3 -83.3 -57.6 -14.3 -14.3 18.0 18.0 44.5 44.5 12.8 12.8 11.5 11.5 17.6 17.6 19.0 19.2 14.3 14.3 20.2 24.3 12.2 15.3 -7.1 -3.7 -7.8 -7.8 5.7 5.7 9.2 9.2 7.8 7.8 5.2 5.2 7.0 8.7 4.5 |

METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: TRANSPORTATION 39 40 | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221(2ND EDITION) METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: TRANSPORTATION Vehicle Revenue HoursofPublicTransit Per Capita:2018 Table 61 Public Transit OperatingExpendituresPer Capita:2018 Table 60 Note: See Table 55 for the major transit operators included in each metro area. area. metro each in included operators transit major the for 55 Table See Note: area. metro each in included operators transit major the for 55 Table See Note: Source: Federal Transit Administration, Administration, Source: Federal Transit Administration, Source: Federal Transit 15 Indianapolis Indianapolis 15 Kansas 14 City Detroit 13 Cincinnati 12 Nashville 11 Louisville 10 Indianapolis 15 Kansas 14 City Cincinnati 13 Detroit 12 Grand 11 Rapids Louisville 10 Average 0.76 Average $131.95 Average $123.42 Average 8 3 9 Nashville 9 Nashville Columbus 7 St.Louis 6 Cleveland 5 Buffalo 4 Minneapolis 3 Pittsburgh 2 Chicago 1 9 Cleveland 8 St. Louis Grand 7 Rapids 6 Columbus 5 Buffalo 4 Minneapolis 2 Pittsburgh 1 Chicago The per capita data are based on the population of th population the on are based data capita The per The per capita data are based on the population of th population the on are based data capita The per Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Midwest Metro Areas Areas Metro Midwest Areas Metro Midwest National Transit Database and SEWRPC SEWRPC and Database Transit National SEWRPC and Database Transit National $110.63 $110.63 $141.28 5 San 5 Antonio $141.28 $151.40 4 Charlotte Charlotte 4 $151.40 $149.48 3 Denver Denver 3 $149.48 $242.50 2 Portland Portland 2 $242.50 182 $138.27 $113.77 7 Providence Providence 7 $113.77 $290.04 1 Salt 1 Lake City $290.04 $86.93 10 Tucson Tucson 10 $86.93 $57.28 15 Oklahoma Oklahoma 15 City $57.28 $82.08 11 Richmond Richmond 11 $82.08 $63.60 13 Birmingham Birmingham 13 Memphis 12 $63.60 $71.47 $63.32 14 Raleigh Raleigh 14 $63.32 $89.26 9 Jacksonville 9 Jacksonville $89.26 0.95 0.73 10 Sacramento Sacramento 10 0.73 0.58 11 Richmond Richmond 11 0.58 .2 1Salt Lake City 1.52 0.37 15 Oklahoma Oklahoma 15 City 0.37 0.78 7 Charlotte Charlotte 7 0.78 0.42 13 Birmingham Birmingham 13 Memphis 12 0.42 0.46 0.38 14 Raleigh Raleigh 14 0.38 .3 6 Tucson 0.83 .0 0.90 .4 9Providence 8Jacksonville 0.74 0.77 .5 2Denver 1.05 .2 4San Antonio 0.92 8 Sacramento Sacramento 8 3Portland

e primary urbanized areawithin the metropolitan area. e primary urbanized areawithin the metropolitan area. 6 5 Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Other Metro Areas Areas Other Metro Areas Other Metro $110.63 $110.63 $280.08 $280.08 $292.61 $292.61 $127.44 $127.44 $134.31 $134.31 $100.14 $100.14 $420.97 $420.97 $52.94 $52.94 $97.50 $97.50 $28.79 $28.79 $43.29 $43.29 $53.44 $40.65 $40.65 $98.38 $98.38 $98.13 0.95 0.31 0.31 0.74 0.74 0.47 0.47 0.22 0.22 0.38 0.38 0.28 0.28 0.29 1.42 0.87 1.78 1.53 0.97 0.76 0.58 0.62 National AmbientAirQualityStandards(NAAQS) Attainment StatusofOzoneandFineParticulate Table 62 Source: Note: Nonattainment refers to the EPA designation given to areas not meeting the standard set by EPA for a particular particular a for EPA by set standard the meeting not areas to given designation EPA the to refers Nonattainment Note: Charlotte -- Charlotte -- Birmingham -- St. Louis -- Pittsburgh ------Nashville Minneapolis ------Milwaukee Louisville Kansas Indianapolis ------Grand Detroit Columbus Cleveland Cincinnati ------Chicago Buffalo usn ------Tucson San Antonio Salt Sacramento ------Richmond Raleigh ------Providence Portland Oklahoma Milwaukee -- Memphis ------Jacksonville Denver Lake Lake meets the standard. standard. the meets Maintenance refers to an area that previously was in no in was previously that area an to refers Maintenance pollutant. The marginal, moderate, and severe classificati severe and moderate, marginal, The pollutant.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and SEWRPC Rapids Rapids ------iy ------City Area Area City City ------City City ------Marginal - Partial Partial - Marginal Partial - Marginal Nonattainment– Nonattainment– Nonattainment – – Nonattainment – Nonattainment – Nonattainment – Nonattainment – Nonattainment – Nonattainment Nonattainment – – Nonattainment – Nonattainment – Nonattainment (2015 Standard) (2015 Standard) Maintenance – Maintenance – 8-Hour Ozone Ozone 8-Hour Ozone 8-Hour Moderate Moderate Marginal Marginal Marginal Marginal Marginal Marginal Marginal Marginal Marginal Marginal Marginal Marginal A COMPARISON OFTHEMILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITSPEERS Midwest Metro Areas Metro Midwest Other Metro Areas Other Metro Nonattainment – – Nonattainment Nonattainment – – Nonattainment Nonattainment – – Nonattainment – Nonattainment (2008 Standard) (2008 Standard) Maintenance – Maintenance – Maintenance – Maintenance – Maintenance – Maintenance – Maintenance – Maintenance – Maintenance – 8-Hour Ozone Ozone 8-Hour Ozone 8-Hour Moderate Moderate Marginal Marginal Marginal Marginal Marginal Marginal Marginal Marginal Marginal Marginal Serious Serious Severe Severe ------Maintenance ------nattainment for a particular standard, but now consistentlystandard, butnow fornattainment aparticular ons indicatethe level of

