HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda -12-2 - Information Item - Memorandum - Second Quarter FY2017-18 Financial Report
FINANCE and ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
Gary Donaldson, CTP, Chief Financial Officer | gdonaldson@orangecountync.gov | 200 S. Cameron Street, Hillsborough, NC 27278 | 919.245.2151
MEMORANDUM
To: Board of County Commissioners
From: Gary Donaldson, Chief Financial Officer
Date: February 20, 2018
Re: Second Quarter FY2017-18 Financial Report
_________________________________________________________________________
The Second Quarter FY2017-18 report provides revenues and expenditures information for the period ending December
31, 2017. Based on six months of financial results, the fiscal year end revenues versus expenditures are projected to be
break-even. The use of a new financial model has been integrated in our financial forecasting.
The Major Orange County Operating funds are:
• General Fund
• Enterprise Funds (Solid Waste Fund and Sportsplex Fund)
The quarterly report is presented with a detailed comparison Budget versus Actuals for the current and prior fiscal year
indicating year to date revenues and expenditures performance. The primary goal of this quarterly report is to
communicate a concise high level financial status of the County’s major operating funds.
The enclosed 2018 Economic Outlook Report by Dr. Michael Walden of NC State University highlights economic
activity throughout North Carolina and its major metropolitan regions. The economic report indicates sustained growth
and no contraction in economic activity for 2018. The report’s metrics supports the County’s projected sales tax growth
rate of 6% for this fiscal year, as sales tax highly correlates with employment, payroll and gross metropolitan product
indicators.
General Fund Performance
The FY2017-18 General Fund performance is consistent with historical performance. Unlike the first three months of the
County’s fiscal year, where expenditures normally exceed revenues due to the timing of Property Tax revenues which are
due September 1, the second quarter revenues normally exceed expenditures due to the collection of a large majority of
Property Tax revenues by December 31, 2017. As of the second quarter General fund revenues total $142.8 million and
General Fund expenditures total $104.1 million.
General Fund Revenues
1
Second quarter FY2017-18 General Fund revenues total $142.8 million or 64.3% of budgeted revenues, which is up by
$8.0 million from 2Q FY2016-17 total of $134.8 million or 61.2% of budgeted revenues. This increase represents a timing
variance in the receipt of property tax collections, continued increase in Emergency Services collections from bringing the
billing in-house, and increased Jail Fees from an increase in the per diem rate for housing Federal detainees.
Summary of Major General Fund Revenues
Property Tax Revenues
2Q FY2017-18 Property Tax revenues total $123.3 million or 81.4% of budgeted revenues, which is $4.9 million higher
than the 2Q FY2016-17 total of $118.4 million or 79.2% of budgeted revenues. The property tax revenues variance is
attributed to the timing of the receipt of collections and a 1.2% tax levy increase from new construction. The County
completed a revaluation and implemented a revenue neutral rate which decreased the tax rate from 87.80 cents per $100 of
value to 83.77 cents per $100 of value. There has been no major tax appeal issue from the revaluation, and the billing
versus collection rate is projected to be in the high 90 percentile by January 31.
Local Option Sales Tax Revenues
2Q FY2017-18 revenues total $6.1 million or 26.1% of budgeted revenues, which is $1.6 million above the 2Q FY2016-
17 Sales Tax revenues of $4.6 million or 20.8%. This reflects three months of actual collections due to the timing of
receipts from the North Carolina Department of Revenue. The local government sales tax distributions in any given
month reflect actual sales made up to three months prior. For example, August collections reflect July vendor sales,
which are processed and allocated in September, with a local government distribution made on or before October 20. The
October payment was the first month’s sales tax distribution allocated to the July-June fiscal year. Historically, the
December distribution each year includes a large number of calendar year end refunds, which results in significantly
lower net Sales Tax revenues. For 2Q FY2017-18, the refunds did not occur in December, and will instead be reflected in
January 2018, so that is why Sales Tax revenue shows an increase in 2Q FY2017-18 compared to 2Q FY2016-17.
