Technical Report: Employment

Transcription

1 Cherokee orecasts Technical Report: Employment An Element of the Joint Comprehensive Plan 2030 For Cherokee and the Cities of Ball Ground, Waleska and Woodstock, Georgia Plan Cherokee Team: ROSS+associates McBride Dale Clarion Day Wilburn Associates Robert Charles Lesser & Company

2 Technical Report: Employment Forecasts Table of Contents Introduction... 1 Alternate Growth Scenarios... 2 Employment Data... 3 Distribution of City Employment... 6 Methodology: Employment Forecasts... 6 wide Employment Estimates 2005 & City Employment Estimates 2005 & Total Employment Estimates for Each Scenario... 8 Annualized Employment Estimates... 8 Analysis... 9 Appendix A: Low Employment Forecast Scenario Appendix B: Medium Employment Forecast Scenario Appendix C: High Employment Forecast Scenario Appendix D: Woods & Poole Methodology Introduction Overview of the Projection Methods The "Export-Base" Approach Employment Data Employment by Sector The Demographic Model Households The Accuracy of the Projections February 2006 i

3 List of Tables Employment Data from Various Sources...4 City Employment Employment Forecasts: Appendix A: Low Forecast Scenario wide Employment 2005 and City Employment 2005 and Employment Summary 2005 and Employment Share 2005 and Annualized Employment Forecasts to Appendix B: Medium Forecast Scenario wide Employment 2005 and City Employment 2005 and Employment Summary 2005 and Employment Share 2005 and Annualized Employment Forecasts to Appendix C: High Forecast Scenario wide Employment 2005 and City Employment 2005 and Employment Summary 2005 and Employment Share 2005 and Annualized Employment Forecasts to February 2006 ii

4 Technical Report: Employment Forecasts Introduction This report presents the methodology used in preparing employment forecasts for Cherokee and its cities, and contains recommendations for use in the Joint Comprehensive Plan 10th-Year Update. The employment forecasts are based on household forecasts, published in a separate Technical Report on Housing Forecasts. Forecasts of the increase in employment in Cherokee and its cities provide basic input to the assessment of nonresidential market forces in the county, which leads to estimates of the demand for land for new stores, businesses and industry over the forecast period. This report contains the following Section that presents the methodology and summarizes the resulting forecasts, three appendices that contain the detailed employment forecast tables for each of three scenarios, and a fourth appendix that discusses the methodology used by Woods & Poole Economics, Inc. in using their econometric model to make estimates and forecasts. Methodology and Summary of Forecasts Appendix A 'Low' Forecast Scenario Appendix B 'Medium' Forecast Scenario Appendix C 'High' Forecast Scenario Appendix D Woods & Poole Methodology February

5 Alternate Growth Scenarios Three scenarios have been developed regarding future growth in Cherokee, characterized as the Low, Medium and High Forecasts. The low forecast is based on an update to the population projections made by the Atlanta Regional Commission as part of Mobility 2030, related to ARC s transportation planning activities. The medium forecast and the high forecast resulted from regression analyses applied to historic population growth trends, which are discussed more fully in the Technical Report on Population Forecasts. Subsequently, the three scenarios were used as a basis for household and housing forecasts and published in a Technical Report on the subject. As will be seen in the description of the methodology used to forecast employment, employment growth is tightly bound to population growth. The analysis of the population growth scenarios presented in the Technical Report on Population Forecasts is particularly pertinent and is summarized as follows: All of the methodologies used for the countywide population forecasts reflect an increasing share of the population located in one or another city most notably Canton, Holly Springs and Woodstock each of which is anticipated to roughly quadruple their 2004 population.differences, however, can be seen between the low and the high forecasts that are most notably evident in the growth rate and pattern for the unincorporated area. Under the Mobility 2030 scenario, the countywide population continues to increase at an increasing rate (note the upward curve in the line on the first graph). With the comparably higher rate of growth in population located within the cities, the unincorporated population grows at a much lower, but steady, rate (note the flatness of the line on the first graph). Considering the medium forecast, however, the countywide total increases at a steady rate (a function of using an average annual rate of growth), but the unincorporated population exhibits a much stronger ess curve shape, suggesting a continuation of an increasing growth rate over the next 10 years or so, then dropping off in the latter part of the forecast period still growing but at a decreasing annual rate. Ultimately, under the medium scenario, the unincorporated population in 2030 will be higher than under the low scenario, but the pattern of that increase could be characterized as a higher rate of growth in the coming decade that drops off in time, compared to a steady state of growth throughout the forecast period, respectively. In the "high" forecast, growth in the unincorporated area continues at a steady but everincreasing rate. This forecast is considered "unconstrained" by the natural-growth effects of dwindling land resources, increasing land prices, and market forces. The reoccurring theme among all of these regressions is a medium population forecast in the low 400,000s and a high forecast in the low 500,000s. Although we believe the 500,000s will not be achieved by 2030 because of all the natural growth processes that are evident in the medium forecast, such a high estimate is presented for discussion and may represent the initial build-out of the county after February

