LADCO         Breakfast Questions – September 22, 2005

 Over the next 20 years, how do you see the La Crosse County economy changing and /or growing?

·         Increase in service sector, continued decrease in mfg jobs.

·         Growth o/s of La Crosse (city)

·         Pay won’t keep up with taxes

·         Less mfg – more service/technology

·         More growth outside La Crosse city

·         Moving from mfg base to more high tech/medical base away from the large companies

·         Growth along I-90 corridor

·         Continued growth in health providers, tourism and regional shopping hub. Change might be better governmental cooperation thru this process

·         Attractive medical facilities

·         Growth due to expansion in Onalaska, West Salem, and South side of La Crosse by area businesses and therefore housing/residential

·         Higher paying jobs due to medical logistics

·         More semi-industry jobs/tourism

·         Growth in service/health industries, this growth does not compensate the loss of higher wage mfg jobs. Effort must be made to reverse this trend and fill this gap

·         A lot more housing

·         Probably less mfg

·         Regional growth center will continue to grow

·         More people, business, traffic there

·         Healthcare/Health Service

·         More tourist

·         Growth in health services

·         Less mfg jobs

·         Growth along the I-90 corridor

·         Medical/Health facilities

·         Population shift – older population

·         Less emphasis on mfg – more on technology

·         Importance of strong educational opportunities

·         More importance on tourism – importance of river and bikes

·         Interstate corridor continues to grow

·         Increase in service sector employment – health care, government

·         Less mfg, fewer corp. HQ

·         Slow growth, possible lagging to Eastern part of state

·         Diversity in types of economics activity

·         Diversity in population/work force

·         Increase in population/business

·         Changing education, technical, information access – infrastructure

·         Growing in population/average higher wages

·         Sharing public services (fire, police, water sewage

·         Knowledge/technology growing

·         Location of La Crosse on Interstate – distribution, service, and retail

·         Residential increase in outlying areas

·         Growth in Onalaska, Holmen, West Salem (commercial)

·         Increase in service industries

·         Redevelopment of older/obsolete areas

·         Redevelopment in every downtown area (W Salem, La Crosse, Onalaska, Holmen, etc)

·         Preserve and maintain existing mfg

·         Support information products

·         Encourage research/development

·         Area boundaries should not recognize state boundaries

·         International business growth

·         Support start-up businesses from down-sized companies

·         Increase in service sector

·         Preserve and maintain mfg

·         Embrace information age

·         Healthcare/research development

·         County redevelopment in downtown areas

·         Potential reduction in mfg base – Trane, TSS, historically isolate machine products

·         Lower wage base

·         Growth in older population

·         Decrease in younger population

·         Increased service jobs – lower wages

·         Growth in small businesses

·         Destination community

·         Regional I-90 corridor very recreational

·         Aging population

·         Need for individuals to work longer

·         Housing healthcare needs for elderly

·         Need to draw educated workers to the area to replace aging population

·         Smaller businesses – Urban sprawl

·         Medium to small size businesses will continue to locate in La Crosse replacing large businesses such as Trane

·         La Crosse County won’t change

·         Small/medium business

·         Service

·         Healthcare growth

·         Educational facilities

·         Area will continue to be regional medical center

·         Small business continue to be employment drivers

·         Universities and WWTC continue to be important economically and culturally

·         Deteriorating neighborhoods need to be revitalized

·         Housing growth needs to be well planned for and will continue to spread to outlying areas – leads to well planned adequate transportation

·         Economy growing

·         Downtown Main Street attracting new business

·         Residential/commercial growth in Onalaska/Holmen

·         Less mfg/more service

·         Continued revitalization of downtown area

·         More cooperation between municipalities

·         More serious jobs/fewer mfg – healthcare particularly, LHI, education

·         More diverse population, growth in Hispanic, other minorities

·         Pressure to retain middle class in city of La Crosse – keep cost of government under control

·         Large employer in 20 yrs – not invented yet – needs to be flexible/adaptable

·         Continued growth in medical field

·         Loss of mfg jobs

·         More retirees – more elderly people to stay in the area

·         Expansion of service economy – medical, education, LHI

·         Decline of mfg

·         Continued expansion/redevelopment D.T. – need for more housing

·         Pressure to retain middle class in city of La Crosse

·         Future tied to natural resources – tourism and retirement haven

·         Transportation issues will be more pressing

·         Continued sprawl 10-15 yr

·         Continued revitalization in downtown area

·         Very limited reliance on agricultural industry

·         Downtown lax to remain about the same (stable) w/co. doing upgrading – growth will be on the outskirts of Onalaska (comm./land development –huge) Holmen and West Salem (residential growth)