(2012 Standard) (2012 Standard) Maintenance – Maintenance – Moderate Moderate PM PM ------Maintenance ------2.5 2.5

severity of nonattainment. nonattainment. of severity

Nonattainment – – Nonattainment – Nonattainment (2006 Standard) (2006 Standard) Maintenance – Maintenance – Maintenance Maintenance Maintenance Maintenance Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Serious Serious PM PM 2.5 2.5

|

METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARISONS: AIR QUALITY 41 42 | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221(2ND EDITION) PRINCIPAL CITY COMPARISONS Total Population: 2018 Table 63 Population Density(People perSquareMile of LandArea):2018 Table 65 Percent ChangeinPopulation: 2010-2018 Table 64 Source: U.S. Source: oftheCe Bureau U.S. Source: oftheCensus Bureau U.S. Source: U.S Bureau of the Census Annual Estimates of Population ofPopulation Estimates oftheCensusAnnual Source: Bureau U.S 10 10 15 Nashville Nashville 15 Kansas City 14 Louisville 13 Indianapolis 12 Cincinnati 11 Columbus 10 Detroit 15 St.Louis 14 Cleveland 13 Buffalo 12 Pittsburgh 11 Grand 15 Rapids Buffalo 14 Pittsburgh 13 Cincinnati 12 St. 11 Louis Cleveland 10 Average 676,161 Average 594,182 594,182 Average 676,161 Average vrg 478 vrg 3,572 Average 4,738 Average 9.2 Average 2.7 Average 9 4 inaoi/t al 3,9 4Denver 8 Louisville City Kansas 7 6 Nashville 733,096 5 Detroit 4 Minneapolis/St. Paul 3 Indianapolis 2 Columbus 1 Chicago 9 Grand Rapids Detroit 8 7 St. Louis 6 Cleveland 5 Pittsburgh 3 Buffalo Minneapolis/St. Paul 2 1 Chicago 3Raleigh 9 Chicago 8 Cincinnati 7 Louisville 6 Indianapolis Rapids Grand 9.8 5 City Kansas 4 3 Minneapolis/St. Paul Nashville 2 1 Columbus Principal CitiesofMidwes Principal CitiesofMidwes Principal CitiesofMidwes Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee nsus DecennialCensus Annual Estimates of Population ofPopulation Estimates Annual er ra Areas t Metro er ra Areas t Metro Areas t Metro ,0,8 1San Antonio 2,705,988 192 1 Providence 11,902 592,002 592,002 383,781 10 Sacramento Sacramento 10 383,781 256,322 14 Salt 14 Lake City 256,322 301,038 13 Birmingham Birmingham 13 301,038 302,615 12 Richmond Richmond 12 302,615 7,8 5Portland 672,681 302,838 11 Raleigh Raleigh 11 302,838 646,170 7 Oklahoma City City Oklahoma 7 646,170 200,230 15 Providence Providence 15 200,230 6,9 6Memphis 620,149 665,498 895,877 2 Jacksonville 2Jacksonville 895,877 6,3 3Charlotte 864,131 6,155 6,155 10.7 2 Charlotte Charlotte 2 10.7 38 1Denver 13.8 1,399 15 Oklahoma Oklahoma 15 City 1,399 1,868 13 Birmingham Birmingham 13 1,868 2,390 12 Salt 12 Lake City 2,390 4,849 8 San San 8 Antonio 4,849 3,884 11 Memphis Memphis 11 3,884 4,095 10 Tucson Tucson 10 4,095 ,4 3Sacramento 6,348 1,470 ,0 7Raleigh 4,905 ,0 9Charlotte 4,507 ,3 5Denver 5,436 ,1 6,918 ,3 6Richmond 4,939 -0.5 -0.5 -3.3 13 Memphis Memphis 13 -3.3 -1.9 12 Providence Providence 12 Tucson 11 -1.9 -1.5 -5.8 15 Birmingham Birmingham 15 -5.8 52 -5.2 . 9Sacramento 0.4 6.5 5 Oklahoma City City Oklahoma 5 6.5 6.7 4 San Antonio Antonio San 4 6.7 . 7Portland 3.8 1.9 8 Jacksonville 8Jacksonville 1.9 . 5Richmond 5.3 and Annual Estimates of Population Population of Estimates Annual and 9 Tucson Tucson 9 10 Salt Lake City City SaltLake 10 4Portland 14 Jacksonville 14Jacksonville 14 14 8 2 Principal Ci Principal Ci Principal Ci Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee ties of Other Metro Areas Areas ties of OtherMetro ties of Other Metro Areas Areas ties of Other Metro Areas ties of OtherMetro 1,532,212 592,002 592,002 179,335 179,335 508,517 508,517 209,294 209,294 200,576 200,576 649,410 649,410 228,783 228,783 470,509 470,509 545,987 545,987 652,573 872,506 650,632 716,492 903,896 6,155 6,155 1,804 1,804 2,050 2,050 1,433 1,433 1,071 1,071 3,162 3,162 2,294 2,294 4,891 1,209 5,198 3,239 2,846 9,742 4,674 3,819 12.0 12.0 19.3 19.3 15.4 15.4 19.4 11.8 12.0 10.0 10.0 16.5 -0.5 -0.5 -1.4 -1.4 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.7 5.0 5.0 7.6 7.6 9.0 Percent ofTotal AdultPopulation withaDegreeBeyondHighSchool: 2018 Table 67 Racial/Ethnic MinorityPopulation asPercent ofTotal Population: 2018 Table 66 Note: The minority population includes pers includes population minority The Note: Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Note:Data pertain to adults 25 years of age and over Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: 13 13 12 Minneapolis/St. Paul 43.8 12 Raleigh Raleigh 12 Pittsburgh 15 43.8 Louisville 14 Grand 13 Rapids Minneapolis/St. 12 Paul Nashville 11 10 Columbus 15 Detroit Detroit 15 Cleveland 14 Kansas 12 City Indianapolis 11 Louisville 10 Average 52.9 52.9 Average Average Average 41.2 Average Average 43.4 41.2 Average 4 9 Indianapolis Kansas 8 City Cincinnati 7 St. Louis 6 5 Buffalo 3 Cleveland 2 Chicago 1 Detroit inaoi/t al 53 1Raleigh Buffalo 9 8 St. Louis Columbus 7 6 Chicago Grand 5 Rapids Cincinnati 4 55.3 Nashville3 Pittsburgh 2 1 Minneapolis/St. Paul race,than onerace. ormore as Black or African American, American Indian/Alaska Nati Principal CitiesofMidwes Principal CitiesofMidwes Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community er ra Areas t Metro er ra Areas t Metro 65.5 65.5 32.4 32.4 35.2 14 Salt 14 Lake City Oklahoma 11 City 35.2 44.8 39.2 10 Birmingham Birmingham 10 39.2 39.3 9 Oklahoma Oklahoma 9 City 39.3 52 25.2 35.1 15 Portland Portland 15 35.1 39.0 10 Tucson Tucson 10 39.0 50.2 7 Charlotte Charlotte 7 2Memphis 50.2 1Birmingham 66.7 89.2 46.1 5 Charlotte Charlotte 5 Salt 4 Lake City Portland 2 46.1 46.6 52.1 50 6Richmond 45.0 23.0 15 Memphis Memphis 15 23.0 42.2 13 Denver Denver 13 42.2 49.1 8 Richmond Richmond 8 49.1 44.5 7 Sacramento Sacramento 7 44.5 75 5Providence 55.9 57.5 43.6 8 Jacksonville 8Jacksonville 43.6 38.5 12 Providence Providence 12 38.5 45.7 10 Jacksonville 10Jacksonville 45.7 61 9Tucson 46.1 48.1 3 Denver 3 48.1 59 3San Antonio 65.9 ons reportedtheHi inasbeing of census A COMPARISON OFTHEMILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITSPEERS with an associate's, bachelor's, or graduatedegree.