6 Employment Data Very little reliable historic data is available regarding employment (number of jobs) as opposed to the number of employed residents in Cherokee. Various data sources also treat employment differently, some including government employees in with various private industry categories, some omitting government employees altogether, some omitting second and part-time jobs, while others count only the employees that fall under workman s compensation. The table on the next page, for instance, shows employment data and some forecasts from four different sources. The first two columns show employment data derived from the Atlanta Regional Commission s forecasts for Mobility 2030; the ARC data has been updated to recent Census estimates for This data has been summed for the county as a whole based on estimates of employment in 2000 and 2030 published by Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ). Cherokee is divided into almost 90 TAZs, which are themselves subdivisions of Census Tracts and do not conform to municipal boundaries. While the Mobility 2030 data is available by SIC 1 industry categories, no data is given for farm employment. The Woods & Poole 2 data, shown on the table for 2000, 2005 and 2030, is generally considered the most complete data, and is also available by SIC category. Woods & Poole works closely with the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA, also shown on the table for 2000). As a result, Woods & Poole estimates reflect a count of all jobs, including second jobs and sole proprietors, thus providing a more complete basis for projecting total future employment levels. While their data and forecasts are the most complete, the data are available only for the county as a whole and are tied to population forecasts that fall notably short when compared to Mobility 2030 projections or the Joint Comprehensive Plan Update forecasts published in the companion Technical Report on Population Forecasts. The last columns on the following table are labeled Census 2000 and are derived from the census long form data, as published by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS). Employment levels reported by the BTS are commonly lower than the Woods & Poole figures because Woods & Poole counts jobs while the BTS derives their data from employed persons. As a result, a person holding both a full-time and a part-time job would be reported by Woods & Poole as two jobs, while the same person would be reported by the BTS as one worker. The true value of the BTS data, however, is that it is available not only for the county as a whole but for the larger cities as well. On the down side, the data are reported by NAICS code, and governmental workers employed in certain service categories (such as education ) are commingled with private sector employees. As a result, the BTS data has to be summed by SIC category and public employees reassigned to the government employment category. 1 Standard Industrial Classification. The SIC Manual is published by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget, but has been obsoleted by the OMB s new NAICS categories (the North American Industry Classification System). 2 Woods & Poole Economics, Inc., is recognized by the Georgia Department of Community Affairs as a primary data source for comprehensive planning in the state. The data shown is from the most recent State Profile published in February

7 Employment Data from Various Sources Cherokee Mobility 2030* Woods & Poole** Census 2000**** BEA 2000*** Total Canton Holly Springs Woodstock Rest of Farm Employment n/a n/a Construction Employment 3,750 9,180 6,049 7,488 16,817 6,049 5, ,650 Manufacturing Employment 4,800 9,217 4,395 4,062 5,325 4,395 5,035 1, ,860 TCU Employment 800 3,729 1,436 1,803 4,357 1,436 1, Wholesale Employment 1,900 8,228 2,344 2,793 5,533 2,344 1, Retail Employment 9,300 32,077 10,131 12,448 21,364 10,131 6,055 1, ,770 2,540 FIRE Employment 1,350 5,902 4,146 5,880 10,481 4,146 2, Service Employment 8,500 29,168 14,962 18,928 39,500 14,962 12,581 2, ,877 7,020 Total Private Employment 30,400 97,501 44,162 54, ,956 44,162 34,906 7, ,367 19,220 Government Employment 5,350 11,477 5,867 7,434 14,397 5,867 5,809 1, ,125 Total Employment 35, ,978 50,029 61, ,353 50,029 40,715 9,225 1,020 8,130 22,345 Number of Households 49, ,656 50,148 63, ,639 50,148 49,495 2,702 1,136 3,869 41,788 Employment per Household Notes: TCU--Transportation, Communications and Utilities. FIRE--Finance, Real Estate and Insurance. *Atlanta Regional Commission, Regional Transportation Plan. **Woods & Poole Economics, Georgia State Profile, Cherokee, Includes 2nd jobs and part-time sole proprietors. ***U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, Regional Economic Information System. Includes part-time employees and sole proprietors. ****U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics, based on 2000 Census. Counts employed persons that commute, by place of work. February

8 City Employment Cherokee Cities Ball Ground Total Employment--2000* Holly Canton Springs Waleska Woodstock Ball Ground Percent of City Total Holly Canton Springs Waleska Woodstock Farm Employment % 0.70% 0.98% 0.00% 0.12% Construction Employment % 10.46% 14.71% 27.32% 11.50% Manufacturing Employment 108 1, % 13.77% 18.63% 3.92% 8.79% TCU Employment % 2.82% 7.84% 0.00% 2.40% Wholesale Employment % 2.11% 8.33% 2.67% 2.58% Retail Employment 39 1, , % 18.05% 7.84% 7.38% 21.77% FIRE Employment % 6.45% 2.45% 1.26% 8.06% Service Employment 36 2, , % 25.72% 31.08% 40.50% 35.39% Total Private Employment 387 7, , % 80.09% 91.86% 83.05% 90.62% Government Employment 90 1, % 19.91% 8.14% 16.95% 9.38% Total Employment 477 9,225 1, , % % % % % Notes: TCU--Transportation, Communications and Utilities. FIRE--Finance, Real Estate and Insurance. *Ball Ground and Waleska estimated from Mobility 2030 TAZ data, Atlanta Regional Commission. Canton, Holly Springs and Woodstock data from U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics, based on 2000 Census. February