·         Growth may be limited if transportation systems are not improved (North – South)

·         Incentives for business to locate or relocate to the La Crosse area

·         Job creation will be the biggest challenge

·         Different industries will evolve – LHI, SIS

·         Loss of skilled mfg jobs

·         How to deal with a growing service oriented economy

·         Destabilization potential exists in downtown La Crosse, affecting tourism

·         More technology

·         More service – call centers etc

·         Small to stable growth of mfg

·         Positive growth, regional hub for area, - wage increases infrastructure

·         Grow medical facilities, logistics health, etc

·         Grow residential subdivisions in smart growth way

·         Try to bring in additional manufacturing/process companies, AG related/IT growth

·         Develop way to attract business – 7 rivers region is one

·         Centralized area moving out near Onalaska

·         Housing market expanding towards West Salem and filling in around Holmen, Onalaska

·         The need for mfg business – Trane Co.

·         The need or a main thorough fare – in order to keep La Crosse’s downtown growing and vibrant

·         Healthcare excellent

·         Niche mfg

·         More small cottage industries

·         Medical

·         Education – universities

·         7 Rivers outreach

·         Retail – La Crosse seems to be a hub for retail (lower paying jobs, but they are jobs) – continues to grow, boost to bring people in

·         Medical, Educational, Technology – very strong opportunities

·         Mfg – up or down – production change – concern – Trane

·         Economic incentives, higher paying jobs, infrastructure, recreational opportunities

·         Continued redevelopment of downtown La Crosse

·         Traffic – transportation

·         Housing – may become unaffordable

·         More technological industry – to compensate/facilitate retail

·         Medical – More competition to bring in line w/nation average

·         Recruitment

·         Health, financial, education, new growth, and areas to strengthen

·         Education and Healthcare

·         Impact of globalization

·         Importance of collaboration

·         Growth in technology will be key

·         Regional services

·         Other forms of mfg

·         Transportation needs for the future; airlines, metro transit, river traffic, DOT

·         High level of Educational opportunities

·         Arts/cultural opportunities

·         Must work w/all areas – cities and towns

·         Continued retail growth

·         Decline in traditional mfg

·         Fewer farms

·         Increase in service and commercial business including education and healthcare

·         Tourism and technical

·         High tech and information-based industries will continue to grow

·         Logistics- health will be major players

·         Retail will continue to expand outward – room for growth in Holmen

·         More expansion in tourism

·         More high tech- information mfg – software development

·         Expanded education at secondary level

·         More retail – along highway corridor

·         Continued redevelopment downtown to specific retail

·         Strengthen educational position and offerings

·         Strengthen medical care offering – regional

·         Tourism, move from seasonal to more year round activities and opportunities

·         Regional transportation hubs – highways, rail, air, and river

·         Energy center – cogeneration, land fill gas utilization

·         Onalaska will continue development along I-90. Downtown La Crosse will continue to develop – tourism will continue to do well if we take advantage of the River and surrounding scenery. Downtown La Crosse will become more office space and less retail

·         Technical and tourist driven economy, maintaining a base of small industrial manufactures w/a growing retail base, regional healthcare and education center

·         Expansion constraints – building moving south and up – Hwy 14 to 10 mi hill – Hwy 33 on ridge

·         Socio/Economic diversity needed

·         Growth in education and medical

·         Less mfg

·         More work at home

·         County moving from mfg to service/retail, medical

·         Nor work at home applications/growth of educational facilities

·         Manufacturing to service

·         Growth

·         Mobile

·         Workforce

·         Demographics

·         Quality employment

·         Work at home

·         Working for self-employment

·         More and more of the workforce will live outside the city of La Crosse – community into the city – importance of public transportation

·         Increase in diversity of business sectors – healthcare especially

·         Less industrial/mfg jobs – to higher end high tech jobs

·         More mom and pop shops

·         Municipal cooperation – revenue sharing/sharing of resources

·         High Tech – “soft industry”

·         Healthcare

·         Less mfg (Trane)

·         More small business

·         Schools/stability

·         Movement from agricultural/mfg based economy to more service and technological service/support stability

·         Trane’s future?