The North Carolina Department of Revenue administers the following monthly disbursement of local option sales taxes
recorded in the County’s General Fund:
• Article 39 (one-cent) - authorized in 1971, and is currently allocated on a point of delivery basis and proceeds are
allocated with local government units within the County. Food purchases are taxable. There is no restricted use.
Category
FY2017-18 Original
Budget
FY2017-18
Revised BudgetYTD Actual
YTD %
Collected Category
FY2016-17
Original Budget
FY2016-17
Revised BudgetYTD Actual
YTD %
Collected
Property Tax151,557,768$ 151,557,768$ 123,361,954$ 81.4%Property Tax 149,498,811$ 149,498,811$ 118,412,891$ 79.2%
Local Option Sales Tax 23,566,784 23,566,784 6,140,408 26.1%Local Option Sales Tax 22,066,641 22,066,641 4,581,981 20.8%
Licenses and Permits 328,000 328,000 74,546 22.7%Licenses and Permits 328,000 328,000 77,742 23.7%
Charges for Services 11,551,045 11,473,448 5,843,072 50.9%Charges for Services 11,681,503 11,891,529 4,424,226 37.2%
Intergovernmental 16,035,147 17,003,273 5,473,753 32.2%Intergovernmental 15,787,579 18,669,438 6,917,852 37.1%
Transfers from Other Funds 3,765,600 3,765,600 0 0.0%Transfers from Other Funds 2,712,600 2,712,600 0 0.0%
Investment Earnings 265,000 265,000 213,519 80.6%Investment Earnings 155,000 155,000 29,718 19.2%
Miscellaneous 2,817,629 2,969,011 1,668,966 56.2%Miscellaneous 886,734 1,032,923 359,277 34.8%
Fund Balance Appropriation 9,769,060 11,143,693 0 0.0%Fund Balance Appropriation 12,726,944 13,887,964 0 0.0%
Total General Fund Revenues219,656,033 222,072,577 142,776,218 64.3%Total General Fund Revenues215,843,812 220,242,906 134,803,687 61.2%
2
• Article 40 (half-cent) - authorized in 1983, and it is currently allocated on a per capita basis; based upon the
county’s population in relation state population total; proceeds are allocated with local government units within
the County. Food purchases are taxable. Thirty percent of this tax is for school capital outlay or debt retirement.
• Article 42 (half-cent) - authorized in initially in 1986, the allocation changed from per capita to a point of delivery
basis; proceeds are allocated with local governments within the County. Food purchases are taxable. Sixty
percent of this tax is for school capital outlay or debt retirement.
• Article 43 (half-cent) - authorized in initially in 1997 for public transportation, and is currently allocated on a per
capita basis. Food purchases are exempt pursuant to G.S.105-164.13B. This tax is restricted to public transit and
is accounted for under inter-governmental revenue in the County General Fund.
Note: Article 46 (quarter-cent) - authorized in 2012 is accounted for in a Special Revenue Fund, and not the General
Fund. The allocation is on a point of delivery. Food purchases are exempt pursuant to G.S.105-164.13B.
Charges for Services
2Q FY2017-18 Charges for Services total $5.8 million or 50.9% of budgeted revenues, as compared with 2Q FY2016-17
total of $4.4 million or 37.2% of budgeted revenues with actual collections in FY2017-18 above FY2016-17 collections in
the second quarter by $1.4 million. The Charges for Service category is comprised of various departmental fees for
services including Planning and Inspections, Environment, Agriculture, Parks and Recreation, Aging, Sheriff’s Office,
Emergency Services, and Register of Deeds. The higher collections are attributed to an increase in Emergency Service
receipts by $530,000, as the Tax Office processes continued backlog billings as part of transitioning from a third party
vendor, and an increase in Jail Fee collections due to an increase in the per diem rate for housing Federal detainees than in
FY2016-17.
Intergovernmental Revenues
2Q FY2017-18 Intergovernmental revenues total $5.4 million or 32.4% of budgeted revenues, as compared to 2Q
FY2016-17 total of revenues of $6.9 million or 37.1% of budgeted revenues. This source of income includes revenue
received from the Federal, State, and other local governments. Examples of revenue from local governments include
contracts with the Towns of Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and Hillsborough for animal control services, and tax collection
services. The second quarter variance is not a performance variance. This variance reflects a timing variance of Federal
and State funds received related to the Department of Social Services.