9 Distribution of City Employment The table on the preceding page provides employment data for all of the cities in Cherokee (except for those portions of Nelson and Mt. Park that extend into Cherokee, where employment is minimal or nonexistent). The numeric data in the left columns of the table (Total Employment 2000) is drawn from two sources: For Canton, Holly Springs and Woodstock, the BTS data for 2000 is transferred to the table. For Ball Ground and Waleska, TAZ data from ARC is drawn from those TAZs within which the two cities are located, which assumes that most of the employment in these rural TAZs is actually within the cities themselves. As will be seen below, the actual total figures are less important than the relationship between the figures for each city. An important factor in making current and future estimates of employment in the county s various cities is the distribution of jobs across the range of employment categories, which differ from city to city. In order to preserve this distinction between cities, the percentage of employment in each category is determined from the year 2000 data from the BTS and as estimated for the other two cities. These percentages are shown in the right columns of the table, and will be applied against 2005 and 2030 employment totals for each city to calculate the number of employees in each employment category. The same figures are used in each of the three scenarios in that the relationships are kept constant, but are applied to different employment totals based on the scenario being considered. Methodology: Employment Forecasts The methodology used in this report goes back to the 2000 Census, and uses Woods & Poole as a major resource. Because the Woods & Poole forecasts are only available for the county as a whole, the approach of this report is to estimate employment in the cities and subtract it from the county total to estimate employment in the unincorporated areas of the county. wide Employment Estimates 2005 & 2030 The first table under each of the three Scenario Appendices shows countywide estimates of employment for 2005 and 2030, calculated by using employment-per-household ratios from Woods & Poole. Even though the projections to 2030 published by Woods & Poole are notably lower than the forecasts prepared for the Joint Comprehensive Plan Update, the population and employment projections are tightly bound within the Woods & Poole econometric model. Thus, the relationship between population and economic growth (i.e., jobs in the county per resident household) can be relied upon with a greater degree of confidence than the numeric projections themselves. Specifically, the first table under each Scenario Appendix has been constructed as follows: employment estimates made by Woods & Poole for each employment category for 2005 and 2030 are shown on the Employment Data table above, as well as W&P s estimated number of households. The employment estimate figures are divided by the number of households to calculate the employment-per-household ratios shown on the table. These Woods & Poole ratios are February

10 then multiplied by the number of households forecast under the scenario to estimate employment by category for the Joint Comprehensive Plan Update (i.e., Plan Cherokee ). City Employment Estimates 2005 & 2030 The second table under each Scenario Appendix shows estimated employment for each city by employment category, for 2005 and This is done by estimating total employment in each city for each of the two benchmark years, and generally distributing that total to each employment category based on the percentages calculated in the City Employment 2000 table above. The employment estimates for each city are made in pace with each city s population growth, and in proportion to population growth countywide. In essence, this assumes that the relationship between population and employment will remain constant and that each city will maintain its proportion of employment relative to its proportion of countywide population. (That is, as each city s population grows in share as a percentage of the county as a whole, its share of countywide employment will also increase proportionally.) The following illustrates the formula for estimating a particular city s employment for the benchmark year 2005: wide Population Increase City s Population Increase = City s Population Increase as % of wide increase City s Population Increase as % of wide increase wide Employment Increase = City s Employment Increase City s Employment Increase + City s Employment in 2000 = City s Employment in 2005 The same process is used to estimate the 2030 employment for each city, substituting data for the increases and adding the city s increase to the 2005 employment level. Once total employment for each city for each of the benchmark years is estimated, it is distributed to the various employment categories on the table based on the percentages calculated in the City Employment 2000 table above (with three exceptions). The three exceptions are: farm employment in 2005 as well as in 2030, and manufacturing employment in For farm employment, the year 2000 Census numbers are repeated for 2005, assuming no further increase or loss has occurred. In the cities where farm employment was reported in the census February

11 (Canton, Holly Springs and Woodstock), it amounts to an insignificant level (less that 1%) in each case. By 2030, it is assumed that farm employment will have disappeared within the cities. Estimating manufacturing employment used a methodology different from all other categories for Applying the 2000 percentage for manufacturing employment distribution to the total 2030 employment in each city results in a total figure for all cities together greater than the total increase countywide. This reflects in part the relatively lower increase in countywide manufacturing employment projected over the period compared to all other categories (except, of course, farm employment). For instance, while the other categories increase by percentages between 200% and 300% under the medium forecast, manufacturing employment increases only 156%. 3 To estimate manufacturing employment in each city in 2030, then, the countywide multiplier for that scenario (156% for the medium forecast, for instance) was applied to each city s 2005 figure. In this way, manufacturing employment continues to grow in each city at the same pace as manufacturing employment countywide, with the clear majority of all manufacturing employment (70% or more, depending on the scenario) still located within the cities. Total Employment Estimates for Each Scenario The third table in each Scenario Appendix summarizes the employment figures for each jurisdiction. The countywide estimates from the first table are combined with the city estimates from the second table (and the portions of Nelson and Mt. Park are inserted for completeness); estimates for the unincorporated area are calculated by subtracting all of the cities from the countywide figures. The fourth table in each Scenario Appendix shows the percentage of countywide employment that is estimated to be located within each jurisdiction in 2005 and The figures are calculated from the previous table, and reveal the extent to which countywide employment is anticipated to be increasingly located within the various cities, as they continue to grow over the 25- year forecast period. Annualized Employment Estimates The last table in each Scenario Appendix shows total employment within the county as a whole, each of the cities and the unincorporated area calculated for each year between 2005 and Because the employment estimates for both 2005 and 2030 are estimated in pace with population growth, the intervening years are also calculated to increase as the population increases. These figures should be treated with great caution for any given year; unlike population growth which tends to have a higher degree of continuity from year to year, even as the rates of growth go up or down over various periods of time, employment growth often reflects a feast-or-famine cycle overlaid on a base of steady background growth in local businesses. While the approach used in constructing the table results in a smooth curve of employment increases for each jurisdiction 3 The percentages differ for each growth scenario, but the relationship between the percentages reflects slower growth in manufacturing employment in each case. February