·         Loss of La Crosse footwear

·         Strong work ethic in WI/upper Midwest

·         Prevention of brain drain

·         Downtown living

·         University/hospitals

·         Less mfg/Trane outsource

·         Increase in services and tech

·         More diverse/minority population

·         Development of Hwy 10 to W Salem

·         Housing – continued growth and new housing – Holmen/W Salem

·         Growth  - medical/soft industries First logic/logistics health

·         Health insurance issues with employment

·         Continued redevelopment of downtown area – Jobs?

·         Increase quality of child care from state level with increase cost of child care to families

·         Capitalize on natural resources and tourism, undeveloped riverfront area – how it connects with Dixon Forest and Myrick Park redevelopment

·         How can employers develop family friendly work policies to better support families to improve retention

·         Employer benefits will we be able to maintain health insurance benefits

·         I see streets, water – sewer and other key pieces of infrastructure wearing out

·         I see wages for product and service employees going down, as more jobs flow out of the U.S.

·         I see medical costs continuing to outrace wages; La Crosse and other Wisconsin physicians currently rank 8 out of the 10 highest fees in the entire U.S.

·         Industry leaving – more service oriented

·         Use uniqueness of each township

·         Metropolitan airport sharing

·         Legislatures have to take leadership role among all communities

·         Concrete implementation plan

·         County economy will only reach its huge potential when all townships, cities, etc begin to work together in cost sharing appreciating each other creating partnerships, and removing barriers that have restricted county economic growth on the past

·         Integrate individual community economic development plans into a county side plan, acknowledging the uniqueness of each community in the wider vision

·         Less mfg, cost share – partnerships

·         Government officials to take lead

·         Concrete implementation process

·         Competition between communities within a plan

·         Metropolitan service and cost sharing

·         Small business dev – diversity (need to attract health/tech)

·         Transportation – roads/trails

·         Uni-gov (at least attempt)

·         Aging population

·         UWL to have significant impact – encourage more retention trained students

·         One area, no boundaries

·         Need better paying jobs, less service, retail

·         Need to work better with developers

·         Continuing role of agriculture diminishing

·         Manufacturing, as we know it, will continue to decline

·         Jobs becoming more technology and service driven

·         Land will continue to be used for development of housing

·         Increase in technology based jobs

·         Mfg will continue to move to China, however, w/in 20 years, we should be able to bring our labor rates more in line

·         Unions will lose favor

·         Education – medical industry continue to grow

·         Regional cooperation through local municipalities  - more shared services

·         Traffic flow needs improvement

·         Growing – becoming more service based, less dependent on mfg

·         I have lived in Monroe County in retirement since (1982) defer economic future of La Crosse to son, Jim Hill

·         La Crosse County growth since I left has exploded North to Onalaska and Holmen

·         Is there a regional concept that would include rapidly growing Tomah and Sparta?

·         Aging population with more reliance on healthcare systems

·         Continuing to evolve toward retail center w/more reliance on service sector – less mfg

·         Continued sprawl to rural areas

·         Current trend from mfg to service/retail industries

·         Over the nest 20 years I see this trend continuing whether this is healthy or not for our future economic growth

·         Trane Co. – future could effect economy – tax ,tourism

·         Moving to service industry and away from mfg industry

·         Dollars for TIF or incentive dollars would be pooled for the entire area involved

·         Taking away internal competition

How should this change and/or growth be facilitated?  Do you favor regional efforts (i.e., revenue sharing) or more localized efforts at the community level?

 

·         Higher education and academic development

·         Brain Drain

·         More higher paying/middle income jobs

·         Expand higher Education

·         Attract younger employees – tourism

·         Downtown revitalization

·         Identify the strengths of each community and regionalize

·         The changes generally affect the region, thus regional efforts would seem logical

·         Regional efforts – various surrounding communities utilize the La Crosse medical facilities, shopping areas, airport, and entertainment

·         Help our existing manufacturers become high knowledge, high tech operators that can compete globally

·         Regional cooperation – revenue sharing not the “us verses them” mentality, we are all in this together

·         Technical schools, workforce development organization

·         Help mfg co. become better equipped to compete globally

·         Improved transportation system

·         Increase in government cooperation

·         Favor more regional efforts

·         Increase in Ed- advanced degrees especially in tech/engineering and research