General Fund Expenditures
2Q FY2017-18 General Fund expenditures total $104.1 million or 46.9% of budgeted expenditures, as compared with 2Q
FY2016-17 total expenditures of $98.8 million or 44.9% of budgeted expenditures, with actual expenditures in FY2017-
18 more than FY2016-17 expenditures by $5.3 million. The overall General fund dollar increase in 2QFY2017-18 is
attributed to increased expenditures of approximately $2.5 million in the Education expenditures for both the Orange
County Schools and the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools, an increase of $1.6 million in School and County Debt
3
Service payments, and an increase of $1.2 million in Sheriff and Emergency Services expenditures associated with
personnel services due to fewer vacant positions, reclassifications of positions, and increased operational encumbrances.
Summary of Major General Fund Expenditures
Please note that the reporting of Budget versus Actual expenditures is reflected by the following Functional
Leadership Teams:
Community Services - Animal Services, NC Cooperative Extension, DEAPR, Economic Development, Planning and
Inspections, and Orange Public Transportation.
2Q FY2017-18 General Fund expenditures total $6.6 million or 45.9% as compared with 2QFY2016-17 Community
Services expenditures of $6.5 million or 46.3%, with actual expenditures in FY2017-18 exceeding FY2016-17
expenditures by $180,000. The increase in expenditures is mostly attributed to an increase in expenditures and/or
encumbrances of $140,000 in Orange Public Transportation due to an expansion of service routes.
General Government - Board of Elections, Clerk to the Board, County Attorney, County Manager, Register of Deeds
and Tax Administration
2Q FY2017-18 General Government expenditures total $5.5 million or 54.8% of budgeted expenditures, as compared
with 2Q FY2016-17 total of $5.6 million or 54.9% of budgeted expenditures. Overall spending among the departments
are in line with FY2016-17 spending as compared to FY2016-17 through the same period.
Public Safety – Courts, Emergency Services, and Sheriff’s Office
2Q FY2017-18 Public Safety expenditures total $12.6 million or 48.4% of budgeted expenditures, as compared with 2Q
FY2016-17 total of $11.2 million or 45.2% of budgeted expenditures. The Sheriff’s Office has increased expenditures and
encumbrances of $570,000 due to reclassification of positions, and an increase in operational encumbrances, and
Emergency Services has increased expenditures and/or encumbrances of $600,000 due to a lower number of staff
vacancies, and an increase in operational encumbrances compared to FY2016-17 through the same period.
Human Services – Department on Aging, Child Support, Housing, Human Rights, and Community Development,
Library, Public Health and Social Services
2Q FY2017-18 Human Services expenditures total $18.3 million or 47.5% of budgeted expenditures, as compared with
2Q FY2016-17 total of $19.1 million or 47.2% of budgeted expenditures. The Department of Social Services comprises
Category
FY2017-18
Original Budget
FY2017-18
Revised BudgetYTD Actual
YTD %
Expended Category
FY2016-17
Original Budget
FY2016-17
Revised BudgetYTD Actual
YTD %
Expended
Community Services 14,331,974$ 14,536,818$ 6,674,565$ 45.9%Community Services 13,654,700$ 14,024,975$ 6,497,248$ 46.3%
General Government 9,954,091 10,003,205 5,482,040 54.8%General Government 10,094,440 10,215,754 5,605,495 54.9%
Public Safety 25,583,899 26,131,155 12,646,138 48.4%Public Safety 24,596,946 24,803,375 11,219,270 45.2%
Human Services 37,508,468 38,543,285 18,295,745 47.5%Human Services 37,249,977 40,406,564 19,083,785 47.2%
Education 89,916,598 89,916,598 43,816,723 48.7%Education 84,259,340 84,259,340 41,229,048 48.9%
Support Services 14,101,197 14,360,805 6,638,705 46.2%Support Services 14,058,009 14,407,497 6,298,616 43.7%
Non-Departmental 28,259,806 28,580,711 10,566,938 37.0%Non-Departmental 31,930,400 32,125,400 8,914,282 27.7%
General Fund Expenditures219,656,033 222,072,577 104,120,854 46.9%General Fund Expenditures215,843,812 220,242,906 98,847,745 44.9%
4
approximately 50% of the human services budget, and its expenditures has decreased $2.1 million due to the State
assuming direct payments to child care providers in FY2017-18. The Health Department expenditures and/or
encumbrances increased $430,000 mainly due to additional contract services, including Family Success Alliance; Child
Support Enforcement expenditures increased $80,000 due to a significantly lower attrition rate, and an increase to OPC
Mental Health due to a payment timing variance when compared to FY2016-17.
