“Presentation to Hannibal CHART Partnership” by Dr. Daryl J. Hobbs September 15,2004 CHART...

“Presentation to Hannibal CHART Partnership”

by Dr. Daryl J. Hobbs

September 15,2004

http://www.oseda.missouri.edu

CHART PartnershipHannibal, MO

“Livable communities don’t just happen.They are created by the people who live in them.”

We can no longer pretend not to know…

What we know

Collaboration

…No longer merely a tactic for improving employee morale..it has become

…the defining principle of organization in a global economy

Number of Missouri Local Governments Number of Missouri Local Governments by Type - States: 1997by Type - States: 1997

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract of the United States: 2000

Missouri U.S. MissouriNational Rank

All Governmental Units 3,416 87,453 6thCounties 114 3,043 4thMunicipalities 944 19,372 5thSchool Districts 537 13,726 9thSpecial Districts 1,497 34,683 6th

Community Development can’t travel very far onignorance of the locality and how it operates.

The key to Rural Development is a more informedlocal leadership.

~Glen Pulver

Population Change 2000-2003

Source: USDC, Census Bureau, Decennial Census 1990 and 2000, Federal State Cooperative for Population Estimates

Prepared by: Univ of Mo Office of Social and Economic Data Analysis (OSEDA)

CountyPopulation

2000

Population 2003

estimate

Percent Change,

2000-2003Marion 28,289 28,289 0.0Clark 7,416 7,420 0.1Lewis 10,494 10,226 -2.6Monroe 9,311 9,396 0.9Ralls 9,626 9,653 0.3Shelby 6,799 6,702 -1.4

Total Population and Components of Change, 1990-2000

Source: 1990 and 2000 Decenial Census / Federal State Coop for Population Estimates - Prepared by: Univ of Mo Office of Social and Economic Data Analysis (OSEDA)

Total Population

2000Marion 28,289 607 2.2 3,993 3,638 355 1.3 252 0.9Clark 7,416 -131 -1.7 820 941 -121 -1.6 -10 -0.1Lewis 10,494 261 2.6 1,242 1,264 -22 -0.2 283 2.8Monroe 9,311 207 2.3 1,047 1,059 -12 -0.1 219 2.4Ralls 9,626 1,150 13.6 956 900 56 0.7 1,094 12.9Shelby 6,799 -143 -2.1 840 1,103 -263 -3.8 120 1.7

Net MigrationChange, 1990-2000 Natural Increase

Number Percent Births RateDeaths Number Rate Number

Population and Components of Change, 2000-2003

Source: 1990 and 2000 Decenial Census / Federal State Coop for Population Estimates - Prepared by: Univ of Mo Office of Social and Economic Data Analysis (OSEDA)

PopulationChange

Marion County 0 1,367 1,085 282 1.0 -282 -1.0Clark County 4 274 256 18 0.2 -14 -0.2Lewis County -268 334 356 -22 -0.2 -246 -2.3Monroe County 85 383 362 21 0.2 64 0.7Ralls County 27 261 332 -71 -0.7 98 1.0Shelby County -97 276 285 -9 -0.1 -88 -1.3

RateBirths Deaths

Natural Increase Net Migration

Number Rate Number

Population Change 1-Jul-90 to 1-Jul-03Marion County

Source: USDC, Census Bureau, Decennial Census 1990 and 2000, Federal State Cooperative for Population Estimates

Prepared by: Univ of Mo Office of Social and Economic Data Analysis (OSEDA)

Source:/popests/sct99_MO.txt and http://eire.census.gov/popest/data/cities/tables/SUB-EST2002-07-29.xls

-7

264

21

-69

136118

-203

1549

210

-20

-131

133

-300

-200

-100

0

100

200

300

Net P

opul

atio

n Ch

ange

Population Change 1-Jul-90 to 1-Jul-03Clark County

-72

3015

-22

82

-107

88

1710

-12

-36

-66

-30

-150

-100

-50

0

50

100

Net

Pop

ulat

ion

Cha

nge

Source: USDC, Census Bureau, Decennial Census 1990 and 2000, Federal State Cooperative for Population Estimates