4 Sacramento Sacramento 4 13 San Antonio San Antonio 13 ve, Asian, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, some other some other Islander, Hawaiian/Pacific Native Asian, ve, 14 14 6 Principal Ci Principal Ci Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee spanic origin and/or reporting their race and/orreporting their spanic origin ties of Other Metro Areas Areas ties of OtherMetro ties of Other Metro Areas Areas ties of OtherMetro 65.5 65.5 32.4 32.4 35.0 35.0 30.0 30.0 57.0 57.0 34.0 34.0 46.6 46.5 46.5 45.7 45.7 31.5 31.5 34.4 34.4 52.0 52.0 57.9 35.0 35.0 55.3 55.3 38.1 38.1 59.2 59.2 33.7 33.7 68.9 68.9 58.5 58.5 46.9 43.1 43.1 75.7 49.6 49.6 67.2 56.9 75.5 56.4 75.2 38.7 38.7 59.8 |

PRINCIPAL CITY COMPARISONS 43 44 | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221(2ND EDITION) PRINCIPAL CITY COMPARISONS Per CapitaIncome:2018 Table 68 Ratio of Minorities to Whites Without aHighSchoolDiploma:2018 Ratio ofMinoritiestoWhitesWithout Table 70 Percent ofTotal Population BelowthePoverty Level:2018 Table 69 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: adul minority of percent the dividing by calculated Ratio Note: 12 12 15 Detroit 15 Detroit Cleveland 14 Pittsburgh 11 Louisville 11 Columbus 11 Indianapolis 10 Sacramento 10 Nashville 15 Kansas 14 City Indianapolis 13 18.6 Louisville 12 11 Chicago Minneapolis/St. 10 Paul Detroit 15 Cleveland 14 Buffalo 13 Grand 11 Rapids Indianapolis 10 Average Average Average 3.1 Average 5.0 5.0 Average 3.1 Average Average 18.8 22.0 Average 4 5 inaoi/t al 674 2Portland Columbus 9 8 Kansas City Louisville 7 6 St. Louis Cincinnati 5 Pittsburgh 4 36,714 Nashville 3 2 Minneapolis/St. Paul 1 Chicago inaoi/t al . 1Denver 8 Cincinnati 8 Buffalo 7 St. Louis Kansas 6 City 4 Nashville 9.5 3 Chicago Grand 2 Rapids 1 Minneapolis/St. Paul Rapids Grand 9 Columbus 8 Pittsburgh 7 6 St. Louis Cincinnati 4 3 Buffalo 2 Cleveland 1 Detroit white adults without a sc high Principal CitiesofMidwes Principal CitiesofMidwes Principal CitiesofMidwes Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community Survey nsus American Community nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community hool equivalent.diploma or er ra Areas t Metro er ra Areas t Metro Areas t Metro 23,439 23,439 30,353 7 Sacramento Sacramento 7 30,353 35,834 3 Salt 3 Lake City 35,834 22,525 14 Birmingham Birmingham 14 22,525 23,215 13 Tucson Tucson 13 23,215 924 29,284 34,636 4 Raleigh Raleigh 4 34,636 847 18,427 San 10 Antonio 27,860 31,874 5 Charlotte Charlotte 5 31,874 710 1Denver 37,160 28,989 9 Oklahoma Oklahoma 9 City 28,989 27,044 11 Providence Providence 11 27,044 157 6Richmond 31,537 29,659 8 Jacksonville 8Jacksonville 29,659 24.9 24.9 17.3 12 Charlotte Charlotte 12 17.3 15.6 15 Denver Denver 15 15.6 20.5 7 San 7 Antonio 20.5 16.5 13 Raleigh Raleigh 13 16.5 19.0 9 Oklahoma City City Oklahoma 9 19.0 1Providence 33.4 52 25.2 19.9 8 Salt 8 Lake City 19.9 01 3Birmingham 30.1 21 5Tucson 22.1 15.8 14 Portland Portland 14 11Jacksonville 15.8 17.4 31 2 Memphis 33.1 3.3 3.3 1.7 14 Providence Providence 14 1.7 1.8 1.8 13 Birmingham Birmingham 13 Sacramento 10 1.8 2.1 . 2Richmond Raleigh 2 4.2 5.0 . 9Memphis 2.4 1.8 11 Oklahoma Oklahoma 11 City 1.8 3.0 6 Charlotte Charlotte 6 3.0 . 7Tucson 5Portland 2.7 3.3 . 8San Antonio 2.4 0.8 15 Jacksonville 15Jacksonville 0.8