Support Services - Asset Management Services, Community Relations, Finance, Human Resources, and Information
Technology
2Q FY2017-18 Support Services expenditures total $6.6 million or 46.2% of budgeted expenditures, as compared with 2Q
FY2016-17 total of $6.3 million or 43.7% of budgeted expenditures. The increase spending is mostly attributed to an
increase in expenditures of $210,000 in the Department of Information Technology related to an increase in maintenance
support for IT contracted services.
Education
2Q FY2017-18 Education expenditures total $43.8 million or 48.7% of budgeted expenditures, as compared with 2Q
FY2016-17 total of $41.2 million or 48.9% of budgeted expenditures. The FY2017-18 Education budget was increased by
$5.7 million over the prior year related to an increase of $3.5 million in Current Expenses, as well as an additional $2.1
million in one-time discretionary funding to the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City School District and Orange County School
District. Current Expenses of $40.7 million or 50% of budgeted expenditures was remitted to the school districts through
the second quarter; this was $1.75 million more than the same period in FY2016-17. The remaining Education budget
pertains to the Health and Safety Contracts for Nurses and School Resource Officers, Recurring Capital, and Other
Related County Support, specifically support to Durham Technical College (Orange County campus).
Non-Departmental
2Q FY2017-18 Non-Departmental expenditures total $10.6 million or 37.0% of budgeted expenditures, as compared with
2Q FY2016-17 total of $8.9 million or 27.7% of budgeted expenditures. The Non-Departmental category includes Debt
Service and Transfers to Other Funds. The second quarter expenditures are 9.3% higher than the same period in 2Q
FY2016-17 due to an increase in School and County debt service payments.
In summary, 2Q FY2017-18 General Fund Revenues and Expenditures are in line with the adopted FY2017-18 General
Fund Budget; and the General Fund is estimated to end with break-even results at the close of the fiscal year.
Enterprise Funds
Solid Waste Fund
2Q FY2017-18 Solid Waste Fund performance is in line with the adopted FY2017-18 budget. Second quarter revenues
are $8.1 million or 49.8% of budgeted revenues and expenditures and/or encumbrances are $9.4 million or 58.2% of
budgeted expenses. The increase of expenditures over revenues is due to a large encumbered amount at December 2017
related to the Eubanks Road Convenience Center construction project. This compares with FY2016-17 second quarter
revenues of $7.0 million or 43.3% of budgeted revenues and expenses of $6.6 million or 40.7% of budgeted expenses.
5
Sportsplex Fund
2Q FY2017-18 Sportsplex Fund performance is consistent with the adopted FY2017-18 budget. The revenue stream is
comprised of Ice Rink-35% of budgeted revenues, Membership and Fitness-31% of budgeted revenues, with the
remaining revenues comprised primarily of Aquatic and Kidsplex. Second quarter revenues are $1.7 million or 50.3% of
budgeted revenues and expenses are $1.6 million or 45.0% of expenses. This compares with FY2016-17 second quarter
revenues of $1.5 million or 46.6% of budgeted revenues and expenses of $1.5 million or 32.2% of budgeted expenses.
Enclosure
6
1
THE NORTH CAROLINA ECONOMIC OUTLOOK, 1st QUARTER 2018
Prepared by Dr. Michael L. Walden, William Neal Reynolds Distinguished Professor,
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, North Carolina State University
Contact Methods: phone: 919-219-8923; e-mail: michael_walden@ncsu.edu
TEN NORTH CAROLINA ECONOMIC HEADLINES FOR 2017 AND 2018
1. North Carolina’s economic growth rate has accelerated since 2013 and has beaten the
broadest national growth rate for three straight years, although falling short of the
Southeast region growth rate in 2017.