12 over time, the data should be treated as averages that will be exceeded or not met on a year-toyear basis. In the long run, of course, the annual averages will result in a realistic total. As noted, in this last table in each Scenario Appendix, employment growth in each jurisdiction is related to the pace of population growth countywide. The first two columns of the table, then, show the population figures for each year as estimated for the scenario, and the annual increment of each year s population growth calculated as the past year s increase as a percentage of the total increase. This annual increase is then applied to the total employment increase for each jurisdiction each year, and added to the previous year s figure for a total figure for the year. Analysis The Alternate Growth Scenarios section above recommends that, of the three scenarios, the medium forecast of population growth is considered the most realistic. Because population growth (directly or as households) is tightly bound to employment growth, both as an integral part of the econometric model used by Woods & Poole and the methodologies presented in this Technical Report, the same can be said of the employment forecast scenarios. The table and graphs on the next page summarize the employment forecasts for each of the three scenarios. The most notable difference between the scenarios is the rate of employment growth in the unincorporated area in comparison to the cities. Under the low forecast, most of the increase in employment over the forecast period (almost two-thirds) gravitates to the cities (or is transferred through annexation) such that by 2030 there are just about the same levels of employment in the cities as a group and in the unincorporated area (a 51%-49% split, respectively). Under the high forecast, employment growth in the unincorporated area out-paces the cities by 2-to-1 as growth spreads more densely throughout the county. The medium forecast scenario results in roughly the same overall numerical increase in employment in the unincorporated area and the cities, while the cities share of employment in 2005 and 2030 grows from 40% to 44%. More detailed tables regarding forecasts for each city and their percentage share of employment growth in the county are found under each of the Scenario Appendices. February

13 Employment Forecasts: Total LOW FORECAST Uninc. All Cities Total Total MEDIUM FORECAST Uninc. All Cities Total Total HIGH FORECAST Uninc. All Cities Total ,848 36,634 25,214 63,162 37,891 25,271 63,323 38,045 25, ,632 37,338 26,294 66,186 39,487 26,699 66,499 40,177 26, ,467 38,062 27,405 69,285 41,122 28,163 69,803 42,395 27, ,354 38,807 28,547 72,451 42,793 29,658 73,235 44,699 28, ,295 39,573 29,722 75,678 44,496 31,182 76,794 47,088 29, ,291 40,361 30,930 78,959 46,227 32,732 80,481 49,563 30, ,344 41,171 32,173 82,286 47,983 34,303 84,295 52,123 32, ,455 42,004 33,451 85,653 49,759 35,894 88,237 54,769 33, ,626 42,861 34,765 89,052 51,553 37,499 92,306 57,500 34, ,859 43,742 36,117 92,476 53,360 39,116 96,503 60,317 36, ,156 44,648 37,508 95,919 55,177 40, ,828 63,220 37, ,518 45,580 38,938 99,373 56,999 42, ,280 66,209 39, ,948 46,539 40, ,831 58,824 44, ,860 69,283 40, ,447 47,525 41, ,286 60,647 45, ,567 72,443 42, ,017 48,539 43, ,732 62,465 47, ,402 75,689 43, ,660 49,582 45, ,161 64,274 48, ,365 79,021 45, ,378 50,655 46, ,566 66,070 50, ,455 82,438 47, ,173 51,758 48, ,940 67,850 52, ,673 85,941 48, ,048 52,893 50, ,276 69,610 53, ,019 89,529 50, ,005 54,060 51, ,567 71,346 55, ,492 93,203 52, ,046 55,260 53, ,806 73,055 56, ,093 96,963 54, ,173 56,494 55, ,985 74,733 58, , ,808 56, ,390 57,764 57, ,098 76,376 59, , ,739 57, ,698 59,070 59, ,138 77,980 61, , ,756 59, ,100 60,413 61, ,098 79,542 62, , ,859 61, ,598 61,796 63, ,971 81,057 63, , ,045 63,968 Increase 63,750 25,162 38,588 81,809 43,166 38, ,690 79,000 38,690 Increase in Employment Medium Housing Forecast Low Housing Forecast 200, , , , , ,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20, , , , , , ,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20, Total Uninc. All Cities Total Total Uninc. All Cities Total 120, ,000 80, ,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 - All Cities Total Uninc. Total Low Forcast High Forecast Medium Forecast High Housing Forecast 180, , , , ,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20, Total Uninc. All Cities Total February

14 Appendix A: Low Employment Forecast Scenario February

15 Scenario: Low Forecast wide Employment and 2030 Cherokee Emp/HH--W&P* Plan Cherokee** Farm Employment Construction Employment ,527 17,846 Manufacturing Employment ,083 5,651 TCU Employment ,812 4,624 Wholesale Employment ,808 5,872 Retail Employment ,513 22,672 FIRE Employment ,911 11,123 Service Employment ,027 41,918 Total Private Employment , ,320 Government Employment ,473 15,278 Total Employment 61, ,353 61, ,598 Number of Households 63, ,639 63, ,146 Notes: TCU--Transportation, Communications and Utilities. FIRE--Finance, Real Estate and Insurance. *Employment per Household, drawn from Woods & Poole Economics, Georgia State Profile, Cherokee, Includes 2nd jobs and part-time sole proprietors. **Woods & Poole employment per household applied to the number of households projected for Plan Cherokee. February