·         More cooperation between Ed institute/businesses

·         Revenue sharing essential plus sharing of government services

·         Revenue sharing essential – without it everything else is just talk, i.e., “money talks bull---- walks”

·         Greater engagement of UW personnel in business and government

·         Regional efforts – paying for services

·         Cooperation:  government, private enterprises and public entities

·         Revenue sharing (municipal income tax where person is employed

·         Ph D level programs in engineering/science

·         Mayors, Town chairman, Village President must be involved in and committed to collaboration

·         Pursue companies to our area

·         Expand higher education

·         Promote area activities

·         Revitalize down town areas/modernize

·         Expand higher education – encourage upgrade of campuses and stop brain drain

·         Stopping the tax flight (seniors leaving for the South)

·         Try to attract young professionals – higher wages

·         Growth of hospitals (technology)

·         Encourage companies that develop products that save our environment

·         Encourage expansion of existing and new cultural arts/opportunities

·         Growth of area economy does not recognize state boundaries

·         Stop brain drain – young and old

·         Tax flight

·         Tourism – sell God’s country

·         Attract young professionals

·         Expansion of cultural experience

·         Local area seems quite contentious and desires local control

·         Perhaps promotion through joint recreational activities “County Fest”?

·         At some point we need to get along socially to cooperate governmentally

·         Favors regional growth

·         Younger population during the planning – H.S. students and college students

·         Talk/collaborate w/ the people we need to draw

·         Who in this room represents our diverse populations?  We need this representation

·         Community leaders of diverse ideas/backgrounds

·         More collaboration w/the higher ed institutions

·         Collaboration of local high schools/colleges

·         Attract diverse employees

·         Efforts need to be regional

·         Regional efforts – cooperation between townships/towns etc

·         Regional cooperation

·         Regional cooperation and focus is s must

·         Compete as one region vs. individual towns

·         Expansion of medical consortium

·         Grow tourism to take advantage of areas

·         Alternative transportation methods

·         Regional cooperation is a must; easy to say, hard to do – need buy in strongly favor revenue sharing; need to ensure services are cost effective

·         Compete as one region vs. individual cities

·         Look at alternatives to cars for transportation options

·         Revenue sharing seems ideal but unlikely, however, continued efforts in educating all citizens in the county may bring some regional cooperation

·         Revenue sharing would benefit all and help encourage the growth of all – maintaining the input and involvement of the community level for resident/community. support

·         Have public forums – continue to sell the benefits

·         You also have to take care or clean up what you’ve got

·         More cooperation between colleges and universities

·         Regional collaboration is important; example of where it has worked is in growing jobs and bringing in business in the Fargo/Moosehead area. They have created thousands of new jobs and brought new business to the area by working together to develop a region plan

·         Comprehensive regional planning/vision and payment system – cross borders

·         Facilitate by regional co-operation a d efficiency

·         Drop the ego’s between city officials and county government

·         Coordinate growth between county, local, village and town governments

·         Shared costs and revenues

·         Share a common vision

·         Keep education, social and community programs

·         Common vision

·         Cooperation amongst officials

·         Infrastructure through downtown is crucial

·         Fargo – pooled funds

·         Shared vision of common goals

·         Regional efforts – cooperation, share costs, share common vision

·         Business spin off’s from schools

·         Favor revenue sharing

·         Traffic – plan for next 50-100 years instead of 20 years

·         Share vision – costs

·         Setup manufacture/industrial park (separately) and use resources that can be shared between business

·         Get businesses to work together to share costs

·         Transportation

·         Infrastructure – need regional government cooperation

·         LAPC includes planning – get their participation

·         Charter Air – subsidized (corp. jets)

·         Duplication of efforts – LADCO

·         Downtown, Main Street etc…

·         Broad participation must occur, all parties must come to the table

·         Must bring pressure to the political process to make these collaboration happen

·         Must include LaCrescent as well as other 7 River region

·         Metropolitan Transit authority

·         Greater collaboration among communities – tourism, development, and services

·         Some form of revenue sharing considered

·         Adopt a model similar to Momentum Chip Valley, where communities work toward regional health

·         Community is key

·         Re-use infrastructure already available

·         Both regional and local efforts will be important since each community may have unique assets, yet economic activity affects surrounding communities by increasing wealth and sparing other business opportunities.