2. The Information, Professional and Business Services, and Leisure and Food Services sectors
have been the fastest growing since 2010.
3. Non-durable Manufacturing – including tobacco products, textiles, and apparel – continues
to contract and is a major factor in the on-going urban/rural divide in the state.
4. Residential construction expanded in 2017 and has grown on trend since 2011; however,
economic activity levels in the sector are well below pre-recessionary levels.
5. North Carolina’s payroll job growth rates have exceeded national payroll job growth rates
in seven of the past eight years; however job growth decelerated in 2017.
6. Each of the major measures of unemployment in North Carolina have been halved since
2010.
7. The “hollowing-out” of North Carolina’s labor market continued in 2017, although at a
slightly less pronounced rate than in the previous seven years.
8. The five largest metropolitan regions in the state accounted for 83% of the growth
in payroll jobs in 2017.
9. The state will experience another year of economic growth in 2018, with real GDP
expanding by 2.8%, the headline jobless rate falling to 3.6%, and over 70,000
payroll jobs being created.
10. The Asheville, Durham, and Raleigh metropolitan regions will have the lowest
unemployment rates at the end of 2018, at or near 3%.
7
2
Statewide and Total Sector Trends
Estimates for 2017 of the broadest measure of economic growth – real (inflation-
adjusted) Gross Domestic Product (GDP) - suggests North Carolina’s aggregate growth rate
again surpassed the national growth rate for the third straight year. However, the state’s growth
rate fell short of the real GDP growth rate for the Southeast (Figure 1). Also, since the state’s
population grew faster than the nation’s population, North Carolina’s growth rate per person (per
capita) was less robust. One estimate for 2017 shows the state’s real GDP growth rate per capita
the same as the national rate.
An avidly debated issue is the impact of the significant tax rate reductions that began
implementation in 2014. For the five years from 2010 to 2014, North Carolina’s real GDP
growth rate fell short of the national rate in four of the years. But in the three years from 2015 to
2017, North Carolina’s growth rate consistently exceeded the national rate. There is some
research suggesting that reductions in a state’s income tax rate – especially the corporate tax rate
– can stimulate economic growth.1 However, an alternative explanation is that consumers’ slow
recovery from the Great Recession – especially in their spending on manufactured durable
goods- delayed the rebound in North Carolina’s manufacturing-heavy economy.
Figure 1. Real GDP Annual Growth Rate (%) in the North Carolina, US, and Southeast
States’ Economies, 2010-2017.
Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. Data for 2017 are for Q2, 2016 to Q2, 2017.
1 Michael L. Walden, “Recovery from the Great Recession: Explaining the Differences among States,” Journal of
Regional Analysis and Policy, 44(2): 166-174, 2014.
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
%
NC US SE
8
3
Figure 2. Economic Sector Growth Rate (%) in North Carolina, 2009-2017.
Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis.
Since the end of the Great Recession in mid-2009, economic growth has been uneven
among North Carolina’s major sectors (Figure 2). Fastest growth has been in the Information,
Professional and Business Services, and Leisure and Food Service sectors, while the slowest
growth has been in the Education and Health Care, Construction, and Non-durable
Manufacturing sectors. Indeed, output in Non-durable Manufacturing, which importantly
includes tobacco manufacturing (primarily cigarettes), textiles, and apparel, has dropped almost
20% since the conclusion of the Great Recession. These results suggest the long-running
restructuring of the North Carolina economy is continuing. Unfortunately, the decline in Non-
durable Manufacturing has a disproportionate negative impact on small town and rural areas.
As a result of its severe contraction during the Great Recession, the health of the
residential housing market has been closely watched. Figure 3 shows a measure of residential
housing market activity in years prior to the Great Recession (2004-2006), during the Great
Recession (2007-2009), and in the recovery following the Great Recession (2010-2017).