16 Scenario: Low Forecast City Employment and 2030 Cherokee Ball Ground Canton Holly Wood- Ball Holly Springs Waleska stock Ground Canton Springs Waleska Woodstock Farm Employment* Construction Employment 103 1, , , ,977 Manufacturing Employment** 117 1, , ,295 TCU Employment Wholesale Employment Retail Employment 42 2, , , ,636 FIRE Employment , ,086 Service Employment*** 38 3, , ,952 2, ,174 Total Private Employment 419 9,451 1, ,645 2,072 22,316 5, ,459 Government Employment 98 2, , ,430 Total Employment**** ,801 1, ,644 2,554 27,865 6,302 1,192 25,889 *Farm employment in cities for 2005 estimated at 2000 levels. No farm employment is estimated within the cities in **Manufacturing employment increase between 2005 and 2030 limited to countywide multiplier. ***Includes reallocation of farm employment percentage and manufacturing employment. ****Totals estimated in pace with increasing share of countywide population; totals distributed to economic categories using 2000 percentage distribution, except as noted above for farm and manufacturing employment. February

17 Scenario: Low Forecast Employment Summary and 2030 Cherokee and Its Cities Cherokee Total Ball Ground Canton Holly Springs Mt. Park (pt) Nelson (pt) Waleska Woodstock Uninc Farm Employment Construction Employment 7, , ,224 4,549 Manufacturing Employment 4, , ,085 TCU Employment 1, ,068 Wholesale Employment 2, ,075 Retail Employment 12, , ,317 7,851 FIRE Employment 5, ,218 Service Employment 19, , ,770 11,396 Total Private Employment 54, ,451 1, ,645 32,851 Government Employment 7, , ,783 Total Employment , ,801 1, ,644 36, Farm Employment Construction Employment 17, , ,977 10,192 Manufacturing Employment 5, , ,295 1,502 TCU Employment 4, ,563 Wholesale Employment 5, ,763 Retail Employment 22, , ,636 11,216 FIRE Employment 11, , ,086 6,943 Service Employment 41, ,952 2, ,174 18,902 Total Private Employment 110,320 2,072 22,316 5, ,459 55,694 Government Employment 15, , ,430 6,102 Total Employment ,598 2,554 27,865 6, ,192 25,889 61,796 February

18 Scenario: Low Forecast Employment Share and 2030 Cherokee and Its Cities Cherokee Total Ball Ground Canton Holly Springs Mt. Park (pt) Nelson (pt) Waleska Woodstock Uninc Farm Employment 100.0% 0.0% 9.4% 1.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.4% 87.8% Construction Employment 100.0% 1.4% 16.4% 3.1% 0.0% 0.0% 2.5% 16.3% 60.4% Manufacturing Employment 100.0% 2.9% 39.8% 7.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.7% 22.9% 26.6% TCU Employment 100.0% 1.8% 18.4% 6.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 14.1% 58.9% Wholesale Employment 100.0% 2.1% 8.9% 4.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.6% 9.8% 73.9% Retail Employment 100.0% 0.3% 17.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.4% 18.5% 62.7% FIRE Employment 100.0% 0.4% 12.9% 0.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2% 14.5% 71.4% Service Employment 100.0% 0.2% 16.1% 2.6% 0.0% 0.0% 1.5% 19.8% 59.9% Total Private Employment 100.0% 0.8% 17.4% 2.7% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 17.7% 60.4% Government Employment 100.0% 1.3% 31.4% 1.7% 0.0% 0.0% 1.5% 13.4% 50.6% Total Employment % 0.8% 19.1% 2.5% 0.0% 0.0% 1.1% 17.2% 59.2% 2030 Farm Employment 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% Construction Employment 100.0% 2.9% 16.3% 5.2% 0.0% 0.0% 1.8% 16.7% 57.1% Manufacturing Employment 100.0% 2.9% 39.8% 7.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.7% 22.9% 26.6% TCU Employment 100.0% 3.5% 17.0% 10.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 13.4% 55.4% Wholesale Employment 100.0% 5.0% 10.0% 8.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.5% 11.4% 64.1% Retail Employment 100.0% 0.9% 22.2% 2.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.4% 24.9% 49.5% FIRE Employment 100.0% 1.2% 16.2% 1.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 18.8% 62.4% Service Employment 100.0% 1.5% 21.4% 6.7% 0.0% 0.0% 1.2% 24.3% 45.1% Total Private Employment 100.0% 1.9% 20.2% 5.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.9% 21.3% 50.5% Government Employment 100.0% 3.2% 36.3% 3.4% 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% 15.9% 39.9% Total Employment % 2.0% 22.2% 5.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.9% 20.6% 49.2% February