4 Salt Lake City City Salt Lake 4 12 Memphis Memphis 12 5Richmond ts without a high school diplom school high a without ts 15 15 12 12 4 Principal Ci Principal Ci Principal Ci Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee ties of Other Metro Areas Areas ties of OtherMetro ties of Other Metro Areas Areas ties of Other Metro Areas ties of OtherMetro Average 31,520 31,520 Average a or equivalent by percent of percent by equivalent or a 23,439 23,439 23,461 23,461 24,525 24,525 23,553 23,553 24,187 24,187 31,816 31,816 38,893 38,893 24,684 24,684 38,804 38,804 37,913 37,913 30,429 30,429 33,094 44,556 42,814 30,632 30,632 14.6 24.9 24.9 11.3 11.3 16.3 16.3 12.3 12.3 12.8 15.3 15.3 20.0 20.0 11.5 11.5 21.9 16.4 16.4 27.1 15.0 15.0 21.9 28.0 27.8 3.3 3.3 2.6 2.6 6.5 6.5 3.2 3.2 3.7 3.7 5.9 5.9 6.5 4.9 4.9 3.4 3.4 4.2 4.7 5.3 4.0 1.8 Ratio ofMinoritiestoWhitesinPoverty: 2018 Table 73 Ratio ofWhitetoMinorityPer CapitaIncome:2018 Table 72 DegreeorHigher: 2018 Ratio ofWhitestoMinoritieswithaBachelor’s Table 71 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: perc the dividing by calculated Ratio Note: Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Note: Ratio calculated by dividing the of percent white adults with a or degree bachelor's higher by percent of adults minority 15 Detroit Detroit 15 Cleveland 14 Cincinnati 13 Rapids Grand 11 Columbus 11 15 Detroit Louisville 13 Columbus 13 13 Pittsburgh Louisville 13 Columbus 13 Indianapolis 11 Buffalo 11 Nashville 10 Average 2.2 Average 2.1 2.1 Average 2.2 Average 2.1 Average 2.0 Average 2.3 Average 2.2 Average 6 3 1 9 Nashville 2Memphis Indianapolis 9 9 Buffalo 8 Kansas City 5 St. Rapids Grand Louis 5 5 Cleveland 2.5 3 Cincinnati 2 Minneapolis/St. Paul 1 Chicago 5Memphis Kansas 9 City Detroit 8 St. Louis 2.5 6 6 Cincinnati 4 Minneapolis/St. Paul Grand 4 Rapids 3 Chicago 2 Cleveland inaoi/t al . 2Memphis Pittsburgh9 9 Kansas City 7 Indianapolis 7 Buffalo 5 Chicago 2.8 4 Nashville 3 Louisville 2 Minneapolis/St. Paul 1 St. Louis Pittsburgh 9 with a bachelor'sdegree or higher. Principal CitiesofMidwes Principal CitiesofMidwes Principal CitiesofMidwes Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community Survey nsus American Community Survey nsus American Community er ra Areas t Metro er ra Areas t Metro Areas t Metro ent of minority population in poverty by percent ofwhite population in poverty. 2.3 2.3 2.2 3.0 1.9 10 Charlotte Charlotte 10 1.9 1.8 13 Tucson Tucson 13 1.8 1.8 13 Sacramento Sacramento 13 1.8 1.6 13 Portland Portland 13 Raleigh 10 1.6 1.8 1.9 12 Sacramento Sacramento 12 1.9 1.8 12 Sacramento Sacramento 12 1.8 1.9 10 Salt 10 Lake City 1.9 3Birmingham 1Richmond 2.1 2.2 2.6 . 5Richmond 2.5 0.9 15 Salt 15 Lake City 0.9 2.3 7 San San 7 Antonio 2.3 2.0 2.0 2.5 4 Birmingham Birmingham 4 2.4 2.5 2.6 . 9Birmingham 2.1 1.9 13 Portland Portland 13 1.9 . 5Raleigh 5Providence 2.0 2.1 Tucson 7 6Denver 2.2 2.4 1.6 13 Oklahoma Oklahoma 13 City 1.6 2.0 9 Tucson Tucson 9 2.0 1.6 2.1 9 Providence 9 2.1 1.8 13 Portland Portland 13 1.8 . 1Charlotte 2.9 . 7Denver 2.2 1.6 15 Jacksonville 15Jacksonville 1.6 . 10 San Antonio 9Oklahoma City 1.9 1.9 2Providence 2.9 2.2 8 Jacksonville 8Jacksonville 2.2 . 4Oklahoma City 2.6 . 5Charlotte 2.1 . 2Raleigh 2.7 A COMPARISON OFTHEMILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITSPEERS SaltCity Lake 7 12 San Antonio San Antonio 12 3Denver 1Richmond

15 Jacksonville 15 Jacksonville 3 6 5 Principal Ci Principal Ci Principal Ci Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee ties of Other Metro Areas Areas ties of OtherMetro ties of Other Metro Areas Areas ties of Other Metro Areas ties of OtherMetro 3.0 3.0 2.3 2.3 2.2 2.9 2.9 1.8 1.8 1.5 1.5 1.9 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.4 1.4 2.0 2.0 1.8 1.8 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.5 1.5 3.7 2.7 2.5 1.8 1.8 2.3 2.7 2.1 2.1 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.8 2.1 3.1 1.3 2.3 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.1 1.8 2.1 2.2 2.6 2.2 1.8 1.6 3.1 1.9 2.8 2.5 2.8 2.8