Residential construction activity in the state made a tepid rebound in the early years of the
recovery, but since 2015 the pace of recovery has accelerated. Residential building permits in
North Carolina in 2017 were the highest in a decade, although they were still well below the
“boom” years of 2004-2006.
-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Non-durable manuf
Construction
Educ & health care
Financial services
Transp & warehousing
Durable manuf
Trade
Farming & forestry
Leisure & food service
Prof & businsess serv
Information
%
9
4
Figure 3. Annual Residential Building Permits, North Carolina, 2004-2017.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau.
Statewide Labor Market Trends
Figure 4 shows annual payroll job growth rates for North Carolina and the U.S. from
2010 through 2017. In all but one year (2011), North Carolina’s growth has exceeded national
growth, and this pattern continued in 2017.
However, the pace of job growth slackened in 2017, after hitting a peak in 2015. The
slowing pace of job growth is a typical pattern as economic recoveries age. More easily
employable individuals with marketable skills are initially hired as the economy expands. As
recoveries mature, more of the unemployed are less qualified for available work, thereby slowing
the pace of hiring.
Each of the three major unemployment rates continued to drop in 2017 in both North
Carolina and the nation (Figure 5). The “headline” rate only counts an individual as unemployed
if she or he has no job, desires a job, and has actively looked for a job in the past month. The
“U5” measure only requires an individual to not have a job and to want a job in order to be
categorized as unemployed. The “U6” rate is the broadest measure of unemployment, including
those counted as unemployed by the “U5” rate as well as those individuals working part-time
only because full-time work cannot be found.
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
70000
80000
90000
100000
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2020 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
#
10
5
Figure 4. Annual Job Growth Rates (%) in North Carolina and the U.S., 2010-2017.
Source: Nonfarm employment numbers from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics based on July to July values.
Figure 5. Alternative Unemployment Rate (%) Measures for NC and the US, 2010 and
2017.
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics; annual averages.
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
%
NC US
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Headline U5 U6
%
NC 2010 NC 2017 US 2010 US 2017
11
6
Each of the rates in 2017 was less than half their level in 2010, both for North Carolina
and the nation. However, in 2017 North Carolina’s average annual “headline” and “U5” rates
were slightly higher than their national counterparts, while the state’s “U6” unemployment rate
was slightly lower than the comparable national “U6” rate.
North Carolina’s labor force participation rate also improved in 2017, rising to 61.6% in
October. The rate measures the percentage of individuals aged 16 years and older who are in the
labor force, meaning they are working or actively looking for work. The state’s rate continues to
track the national rate, but has been averaging a full percentage point higher.
North Carolina workers saw larger gains than their national counterparts in their real
hourly wages – wage gains after subtracting inflation – in 2017 (Figure 6). This repeats the
result seen in 2015 and reverses the pattern experienced for most of the years immediately after
the recession when national gains exceeded North Carolina gains. A likely reason is the faster
growing North Carolina economy compared to the national economy in recent years.
Last, Figure 7 shows that the labor market phenomenon of “hollowing-out” persisted in
2017 in North Carolina. “Hollowing-out” means growth in jobs occurs at both the “high-paying”
end as well as the “low-paying” end, with little or no growth in “middle-paying” jobs.2
Although the annual rates in 2017 were slightly lower for “high-paying” and “low-paying” jobs
Figure 6. Annual Real Wage Rate Changes (%), NC and the U.S., 2010-2017.
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics; October of each year using the CPI deflator; private sector wages.
2 For the definitions of “high-paying”, “middle-paying”, and “low-paying”, see Michael L. Walden, “North Carolina’s
‘U-Turn’ and Alternative Economic Paths of the State’s Regions,” Studies in the North Carolina Economy, July 2017.
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
%
Axis Title
NC US
12
7
Figure 7. The “Hollowing-Out” of the Labor Market, Percentage Change, 2009-2016 and
2017 (Annualized Percentage Change in Jobs Classified by Level of Pay in North Carolina).