19 Scenario: Low Forecast Annualized Employment Forecasts to 2030 Cherokee and Its Cities Cherokee Population Annual Increment Cherokee Ball Ground Canton Employment Holly Mt. Park Springs (pt) Nelson (pt) Waleska Woodstock Uninc ,653 61, ,801 1, ,644 36, , % 63, ,251 1, ,071 37, , % 65, ,713 1, ,510 38, , % 67, ,189 1, ,961 38, , % 69, ,678 2, ,425 39, , % 71, ,181 2, ,902 40, , % 73, ,698 2, ,393 41, , % 75, ,230 2, ,898 42, , % 77,626 1,021 15,777 2, ,417 42, , % 79,859 1,092 16,340 2, ,951 43, , % 82,156 1,165 16,919 3, ,500 44, , % 84,518 1,240 17,514 3, ,065 45, , % 86,948 1,318 18,126 3, ,646 46, , % 89,447 1,398 18,756 3, ,243 47, , % 92,017 1,480 19,404 3, ,858 48, , % 94,660 1,564 20,070 4, ,490 49, , % 97,378 1,651 20,755 4, ,140 50, , % 100,173 1,740 21,459 4, ,808 51, , % 103,048 1,832 22,183 4, ,010 20,495 52, , % 106,005 1,926 22,928 4, ,034 21,202 54, , % 109,046 2,023 23,694 5, ,058 21,929 55, , % 112,173 2,123 24,482 5, ,083 22,677 56, , % 115,390 2,226 25,293 5, ,109 23,446 57, , % 118,698 2,332 26,127 5, ,136 24,237 59, , % 122,100 2,441 26,984 6, ,163 25,051 60, , % 125,598 2,554 27,865 6, ,192 25,889 61,796 Increase 182,761 63,750 2,037 16,064 4, ,245 25,162 February

20 Appendix B: Medium Employment Forecast Scenario February

21 Scenario: Medium Forecast wide Employment and 2030 Cherokee Emp/HH--W&P* Plan Cherokee** Farm Employment Construction Employment ,687 20,599 Manufacturing Employment ,170 6,523 TCU Employment ,851 5,337 Wholesale Employment ,867 6,777 Retail Employment ,779 26,169 FIRE Employment ,036 12,838 Service Employment ,432 48,384 Total Private Employment , ,336 Government Employment ,632 17,635 Total Employment 61, ,353 63, ,971 Number of Households 63, ,639 65, ,222 Notes: TCU--Transportation, Communications and Utilities. FIRE--Finance, Real Estate and Insurance. *Employment per Household, drawn from Woods & Poole Economics, Georgia State Profile, Cherokee, Includes 2nd jobs and part-time sole proprietors. **Woods & Poole employment per household applied to the number of households projected for Plan Cherokee. February

22 Scenario: Medium Forecast City Employment and 2030 Cherokee Ball Ground Canton Holly Wood- Ball Holly Springs Waleska stock Ground Canton Springs Waleska Woodstock Farm Employment* Construction Employment 103 1, , , ,983 Manufacturing Employment** 117 1, , ,467 TCU Employment Wholesale Employment Retail Employment 42 2, , , ,646 FIRE Employment , ,089 Service Employment*** 39 3, , ,673 2, ,024 Total Private Employment 420 9,471 1, ,668 2,075 22,355 5, ,501 Government Employment 98 2, , , ,434 Total Employment**** ,826 1, ,669 2,558 27,913 6,314 1,194 25,935 *Farm employment in cities for 2005 estimated at 2000 levels. No farm employment is estimated within the cities in **Manufacturing employment increase between 2005 and 2030 limited to countywide multiplier. ***Includes reallocation of farm employment percentage and manufacturing employment. ****Totals estimated in pace with increasing share of countywide population; totals distributed to economic categories using 2000 percentage distribution, except as noted above for farm and manufacturing employment. February

23 Scenario: Medium Forecast Employment Summary and 2030 Cherokee and Its Cities Cherokee Total Ball Ground Canton Holly Springs Mt. Park (pt) Nelson (pt) Waleska Woodstock Uninc Farm Employment Construction Employment 7, , ,227 4,702 Manufacturing Employment 4, , ,166 TCU Employment 1, ,105 Wholesale Employment 2, ,132 Retail Employment 12, , ,323 8,106 FIRE Employment 6, ,339 Service Employment 19, , ,778 11,784 Total Private Employment 55, ,471 1, ,668 33,957 Government Employment 7, , ,001 3,934 Total Employment , ,826 1, ,669 37, Farm Employment Construction Employment 20, , ,983 12,932 Manufacturing Employment 6, , ,467 1,824 TCU Employment 5, ,272 Wholesale Employment 6, ,664 Retail Employment 26, , ,646 14,693 FIRE Employment 12, , ,089 8,650 Service Employment 48, ,673 2, ,024 25,870 Total Private Employment 127,336 2,075 22,355 5, ,501 72,614 Government Employment 17, , ,434 8,444 Total Employment ,971 2,558 27,913 6, ,194 25,935 81,058 February