|

PRINCIPAL CITY COMPARISONS 45 46 | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221(2ND EDITION) PRINCIPAL CITY COMPARISONS Unemployment Rate:2018 Table 74 Multifamily HousingasPercent ofTotal HousingUnits:2018 Table 76 Percent ChangeinHousingUnits:2010-2018 Table 75 Source: U.S. Source: oftheCe Bureau U.S. Statistics of Labor Bureau U.S. Source: Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: 11 11 15 Louisville Louisville 15 14 Detroit City Kansas 13 Indianapolis 12 Grand 11 Rapids Nashville 10 15 Buffalo Cincinnati 14 St. 13 Louis Grand 12 Rapids Indianapolis 10 Nashville 14 Paul Minneapolis/St. 14 Indianapolis 13 St. 11 Louis Kansas 11 City Columbus 10 Average 4.4 Average 3.8 3.8 Average 4.4 Average Average 50.7 Average Average 46.8 50.7 Average 7.5 Average 3.2 Average 8 4 8 Grand 8 Grand Rapids 7 Louisville Pittsburgh 5 5 Chicago 4 Cincinnati 3 Buffalo 2 Cleveland 1 Detroit inaoi/t al 61 5Raleigh 9 Cleveland Pittsburgh 8 56.1 7 Columbus 6 St. Louis 5 Minneapolis/St. Paul Cincinnati 3 2 Buffalo 1 Chicago 4Portland 9 Pittsburgh 8 Chicago 7 Louisville 4.2 6 Cleveland 5 Detroit 4 Minneapolis/St. Paul Kansas 3 City 2 Columbus 1 Nashville Principal CitiesofMidwes Principal CitiesofMidwes Principal CitiesofMidwes Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee nsus DecennialCensus nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community er ra Areas t Metro er ra Areas t Metro Areas t Metro Local Area Unemployment Statistics Statistics Unemployment Area Local 29 1Raleigh 12.9 59.6 59.6 33.8 15 Oklahoma Oklahoma 15 City 33.8 46.0 10 Memphis Memphis 10 46.0 53.5 8 Charlotte Charlotte 8 53.5 34 1Providence 73.4 39.6 12 Sacramento Sacramento 12 39.6 40.6 11 Tucson Tucson 11 40.6 40 7Portland Denver 3 54.0 60.9 47 64.7 36.2 13 San Antonio San Antonio 13 14 Jacksonville 34.2 36.2 60 6Richmond 56.0 25 9Birmingham 52.5 20 -2.0 4.0 4.0 2.6 15 Salt 15 Lake City 2.6 2.6 2.6 4.2 6 Sacramento Sacramento 6 4.2 . 1Providence 9.0 3.8 12 San 12 Antonio 3.8 . 3Memphis 4.2 4.5 3.5 13 Denver Denver 13 3.5 . 3Birmingham 5.7 3.8 11 Richmond Richmond 11 3.8 3.9 8 Raleigh Raleigh 8 3.9 . 2Tucson 6.5 . 7Charlotte 4.1 4.0 8 Jacksonville 8 Jacksonville 4.0 1.6 1.6 . 8San Antonio 2.7 0.2 14 Sacramento Sacramento 14 Richmond 13 Tucson 10 0.2 0.7 1.9 . 5Oklahoma City 3.9 0.9 12 Memphis Memphis 12 0.9 2.6 9 Jacksonville 9Jacksonville 2.6 5.7 3 Charlotte Charlotte 3 5.7 . 2Denver 7.1 . 6Salt Lake City 3.1 . 7Birmingham 3.0 and Annual Estimates of Housing Units Units Housing of Estimates Annual and 13 Oklahoma City City Oklahoma 13 8Portland 4 Salt Lake City City SaltLake 4

15 15 11 Providence Providence 11 5 2 Principal Ci Principal Ci Principal Ci Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee ties of Other Metro Areas Areas ties of OtherMetro ties of Other Metro Areas Areas ties of Other Metro Areas ties of OtherMetro 14.9 14.9 15.8 19.1 11.0 59.6 59.6 40.3 40.3 29.3 29.3 39.8 39.8 43.8 43.8 39.5 39.5 53.7 53.7 56.3 56.3 51.2 36.5 36.5 35.8 35.8 45.1 78.0 41.2 52.5 4.0 4.0 3.2 3.2 2.9 2.9 3.2 3.2 3.9 3.9 3.5 3.5 3.3 3.3 3.6 4.6 3.6 3.6 5.1 3.8 4.6 3.6 4.7 1.6 1.6 2.9 2.9 3.5 3.5 4.2 4.2 2.1 2.1 2.8 2.8 7.9 6.2 6.6 6.1 7.3 Percent ofTotal Workers Who DrivetoWork Alone:2018 Table 79 Average Travel TimetoWork inMinutes:2018 Table 78 Median Value HousingUnits:2018 ofOwner-Occupied Table 77 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: of estimate respondent's ACS the upon based are Values Note: 13 13 12 15 Chicago Chicago 15 Pittsburgh 14 Paul Minneapolis/St. 13 Buffalo 12 Detroit 11 Cleveland 10 Rapids Grand 15 Buffalo 14 Columbus 12 Kansas 11 City Louisville 10 Detroit 15 Cleveland 14 Buffalo 13 Pittsburgh 11 Indianapolis 10 Average 71.3 Average Average 73.8 71.3 Average Average 23.5 23.8 Average 238,100 Average 157,400 Average 7 inaoi/t al 37 8Tucson 23.7 Pittsburgh 8 8 Minneapolis/St. Paul 6 Indianapolis Cincinnati 6 5 Cleveland 4 Nashville 3 St. Louis Detroit 2 Chicago 1 Salt Lake City 3 9 Cincinnati 8 Kansas 247,537 City 7 Grand Rapids 6 St. Louis 5 Columbus 4 Louisville Minneapolis/St. Paul 3 2 Chicago 1 Nashville 9 Cincinnati Cincinnati 9 8 St. Louis Grand 6 Rapids 5 Columbus 4 Nashville 3 Louisville City Kansas 2 1 Indianapolis would sell forit weresale. if for Principal CitiesofMidwes Principal CitiesofMidwes Principal CitiesofMidwes Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community Survey nsus American Community Survey nsus American Community er ra Areas t Metro er ra Areas t Metro Areas t Metro 126,300 126,300 140,200 11 Oklahoma Oklahoma 11 City 140,200 142,700 10 Tucson Tucson 10 142,700 7,0 2Denver 271,600 5,5 8Providence 151,852 5,0 5Raleigh 159,400 5,0 6Richmond 1Portland 154,800 274,100 147,800 9 Jacksonville 9Jacksonville 7Charlotte 147,800 154,600 6,0 4Sacramento 168,700 71,100 14 Memphis Memphis 14 71,100 830 98,300 51,600 15 Birmingham Birmingham 15 51,600 74.0 74.0 21.7 69.9 10 Sacramento Sacramento 10 69.9 64.0 13 Salt Lake City City Salt Lake 13 64.0 19.4 14 Oklahoma Oklahoma 14 City Providence 10 19.4 22.7 68.9 12 Denver Denver 12 68.9 23.7 9 Birmingham Birmingham 9 23.7 Charlotte 2 26.0 69.0 11 Richmond Richmond 11 69.0 23.9 6 Raleigh Raleigh 6 23.9 77.0 6 Raleigh Raleigh 6 77.0 54.5 14 Providence Providence 14 54.5 City Salt Lake 15 18.5 09 70.9 21.8 11 Richmond Richmond 11 21.8 24.6 4 Jacksonville 4Jacksonville 3Portland 24.6 25.3 78.5 4 Jacksonville 4Jacksonville 78.5 35.4 1 Sacramento Sacramento 1 35.4 83 5San City Oklahoma Antonio 2 78.3 81.3 22.0 11 Memphis Memphis 11 22.0 22 8Tucson 72.2 48.9 15 Portland Portland 15 48.9 30 1Memphis 83.0 98 3Birmingham 79.8 39 6 San Antonio 23.9 43 5Denver 24.3 A COMPARISON OFTHEMILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITSPEERS 12 San Antonio San Antonio 12 7 Charlotte Charlotte 7 how much the property (house property much the how 13 13 13 13 9 Principal Ci Principal Ci Principal Ci Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee ties of Other Metro Areas Areas ties of OtherMetro ties of Other Metro Areas Areas ties of Other Metro Areas ties of OtherMetro and lot or condominium unit) unit) or condominium lot and 126,300 126,300 103,700 103,700 167,800 167,800 161,700 161,700 155,600 155,600 255,900 435,100 451,000 230,900 219,500 268,900 358,300 183,700 359,800 93,400 93,400 74.0 74.0 21.7 22.2 22.2 64.3 64.3 19.1 19.1 68.5 68.5 73.7 73.7 65.5 65.5 77.6 77.6 21.9 21.9 23.0 23.0 26.0 21.0 21.0 71.7 71.7 24.6 24.6 58.5 58.5 75.2 75.2 82.3 82.3 21.9 21.9 26.4 26.4 25.8 74.4 78.0 25.5 25.5 79.4 79.4 80.7 24.6 25.1 83.5 23.1 |