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
and slightly higher for “middle-paying” jobs compared to the annual rates in the 2009-2016
period, the pattern was clearly the same. Like the nation, North Carolina still has a problem in
creating sufficient jobs paying a middle-income salary
Regional Trends
A clear urban/rural divide has persisted in North Carolina for several decades, and 2017
did little to change that observation. Aggregate payroll job growth rates for North Carolina
regions between 2010 and 2017 are shown in Figure 8. Clearly the Charlotte and Raleigh
metropolitan areas have been in a class by themselves, with job growth rates approaching 25%.
Wilmington, Asheville, and Durham also had aggregate job growth rates above the state average.
Next are the Triad and mid-sized metros, followed by the slowest job growth in rural North
Carolina and the smallest regions. Goldsboro and Rocky Mount lost payroll jobs over the
period.
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
High Paying Middle Paying Low Paying
%
2009-16 2017
13
8
Figure 8. Job Growth Rates (% Change) in North Carolina Regions, 2010-2017.
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, based nonfarm employment from February 2010 (low point of job market)
to October 2017 (latest available data) using seasonally-adjusted data. Rural NC includes counties outside the
listed metropolitan areas.
Figure 9 provides similar information for the regions grouped into size categories. In
2017 the large and medium sized regions had the fastest job growth. Indeed, the five largest
metropolitan areas in the state accounted for 83% of the state’s payroll job growth in 2017.
Forecasts
The NCSU Index of North Carolina Leading Economic Indicators (Figure 10) has
followed a modest upward trend since late 2015, suggesting gradual improvement in economic
growth into the early months of 2018. Importantly, there is no indication of a downward trend in
the Index, thus suggesting no occurrence of a recession in the immediate future. As Figure 10
shows, the Index was successful in predicting the 2007-2009 Great Recession by over a six-
month lead.
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25
Rocky Mt
Goldsboro
Fayetteville
Jacksonville
New Bern
Rural NC
Greenville
Hickory
Greensboro
Winston-Sal
Burlington
State
Durham
Asheville
Wilmington
Raleigh
Charlotte
%
14
9
Figure 9. Annualized Payroll Job Growth Rates in North Carolina Regions Classified by
Size, 2017 and 2009-2016.
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics; a large metros are Charlotte, Durham-Chapel Hill, Greensboro, Raleigh, and
Winston-Salem; medium metros include Asheville, Burlington, Fayetteville, Greenville, Hickory, and Wilmington;
small metros are composed of Goldsboro, Jacksonville, New Bern, and Rocky Mount; and non-metros are counties
not included in the large, medium, and small metro categories
Figure 10. NCSU Index of North Carolina Leading Economic Indicators
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
Large metros Medium metros Small metros Non-Metros
%
2017 2009-2016
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
105
20
0
7
f
e
b
20
0
7
m
a
y
20
0
7
a
u
g
20
0
7
n
o
v
20
0
8
f
e
b
20
0
8
m
a
y
20
0
8
a
u
g
20
0
8
n
o
v
20
0
9
f
e
b
20
0
9
m
a
y
20
0
9
a
u
g
20
0
9
n
o
v
20
1
0
f
e
b
20
1
0
m
a
y
20
1
0
a
u
g
20
1
0
n
o
v
20
1
1
f
e
b
20
1
1
m
a
y
20
1
1
a
u
g
20
1
1
n
o
v
20
1
2
f
e
b
20
1
2
m
a
y
20
1
2
a
u
g
20
1
2
n
o
v
20
1
3
f
e
b
20
1
3
m
a
y
20
1
3
a
u
g
20
1
3
n
o
v
20
1
4
f
e
b
20
1
4
m
a
y
20
1
4
a
u
g
20
1
4
n
o
v
20
1
5
m
a
r
20
1
5
j
u
n
20
1
5
s
e
p
20
1
5
d
e
c
20
1
6
m
a
r
20
1
6
j
u
n
e
20
1
6
s
e
p
20
1
6
d
e
c
20
1
7
m
a
r
20
1
7
j
u
n
e
20
1
7
s
e
p
Source: calculations by Dr. Michael Walden
NCSU INDEX OF NORTH CAROLINA LEADING ECONOMIC INDICATORS
15
10
Like most states, North Carolina’s economy in 2018 will be strongly influenced by
national economic events. A large majority of contemporary economic forecasts are presently
indicating a continuation of national economic growth in 2018.