Prepared by: Univ of Mo Office of Social and Economic Data Analysis (OSEDA)

Source:/popests/sct99_MO.txt and http://eire.census.gov/popest/data/cities/tables/SUB-EST2002-07-29.xls

Population Change 1-Jul-90 to 1-Jul-03Lewis County

9

-30

43

-30

127

-78

-119

-9-4

-158

92

76

79

-200

-150

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

Net

Po

pu

lati

on

Ch

ang

e

Source: USDC, Census Bureau, Decennial Census 1990 and 2000, Federal State Cooperative for Population Estimates

Prepared by: Univ of Mo Office of Social and Economic Data Analysis (OSEDA)

Source:/popests/sct99_MO.txt and http://eire.census.gov/popest/data/cities/tables/SUB-EST2002-07-29.xls

Population Change 1-Jul-90 to 1-Jul-03Monroe County

55

77

73

134

6776 46

5

76

-61

-134

-45

-95

-200

-150

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

200

Net

Pop

ulat

ion

Cha

nge

Source: USDC, Census Bureau, Decennial Census 1990 and 2000, Federal State Cooperative for Population Estimates

Prepared by: Univ of Mo Office of Social and Economic Data Analysis (OSEDA)

Source:/popests/sct99_MO.txt and http://eire.census.gov/popest/data/cities/tables/SUB-EST2002-07-29.xls

Population Change 1-Jul-90 to 1-Jul-03Ralls County

152

293

132

69

19

78

-17

120

66

186

35

79

-25

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Net

Pop

ulat

ion

Cha

nge

Source: USDC, Census Bureau, Decennial Census 1990 and 2000, Federal State Cooperative for Population Estimates

Prepared by: Univ of Mo Office of Social and Economic Data Analysis (OSEDA)

Source:/popests/sct99_MO.txt and http://eire.census.gov/popest/data/cities/tables/SUB-EST2002-07-29.xls

Population Change 1-Jul-90 to 1-Jul-03Shelby County

-19

-53

-13

21

-62

-33

-41

23

64

-11

-19

0

-77

-100

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

Net

Po

pu

lati

on

Ch

ang

e

Source: USDC, Census Bureau, Decennial Census 1990 and 2000, Federal State Cooperative for Population Estimates

Prepared by: Univ of Mo Office of Social and Economic Data Analysis (OSEDA)

Source:/popests/sct99_MO.txt and http://eire.census.gov/popest/data/cities/tables/SUB-EST2002-07-29.xls

Missouri Transfer Payments by Type, 2000

Other8%

Medicare21%

Medicaid19%

Unemployment benefits

1%

Social Security41%

Veterans benefits2%

Income Maintenance

8%

Source: USDC, Bureau of Economic Analysis, Regional Economic Information SystemPrepared by: University Outreach and Extension, Office of Social and Economic Data Analysis - (OSEDA)

Kids Count – ClarkCounty

Kids Count – Lewis County

Kids Count – Marion County

Kids Count – Monroe County

Kids Count – Ralls County

Kids Count – Shelby County

REGIONALIZATION WORK RETAIL TRADE HEALTH CARE IMPLICATIONS

Community Public Finance

CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING REGIONS

› All Economies are Regional› Regional Centers are vital to regional viability:

They are essential to growth but not necessarily the location of growth. The population of a place is not necessarily the determining factor in

whether it is a regional center or not.

› Missouri is one of the most economically, geographically and culturally diverse states in the U.S It would facilitate planning and delivery of services if regional boundaries

were drawn so that counties within a region were relatively homogeneous while the differences between regions would be relatively great. That would facilitate more effective targeting of training and educational services.

Ironically regional centers are more alike than the regions they serve.

› Transportation routes are a consideration in establishing regional boundaries. A concern is accessibility and it is easier to get to some regional centers from one direction than another.