PRINCIPAL CITY COMPARISONS 47 48 | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221(2ND EDITION) PRINCIPAL CITY COMPARISONS Percent ofTotal Workers WhoCarpooltoWork: 2018 Table 80 Percent ofTotal Workers Who Bike toWork: 2018 Table 82 Percent ofTotal Workers WhoTake PublicTransportation toWork: 2018 Table 81 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: 15 Nashville Nashville 15 Kansas 14 City Louisville 13 Nashville 15 Indianapolis 14 Kansas City 13 Louisville 11 Columbus 11 Grand 10 Rapids Birmingham 12 St. 15 8.4 Louis Pittsburgh 13 Chicago 13 Minneapolis/St. 10 Paul Louisville 10 Indianapolis 10 Average 9.4 Average 10.0 10.0 Average 9.4 Average Average 0.9 Average 1.4 1.4 Average 0.9 Average 4.2 Average 8.2 Average 3 7 8 9 Kansas City 8 Buffalo 7 Columbus 6 Nashville 4 Cleveland Cincinnati 4 Grand Rapids 2 1 Detroit 9 Indianapolis Indianapolis 9 Detroit 9 Columbus 9 1Portland 9 Cincinnati 7 Cleveland 4 St. Louis Grand 4 Rapids 4 Buffalo 2.6 3 Pittsburgh 2 Chicago 1 Minneapolis/St. Paul 3Richmond Detroit 9 Cincinnati 7 6 Buffalo 11.6 5 St. Louis 4 Cleveland 3 Minneapolis/St. Paul Pittsburgh 2 1 Chicago Principal CitiesofMidwes Principal CitiesofMidwes Principal CitiesofMidwes Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community Survey nsus American Community nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community er ra Areas t Metro er ra Areas t Metro Areas t Metro 83 1Portland 28.3 18.6 2 Salt Salt 2 Lake City 18.6 48 1Providence 14.8 03 10.3 01 5Denver 10.1 00 San Antonio 2 10.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 13 Oklahoma Oklahoma 13 City 0.1 0.4 13 Birmingham Birmingham 13 0.4 0.5 12 Raleigh Raleigh 12 0.5 Tucson 5 2Richmond 0.9 1.8 0.5 10 San San 10 Antonio 0.5 . 3Salt Lake City 0.9 0.5 10 Memphis Memphis 10 6 Sacramento 0.5 0.9 0.2 13 Charlotte Charlotte 13 0.2 . 7Providence 0.7 0.5 9 Jacksonville 9Jacksonville 3Denver 0.5 1.7 9.9 9.9 6.1 6.1 1.6 15 Oklahoma Oklahoma 15 City Raleigh 12 1.6 3.2 Raleigh 11 8.4 8.4 10 Charlotte Charlotte 10 8.4 9.8 4 Salt 4 Lake City 9.8 6.9 7 Sacramento Sacramento 7 6.9 8.3 14 Denver Denver 14 8.3 5.9 8 Tucson Tucson 8 5.9 1.9 13 Memphis Memphis 13 Birmingham 10 1.9 3.3 6.5 15 Portland Portland 15 6.5 . 6Providence 9.6 3.2 11 San 11 Antonio 3.2 Richmond 12 8.3 . 9.6 2.3 . 8Oklahoma City 6Memphis 9.5 9.7 . 5Tucson 9.8 9.1 9 Jacksonville 9Jacksonville 9.1 13 Jacksonville 13Jacksonville