24 Scenario: Medium Forecast Employment Share and 2030 Cherokee and Its Cities Cherokee Total Ball Ground Canton Holly Springs Mt. Park (pt) Nelson (pt) Waleska Woodstock Uninc Farm Employment 100.0% 0.0% 9.2% 1.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.4% 88.0% Construction Employment 100.0% 1.3% 16.1% 3.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.4% 16.0% 61.2% Manufacturing Employment 100.0% 2.8% 39.0% 7.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.6% 22.5% 28.0% TCU Employment 100.0% 1.8% 18.0% 6.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 13.8% 59.7% Wholesale Employment 100.0% 2.1% 8.7% 4.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.6% 9.6% 74.4% Retail Employment 100.0% 0.3% 16.7% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.4% 18.2% 63.4% FIRE Employment 100.0% 0.4% 12.6% 0.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 14.2% 71.9% Service Employment 100.0% 0.2% 15.8% 2.5% 0.0% 0.0% 1.4% 19.4% 60.6% Total Private Employment 100.0% 0.8% 17.1% 2.6% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 17.4% 61.2% Government Employment 100.0% 1.3% 30.9% 1.7% 0.0% 0.0% 1.5% 13.1% 51.5% Total Employment % 0.8% 18.7% 2.5% 0.0% 0.0% 1.1% 16.9% 60.0% 2030 Farm Employment 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% Construction Employment 100.0% 2.5% 14.2% 4.5% 0.0% 0.0% 1.6% 14.5% 62.8% Manufacturing Employment 100.0% 2.8% 39.0% 7.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.6% 22.5% 28.0% TCU Employment 100.0% 3.0% 14.7% 9.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 11.7% 61.3% Wholesale Employment 100.0% 4.4% 8.7% 7.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.5% 9.9% 68.8% Retail Employment 100.0% 0.8% 19.3% 1.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.3% 21.6% 56.1% FIRE Employment 100.0% 1.0% 14.0% 1.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 16.3% 67.4% Service Employment 100.0% 1.2% 17.9% 5.7% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 20.7% 53.5% Total Private Employment 100.0% 1.6% 17.6% 4.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% 18.5% 57.0% Government Employment 100.0% 2.7% 31.5% 2.9% 0.0% 0.0% 1.1% 13.8% 47.9% Total Employment % 1.8% 19.3% 4.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% 17.9% 55.9% February

25 Scenario: Medium Forecast Annualized Employment Forecasts to 2030 Cherokee and Its Cities Cherokee Population Annual Increment Cherokee Ball Ground Canton Employment Holly Mt. Park Springs (pt) Nelson (pt) Waleska Woodstock Uninc ,449 63, ,826 1, ,669 37, , % 66, ,421 1, ,233 39, , % 69, ,030 1, ,811 41, , % 72, ,653 2, ,402 42, , % 75, ,288 2, ,004 44, , % 78, ,933 2, ,616 46, , % 82, ,587 2, ,237 47, , % 85,653 1,078 16,249 2, ,865 49, , % 89,052 1,163 16,917 3, ,499 51, , % 92,476 1,248 17,590 3, ,138 53, , % 95,919 1,334 18,267 3, ,780 55, , % 99,373 1,420 18,946 3, ,425 56, , % 102,831 1,506 19,626 3, ,070 58, , % 106,286 1,592 20,305 4, ,715 60, , % 109,732 1,678 20,983 4, ,358 62, , % 113,161 1,764 21,657 4, ,998 64, , % 116,566 1,849 22,326 4, ,017 20,633 66, , % 119,940 1,933 22,989 4, ,038 21,263 67, , % 123,276 2,016 23,645 5, ,059 21,885 69, , % 126,567 2,098 24,292 5, ,080 22,499 71, , % 129,806 2,179 24,929 5, ,100 23,103 73, , % 132,985 2,258 25,554 5, ,120 23,696 74, , % 136,098 2,336 26,166 5, ,139 24,277 76, , % 139,138 2,412 26,764 5, ,158 24,844 77, , % 142,098 2,486 27,346 6, ,177 25,396 79, , % 144,971 2,558 27,913 6, ,194 25,935 81,057 Increase 234,205 81,809 2,040 16,087 4, ,266 43,166 February

26 Appendix C: High Employment Forecast Scenario February

27 Scenario: High Forecast wide Employment and 2030 Cherokee Emp/HH--W&P* Plan Cherokee** Farm Employment Construction Employment ,707 25,720 Manufacturing Employment ,181 8,144 TCU Employment ,856 6,664 Wholesale Employment ,875 8,462 Retail Employment ,811 32,675 FIRE Employment ,052 16,030 Service Employment ,480 60,413 Total Private Employment , ,994 Government Employment ,651 22,019 Total Employment 61, ,353 63, ,013 Number of Households 63, ,639 65, ,568 Notes: TCU--Transportation, Communications and Utilities. FIRE--Finance, Real Estate and Insurance. *Employment per Household, drawn from Woods & Poole Economics, Georgia State Profile, Cherokee, Includes 2nd jobs and part-time sole proprietors. **Woods & Poole employment per household applied to the number of households projected for Plan Cherokee. February

28 Scenario: High Forecast City Employment and 2030 Cherokee Ball Ground Canton Holly Wood- Ball Holly Springs Waleska stock Ground Canton Springs Waleska Woodstock Farm Employment* Construction Employment 103 1, , , ,985 Manufacturing Employment** 117 1, , ,829 TCU Employment Wholesale Employment Retail Employment 42 2, , , ,651 FIRE Employment , ,091 Service Employment*** 39 3, , ,057 2, ,672 Total Private Employment 420 9,473 1, ,670 2,077 22,372 5, ,521 Government Employment 98 2, , , ,436 Total Employment**** ,829 1, ,672 2,560 27,935 6,321 1,194 25,957 *Farm employment in cities for 2005 estimated at 2000 levels. No farm employment is estimated within the cities in **Manufacturing employment increase between 2005 and 2030 limited to countywide multiplier. ***Includes reallocation of farm employment percentage and manufacturing employment. ****Totals estimated in pace with increasing share of countywide population; totals distributed to economic categories using 2000 percentage distribution, except as noted above for farm and manufacturing employment. February