With a new national income tax plan enacted for 2018, North Carolina could see some
added economic growth motivated by the plan’s lower marginal tax rates. If a national
infrastructure plan is submitted and passed during 2018, more state construction programs could
be planned. However, there are rumors a national plan would require an 80% funding
commitment from states. If true, there would be a challenge about how North Carolina would
generate its contribution.
The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is currently being renegotiated by
treaty partners Mexico, Canada, and the U.S. If negotiations fail, there is a likelihood NAFTA
would be terminated. While a termination would create both winners and losers in North
Carolina, a recent study suggested the short-run impacts would be relatively minor in the context
of the total state economy.3
For 2018, it is forecasted North Carolina real GDP will increase by 2.8% - one-tenth
percentage point faster than the national rate - and payroll employment in the state will grow by
1.6% - the same rate as the nation. The payroll job growth rate will translate to
approximately 71,000 net new positions.
Predicting the most-used unemployment rate – the “headline rate” - is more difficult.
The rate will drop as more jobs are added and nothing else changes. But if some individuals who
had dropped-out of the labor force because they could not find work – and therefore are not
officially counted as unemployed – resume looking for work as labor market conditions improve,
the jobless rate can remain the same, or perhaps rise, as jobs increase.
The lowest state unemployment during the economic expansion of the 2000s decade was
4.6%; the lowest state rate during the economic expansion of the 1990s decade was 3%.
Economic conditions today – such as globalization - are much more like the 2000s than the
1990s, with an estimated 100,000 to 300,000 able-bodied, working-age individuals having left
the labor force in North Carolina. As labor market conditions continue to improve, it would be
expected significant numbers of this “hidden labor force” will actively look for work, thereby
moderating any reductions in the unemployment rate. Therefore, a year-end statewide
unemployment rate of 3.6% is expected in 2018. This would represent half the drop seen in
the 2017 jobless rate with a comparable number of payroll jobs added.
Regional unemployment rate forecasts are presented in Table 1. Asheville, Durham, and
Raleigh are predicted to have the lowest end-of-year jobless rates in 2018, at or near 3%.
With a tighter labor market, real (inflation-adjusted) wage growth should accelerate
from its 0.8% rate in 2017 to 0.9% in 2018. This represents a major improvement over the
fall in real wage rates in the state between 2010 and 2014.
3 Michael L. Walden, “How Would Ending NAFTA Impact the North Carolina Economy?” Studies in the North
Carolina Economy, November 2017, https://ag-econ.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/nceconomy-
nafta2.pdf.
16
11
Table 1. North Carolina Regional Unemployment Rate Forecasts.
Region October 2017 Rate Forecasted October 2018 Rate
Asheville 3.3% 3.0%
Burlington 3.8% 3.4%
Charlotte 3.9% 3.5%
Durham 3.6% 3.2%
Fayetteville 5.2% 4.6%
Greensboro 4.3% 3.9%
Greenville 4.5% 3.8%
Goldsboro 4.6% 4.1%
Hickory 4.0% 3.8%
Jacksonville 4.7% 4.4%
New Bern 4.3% 3.8%
Raleigh 3.6% 3.2%
Rocky Mount 6.0% 5.4%
Wilmington 3.9% 3.5%
Winston-Salem 4.0% 3.7%
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics; author’s forecasts.
There is no expectation that either the household income divide or the geographic
economic divide in North Carolina will significantly change in 2018. The forces providing
advantages to large metropolitan areas – transportation linkages, vibrant downtowns attracting a
college-educated workforce, international ties, and a 21st century economy based on higher
education, technology, finance – will still give those regions strong advantages. Also,
technology will continue to “disrupt” the occupational market by producing machinery and
programs that can increasingly substitute for a broader range of human-performed tasks. Those
with cognitive abilities not (yet!) able to be performed by technology will be rewarded in the job
market, while those workers competing with technology-based applications will find it more
difficult to be valued.
So, 2018 will be a further year of economic growth in North Carolina, with both income
and employment improving. But beneath the broad statewide picture will linger economic
disparities that are yet to be closed.
17