8 Charlotte Charlotte 8 Sacramento 3 7 8 4 Principal Ci Principal Ci Principal Ci Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee ties of Other Metro Areas Areas ties of OtherMetro ties of Other Metro Areas Areas ties of Other Metro Areas ties of OtherMetro 10.9 10.9 11.0 11.0 12.1 12.0 15.2 10.4 10.8 0.7 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 2.4 0.1 0.1 3.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 2.0 2.5 2.5 5.3 1.0 0.5 9.9 9.9 6.1 6.1 2.9 2.9 1.4 1.4 0.5 0.5 2.2 8.7 8.6 8.6 7.7 7.7 3.3 3.3 9.5 9.5 7.8 7.8 7.6 7.6 3.2 3.2 8.6 8.6 5.9 3.2 3.2 1.4 2.5 2.5 9.7 4.5 6.4 9.6 Percent ofTotal HouseholdswithNoVehicles orOneVehicle: 2018 Table 85 Percent ofTotal HouseholdswithNoVehicles: 2018 Table 84 Percent ofTotal Workers WhoWalk toWork: 2018 Table 83 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: 15 Nashville Nashville 15 City Kansas 14 Louisville 13 Grand 12 Rapids 11 Indianapolis Columbus 10 Nashville 15 Columbus 14 Indianapolis 13 Louisville 12 Kansas City 11 Rapids Grand 10 Kansas 15 City Indianapolis 14 13 Louisville Nashville 12 Columbus 11 Detroit 10 Average 40.3 Average Average 33.0 40.3 Average 4.6 Average 7.9 Average 3.6 Average 4.6 Average 7 9 8 inaoi/t al . 7Birmingham 7.7 8 Cincinnati 7 Minneapolis/St. St. Louis Paul 6 4 Detroit 4 Cleveland 3 Buffalo Pittsburgh 2 1 Chicago 3Portland Grand 9 Rapids 7 Cleveland 6 Cincinnati 6.0 5 Chicago 3 St. Louis 3 Minneapolis/St. Paul 2 Buffalo Pittsburgh 1 inaoi/t al 77 9Tucson 37.7 9 Minneapolis/St. Paul Cincinnati 8 6 St. Louis 5 Detroit Pittsburgh 4 3 Cleveland 2 Buffalo 1 Chicago Principal CitiesofMidwes Principal CitiesofMidwes Principal CitiesofMidwes Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community Survey nsus American Community Survey nsus American Community er ra Areas t Metro er ra Areas t Metro Areas t Metro 13.7 2 Providence Providence 2 1Richmond 13.7 16.3 Providence 1 10.2 11 5Tucson 11.1 31 3Portland 13.1 11 11.1 40.9 40.9 27.7 15 Oklahoma Oklahoma 15 City Sacramento 12 27.7 29.6 50.5 4 Memphis Memphis 4 50.5 30.6 12 Raleigh Raleigh 12 30.6 87 4Portland 48.7 30.8 30.8 40.6 8 Denver Denver 8 40.6 56 6Birmingham 45.6 55.8 33.5 10 Charlotte Charlotte 10 33.5 20 2Providence 52.0 29.1 14 San Antonio San Antonio 14 29.1 14 3Richmond 51.4 6.6 6.6 4.7 3.1 15 Oklahoma Oklahoma 15 City Sacramento 12 3.1 3.6 Oklahoma 12 City 2.9 3.4 13 Raleigh Raleigh 13 3.4 Raleigh 14 Charlotte 10 1.8 3.4 4.3 10 San Antonio San Antonio 10 4.3 . 6 SaltCity Lake 6 9.9 Birmingham 9 4.1 1.9 13 Jacksonville 13Jacksonville 1.9 . 8Denver 7.4 2Salt Lake City 5.6 7.4 3.3 14 Charlotte Charlotte 14 3.3 . 6Richmond 5.5 3.2 10 San 10 Antonio 3.2 1.6 15 Memphis Memphis 15 1.6 . 4Denver 6.0 4.2 . 7Sacramento 4.9 A COMPARISON OFTHEMILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITSPEERS 11 Jacksonville 11Jacksonville 7 Salt Lake City City SaltLake 7 9Memphis Tucson 7 11 Jacksonville 11Jacksonville 5 1 4 Principal Ci Principal Ci Principal Ci Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee ties of Other Metro Areas Areas ties of OtherMetro ties of Other Metro Areas Areas ties of Other Metro Areas ties of OtherMetro 40.9 40.9 25.1 25.1 26.5 37.8 37.8 26.5 26.5 33.2 33.2 33.0 33.0 26.4 26.4 28.9 28.9 37.4 29.9 29.9 37.8 39.7 38.7 32.8 4.7 4.7 6.6 6.6 7.4 7.4 8.9 2.7 2.7 1.3 1.3 3.5 3.5 2.3 2.3 2.6 2.8 1.5 2.1 2.2 2.2 9.5 4.8 5.1 4.2 4.4 6.8 2.9 2.9 2.4 2.4 3.3 2.2 2.2 4.5 4.1 5.9 1.7 4.4 2.9 5.7 |

PRINCIPAL CITY COMPARISONS 49 50 | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221(2ND EDITION) PRINCIPAL CITY COMPARISONS Adults with a Bachelor’s DegreeorHigher:2018 Adults withaBachelor’s Ratio ofRemainder ofMetroAreatoCity Table 87 aHighSchoolDiploma:2018 Adults Without Ratio ofCitytoRemainder ofMetroArea Table 86 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: Note: Ratio calculated by dividing the percen Note: Ratio calculated by dividing the percent of principal city city principal of percent the dividing by calculated Ratio Note: 15 Nashville Nashville 15 Louisville 14 Pittsburgh 13 Columbus 11 Chicago 11 10 St. Louis 14 Pittsburgh Pittsburgh 14 Nashville 14 Cincinnati 13 Minneapolis 11 Grand 11 Rapids St. 10 Louis vrg 19 vrg 1.52 Average 1.90 Average vrg .8 Average 1.03 Average 1.18 1 3 9 Cincinnati 8 Grand Rapids 7 Indianapolis 6 Minneapolis 5 Detroit Kansas City 4 3 Buffalo 2 Cleveland 9 Chicago 8 Louisville 7 Columbus 6 Indianapolis 5 Buffalo 4 Kansas City 2 Cleveland 1 Detroit Principal CitiesofMidwes Principal CitiesofMidwes of remaindermetro of area withouadults of cityprincipal withadults bachelor's a degree or higher. Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community er ra Areas t Metro er ra Areas t Metro 3.43 1.69 1.15 14 Raleigh Raleigh 14 1.15 1.23 13 Charlotte Charlotte 13 1.23 1.14 15 Portland Portland 15 1.14 .9 5Sacramento 2.29 0.78 14 Portland Portland 14 0.78 .7 8Sacramento 0.97 0.78 15 Salt 15 Lake City 0.78 .8 9Memphis 1.58 0.85 13 Charlotte Charlotte 13 0.85 .0 Oklahoma City 4 2.30 0.87 12 Denver Denver 12 Raleigh 11 Richmond 10 0.87 0.87 0.93 1.46 12 Salt 12 Lake City 1.46 .3 7Providence 4Birmingham 1.03 1.26 2.23 .7 8Birmingham 3San Antonio1.67 2.49 1.46 11 Providence Providence 11 1.46 .1 4San Antonio 1.21 1.54 10 Jacksonville 10Jacksonville 1.54 .0 7Denver 1.80 .9 6Memphis 1.19 .0 2Tucson 2.90 .2 6Richmond 2.02 .2 2Tucson 2.12 .9 8Oklahoma City 0.99 t of remainder of metro area adults with t a high school dipl