29 Scenario: High Forecast Employment Summary and 2030 Cherokee and Its Cities Cherokee Total Ball Ground Canton Holly Springs Mt. Park (pt) Nelson (pt) Waleska Woodstock Uninc Farm Employment Construction Employment 7, , ,227 4,722 Manufacturing Employment 4, , ,176 TCU Employment 1, ,110 Wholesale Employment 2, ,140 Retail Employment 12, , ,323 8,137 FIRE Employment 6, ,355 Service Employment 19, , ,779 11,829 Total Private Employment 55, ,473 1, ,670 34,094 Government Employment 7, , ,002 3,951 Total Employment , ,829 1, ,672 38, Farm Employment Construction Employment 25, , ,985 18,047 Manufacturing Employment 8, , ,829 2,291 TCU Employment 6, ,597 Wholesale Employment 8, ,347 Retail Employment 32, , ,651 21,189 FIRE Employment 16, , ,091 11,838 Service Employment 60, ,057 2, ,672 39,030 Total Private Employment 158,994 2,077 22,372 5, , ,224 Government Employment 22, , ,436 12,821 Total Employment ,013 2,560 27,935 6, ,194 25, ,045 February

30 Scenario: High Forecast Employment Share and 2030 Cherokee and Its Cities Cherokee Total Ball Ground Canton Holly Springs Mt. Park (pt) Nelson (pt) Waleska Woodstock Uninc Farm Employment 100.0% 0.0% 9.2% 1.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.4% 88.0% Construction Employment 100.0% 1.3% 16.1% 3.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.4% 15.9% 61.3% Manufacturing Employment 100.0% 2.8% 38.9% 7.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.6% 22.5% 28.1% TCU Employment 100.0% 1.8% 17.9% 6.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 13.8% 59.8% Wholesale Employment 100.0% 2.1% 8.7% 4.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.6% 9.6% 74.4% Retail Employment 100.0% 0.3% 16.7% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.4% 18.1% 63.5% FIRE Employment 100.0% 0.4% 12.6% 0.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 14.2% 72.0% Service Employment 100.0% 0.2% 15.7% 2.5% 0.0% 0.0% 1.4% 19.4% 60.7% Total Private Employment 100.0% 0.8% 17.0% 2.6% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 17.4% 61.2% Government Employment 100.0% 1.3% 30.8% 1.7% 0.0% 0.0% 1.5% 13.1% 51.6% Total Employment % 0.8% 18.7% 2.5% 0.0% 0.0% 1.1% 16.9% 60.1% 2030 Farm Employment 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% Construction Employment 100.0% 2.0% 11.4% 3.6% 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% 11.6% 70.2% Manufacturing Employment 100.0% 2.8% 38.9% 7.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.6% 22.5% 28.1% TCU Employment 100.0% 2.4% 11.8% 7.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 9.3% 69.0% Wholesale Employment 100.0% 3.5% 7.0% 6.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.4% 7.9% 75.0% Retail Employment 100.0% 0.6% 15.4% 1.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.3% 17.3% 64.8% FIRE Employment 100.0% 0.8% 11.2% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 13.0% 73.8% Service Employment 100.0% 0.9% 13.3% 4.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% 16.0% 64.6% Total Private Employment 100.0% 1.3% 14.1% 3.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.6% 14.8% 65.6% Government Employment 100.0% 2.2% 25.3% 2.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.9% 11.1% 58.2% Total Employment % 1.4% 15.4% 3.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.7% 14.3% 64.7% February

31 Scenario: High Forecast Annualized Employment Forecasts to 2030 Cherokee and Its Cities Cherokee Population Annual Increment Cherokee Ball Ground Canton Employment Holly Mt. Park Springs (pt) Nelson (pt) Waleska Woodstock Uninc ,908 63, ,829 1, ,672 38, , % 66, ,264 1, ,084 40, , % 69, ,716 1, ,513 42, , % 73, ,186 1, ,959 44, , % 76, ,673 2, ,421 47, , % 80, ,178 2, ,900 49, , % 84, ,700 2, ,395 52, , % 88, ,239 2, ,907 54, , % 92,306 1,021 15,796 2, ,435 57, , % 96,503 1,094 16,370 2, ,980 60, , % 100,828 1,169 16,962 3, ,542 63, , % 105,280 1,246 17,571 3, ,120 66, , % 109,860 1,325 18,198 3, ,715 69, , % 114,567 1,407 18,842 3, ,326 72, , % 119,402 1,491 19,504 3, ,954 75, , % 124,365 1,577 20,183 4, ,599 79, , % 129,455 1,665 20,880 4, ,260 82, , % 134,673 1,756 21,594 4, ,938 85, , % 140,019 1,849 22,326 4, ,015 20,632 89, , % 145,492 1,944 23,075 4, ,039 21,343 93, , % 151,093 2,041 23,841 5, ,063 22,070 96, , % 156,822 2,140 24,625 5, ,088 22, , , % 162,678 2,242 25,426 5, ,113 23, , , % 168,662 2,346 26,245 5, ,139 24, , , % 174,774 2,452 27,081 6, ,166 25, , , % 181,013 2,560 27,935 6, ,194 25, ,045 Increase 336, ,690 2,042 16,106 4, ,285 79,000 February