·         Transportation routes/infrastructure need to correlate w/planned growth, intergovernmental cooperative agreements will be important too

·         Continued focused growth by LADCO – city/county

·         Regional marketing effort of 7 River Region

·         More efforts part of municipality in favor of TIF etc

·         More cooperation between government entities/less rivalry on turf protection

·         Regionalization:  cost sharing, revenue sharing, reduction of duplication of efforts

·         Reduction of unclear or mixed messages to potential investors and/or developers

·         Reuse of vacant, outdated facilities and land

·         Is there a way to do revenue sharing where these communities giving the revenues get to decide where the money will be spent?  I favor more localized efforts.  Onalaska/Holmen will try to grow on their own without any help since much of the growth is already there.  Must be able to show each city that regional cooperation will make their city a lot better.

·         Tourist and Education sectors, now participate in revenue sharing thru room tax for tourist industry and education thru district wine tax and state taxes.

·         Push education/skills.  Innovation with infrastructure.  Partnerships to support facilities (airport) and services to benefit a widespread area.

·         Favor regional efforts

·         Need for skilled/educated workforce

·         Support entrepreneurial

·         Workforce education – Technology

·         Services – Airport/Economic Development

·         County government role to coordinate atmosphere

·         Yes, this I believe is a good idea.  Someone not being partial to one city would over see the region.  Don’t reinvent the wheel, visit and learn form someone that has done this. (North Dakota Cook County).

·         It has to be regional/or county level.  Revenue sharing has to be a solution, along with regional economic development.

·         Municipal cooperation, revenue sharing and sharing of resources

·         Regional efforts – schools, police, fire, and streets

·         Avoid drawing lines between communities.  Give the incentives to collaborate

·         Monitor transportation

·         Union impact – make sure all economic groups are involved

·         We should attempt to recognize the importance of regional collaboration. Smaller/rural municipalities should recognize a role as should the larger municipalities.

·         More efficiency with sharing infrastructure, facilities/admin

·         County School District (?)

·         Pooling of resources to make it work, smaller municipalities need to recognize this including LaCresent.

·         System has systematic issues – loss of local control, winner takes all mentality.

·         Telecommunications to facilitate reg. education – Ex. Language Technology

·         Regional local areas need to give up some of their autonomy – Police, Fire Dept, Hwy development (North/South corridor), schools – share teachers and administrators

·         Languages and advanced studies

·         Co-operate with city tax – TIF – redevelopment

·         Transportation – upgrade infrastructure

·         Revenue sharing – Airport, etc

·         Property tax, etc

·         Industrial Parks?

·         Schools (closing/opening)

·         Onalaska/Holmen etc

·         Unsure, nothing specific – coordinated efforts from all communities, go to “people” for more input, public meetings

·         The public, government, and bus need to aggressively lobby and demand for wages/jobs that allow us to pay adequate taxes to fund roads and services.

·         Adequate wages must be provided to pay for medical services and to be consumers

·         Legislators – county leadership and town leadership

·         Metropolitan look at shared services

·         Revenue and expense sharing

·         Of course regional efforts in as many ways as possible, and be supportive of localized efforts

·         Revenue sharing can only occur when “expense” sharing happens also

·         Metro government on common services

·         Revenue/expense sharing

·         Business must demand cooperation between governments

·         Develop a model for cooperation sharing to aim for

·         UNI-GOV

·         Police – Fire – Waste Management – School, etc

·         Definitely need regional efforts to maintain costs, promote autonomy, regional government, better transportation, roads (i.e. MTU bus service to Onalaska)

·         Basic services must be regionalized – school, fire, police, government

·         If we propose regional efforts, there needs to be regional control. i.e. if La Crosse wants regional revenue, there need to be regional government governing those funds, not current structure

·         Yes, highways are utilized by everyone commuting to work

·         Regional efforts

·         Transit system

·         Favor sharing and consolidation of services, not revenue sharing.  Revenue should follow the delivery of services

·         Develop regional recruitment/retention plan for business

·         Visit and learn from other areas that were successful

·         Needs to be regional – with oversight – to much incentive for local government to compare among themselves – along with changing personalities and view at elections occurring

·         Regional efforts to pool revenues to market county for new development

·         Cooperation efforts of cities/towns working together to bring new business to area  - recruitment