3 Jacksonville adults without adults high diplomaa school equivalentor percent by oma or equivalent. 1 1 Principal Ci Principal Ci Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee a a bachelor's degree or higher by percent ties of Other Metro Areas Areas ties of OtherMetro ties of Other Metro Areas Areas ties of OtherMetro 3.43 1.69 1.06 1.06 1.02 1.02 1.30 1.30 0.87 0.87 1.67 1.21 1.21 1.58 0.85 0.85 1.59 1.46 0.68 0.68 0.71 0.71 0.72 1.45 1.54 0.83 0.83 0.89 0.89 1.55 1.18 1.74 0.99 1.18 1.06 1.35 1.23 1.16 0.99 1.35 Ratio ofCitytoRemainder ofMetroAreaPeople inPoverty: 2018 Table 89 Ratio ofRemainder ofMetroAreatoCityPer CapitaIncome:2018 Table 88 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: city principal of percent the dividing by calculated Ratio Note: Ce ofthe Bureau U.S. Source: metro ar of the remainder by dividing calculated Note: Ratio 15 Nashville Nashville 15 Louisville 14 Indianapolis 13 Chicago 12 St. 11 Louis Pittsburgh 10 Nashville 15 Pittsburgh 13 Chicago 13 Cincinnati 12 Louisville 11 vrg 25 vrg 2.08 Average 2.54 Average Average 1.19 Average 1.30 1 2 9 St. 9 Louis 9 Minneapolis 8 Grand Rapids 7 Kansas City 6 Columbus 5 Indianapolis 4 Buffalo 3 Cleveland 1 Detroit 9 Kansas City 8 Grand Rapids 7 Columbus 6 Cincinnati Detroit 5 4 Minneapolis 3 Cleveland 2 Buffalo Principal CitiesofMidwes Principal CitiesofMidwes population in poverty. poverty. population in Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee nsus American Community Survey Survey nsus American Community Survey nsus American Community er ra Areas t Metro er ra Areas t Metro 4.00 1.80 1.63 15 Sacramento Sacramento 15 Charlotte 14 1.63 1.69 0.96 15 Salt 15 Lake City Raleigh 11 0.96 1.11 1.04 14 Charlotte Charlotte 14 1.04 2.18 10 Raleigh Raleigh 10 2.18 1.14 10 Oklahoma Oklahoma 10 City 1.14 .0 6Birmingham 2.60 .9 7Salt Lake City San 5 Antonio 2.59 3.08 .8 1.98 1.86 13 Portland Portland 13 Denver 11 1.86 2.14 Denver 12 1.08 .9 6Memphis 4Birmingham 1.29 1.53 .9 2Providence 3.39 1.99 12 Oklahoma Oklahoma 12 City 1.99 1.04 13 Portland Portland 13 1.04 .1 8Sacramento 1.21 .0 8Tucson 2.40 .5 3Providence 1.65 .0 5San Antonio 1.30 .3 3Memphis 3.23 1.27 7 Jacksonville 7Jacksonville 1.27 2.22 9 Jacksonville 9Jacksonville 2.22 .4 9Richmond 1.14 .1 4Richmond 3.11 A COMPARISON OFTHEMILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITSPEERS Tucson 2 cipal city per capita income. per principal city by income per capita ea population in poverty by percent of remainder of metro area metro of remainder of percent by poverty in population 1 1 Principal Ci Principal Ci Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee ties of Other Metro Areas Areas ties of OtherMetro ties of Other Metro Areas Areas ties of OtherMetro 1.80 4.00 1.20 1.20 1.23 1.26 1.26 0.82 0.82 0.98 0.93 0.93 0.87 0.87 1.71 1.71 1.01 1.01 1.34 1.34 1.65 0.88 0.88 2.40 2.40 1.52 1.52 1.39 2.33 2.74 1.14 2.25 1.34 2.15 1.09 1.31 2.41 1.48 2.66 1.23 1.82 |

PRINCIPAL CITY COMPARISONS 51 52 | SEWRPC MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 221 (2ND EDITION) SOUTHEASTERN WISCONSIN REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF

Kevin J. Muhs, PE, AICP...... Executive Director Benjamin R. McKay, AICP...... Deputy Director Laura L. Herrick, PE, CFM...... Chief Environmental Engineer Christopher T. Hiebert, PE...... Chief Transportation Engineer Elizabeth A. Larsen, SPHR, SHRM-SCP...... Director of Administration Eric D. Lynde...... Chief Special Projects Planner Rob W. Merry, PLS...... Chief Surveyor Nakeisha N. Payne...... Public Involvement and Outreach Manager David A. Schilling...... Chief Land Use Planner Dr. Thomas M. Slawski...... Chief Biologist

Special acknowledgment is due Kathryn E. Sobottke (Principal Specialist) and Megan I. Deau (Senior Graphic Designer) for their contributions to this report, with appreciation extended to all Commission staff who supported and contributed to the report.