Wednesday, January 17, 2007

Just the facts, ma'am

Just the facts, ma’am
Joe Friday
True contributor

Okay, here’s the deal. The CCEAC, that self-named grassroots group consisting of seven major employers in Cook County, have published a report. Some of it is opinion. Some of it is fact. Whatever fact means.

Here are some of the bare bones facts:

· Cook County Living Wages and Actual Average Wages at Certain Tourism Businesses: Living wage for a family of four with two adult workers is said to be $10.70 per hour. Average wages in Lutsen Mountains and resort area are about $12 per hour. This translates as: two adults working full time year round could support a family based on their wages in the Lutsen area. Questions: How many families have two adults working full time year round? What happens if one adult gets sick or has a baby? Census figures indicate that far fewer women than men have full-time, year round jobs.
· Per Capita Income Change: 1990 to 2000: In 1990 per capita income in Cook County was $12,067 compared with $14,420 in Minnesota. In 2000, per capita income in Cook County was $21,175 compared with $23,198 in MN.
· Increase in Per Capita Income from 1990 to 2000: Cook County, 75 percent; Minnesota, 61 percent. “Much of this increase was due to the substantial increase in retirement income ... in Cook County...”
· Housing in multi-unit structures (2000): Cook County had only 6.8 percent multi-unit housing compared with 22.3 percent in MN and 28.4 percent in U.S. This likely explains why Cook County has only about one-half the proportion of young adults ages 20-24.
· Monthly sales as percentage of peak month: Peak months for lodging and total sales were July, August and September. In April, May and November sales dropped to 30 percent of these levels compared with 50 percent during the winter months. Cook County unemployment is higher than the state from November through April. Seasonal underemployment is believed to be far more prevalent than unemployment and to affect many more workers, according to figures from local businesses in 2005.
· Average visitors per day (2005): About 54 percent of visitors stay overnight at a hotel or resort. The rest is split among campgrounds, vacation homes and day visitors. Hotel and resort visitors spend more: $291 per party night compared with $69-$99 per party day for others.
· Direct tourism spending (2005): Of the $100 million direct sales for tourism in 2005, 70 percent was for hotel and resort visitors. Another 20 percent included spending by vacation home owners for construction, occupancy and other expenses. The remaining 10 percent came from campers and day visitors.
· Average visitors per day (2005): 72 percent of direct tourism spending in 2005 came from hotel and resort visitors, but these visitors accounted for only 53 percent of total county sales.
· Sales by source (2004): Tourism, including hotel visitors, business spending, vacation home spending, campers and day visitors accounted for 82 percent of sales in 2004. The remainder was local sales (8 percent) and interest/retirement income (9 percent).The West End has about 2/3 of year round lodging capacity; Grand Marais has about ¼ and the Gunflint trail has about 9 percent.
· 2005 lodging revenue per lodging district: The West End receives about 66 percent of lodging revenue, compared with 20 percent for Grand Marais and 14 percent for Gunflint Trail.
· Monthly winter hotel visitors—2005, party days: Downhill skiers spend more than ¼ of overnight lodging tourism sales. During the winter months, this figure increases to 74 percent.
· Monthly lodging visitors (2005): After accounting for non-winter sales, ski-based tourism sales accounted for 35 percent of overnight lodging. Cross country skiers represented three percent, general tourism 60 percent and snowmobile less than one percent.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

True,

Why in the world do you use their (the committee's) numbers for wages. You really need to look at the raw data or at least see the median and look at the distribution to understand what the wage figures mean. What are they countying as wages?

They do not tell us about the full time workers they pay less than $10 per hour and no insurance, etc. And since when is a it relevant to use two workers wages to come up with a living wage?

The whole problem with this analysis is that you buy into their misdirection. The facts that the self blessed committee proclaim are totally irrelevant to their proposition. The fundamental issue is, should tax dollars go to support a few wealthy people who, like Fritz Sobajna rightly said tonight,own one hell of a lot of very valuable property.

The old rule applies - follow the money. Where does it come from? From the ordinary tax payer whether he or she is a tourist or a resident. Where does it go? To a few wealthy individuals to further enhance their positions of privelege in the county.

Even by the voodoo standards of the old trickel down economics this whole propositon is a perversity.

The deal is this, they now want to impose a 3% sales tax on all "tourist" related transactions in the county. That isn't a head tax on the unsuspecting tourist as they cross the county line, it is a day in and day out tax on every meal, etc. It is collected from those who could afford it, fairness aside, and those who cannot, and then it is given to those who do not need it to put in their pockets.

It is nothing other than take from the poor and give to the rich, each and every day. Remember, these folks who now want to help the county by taking your money are by and large the same crew that imports foreign workers every year to keep wages down. Now they expect us to believe they want to impose this tax to raise wages in the county. What is Bill Hanson doing supporting a bunch of folks with a history of driving down wages?

My thoughts are that the only welfare these guys have in mind is their own.

It is hoped that Fritz and the other right thinking county commissioners who oppose this prevail.

Anonymous said...

Dear Joe,
Here are some of my questions:
What are the specific sources of the data that suggest counter-intuitive findings, such as high average wages? Does it include the foreign workers? Can it be broken down by job category, age and qualifications of employees, physical stamina v. brains required, etc?
In this model to promote new year-round tourism, what kind of jobs are the business owners looking to create? For example, service jobs like housekeepers, waiters, cashiers, etc. or high-quality jobs that require education and skills? If high-quality, what would those jobs be?
Where is DIVERSIFICATION in the plan to improve the economy and quality of life? They seem to be saying, it has always been tourism and so it shall be evermore, just with better pay. But I have heard comments from quite a number of people that they don't want the jobs that come from serving tourists. Also a Grand Marais business owner pointed out that diversification is always a wise policy rather than putting all your eggs in one basket.
These are a few things I want to look at seriously, just for starters.
Oh, yeah, and where do seven of the top business owners and county employers get their mandate to call themselves "grassroots?" "Treetops" is more like it. It smacks of feudalism, Lady Bountiful and noblesse oblige, especially when they talk about the lack of "professional expertise" in Cook County.
Enough to be going on with!
Lois Lane
Crack reporter
Daily Planet