F E B R U A R Y

1 9 9 7

W I N T E R

I S S U E

ARIZONA’S 1997/98
ECONOMIC OUTLOOK
Marshall J. Vest
Forecasting Project Director
January 3, 1997
This is a talk reprinted from the Economic
Outlook 1997-98 luncheon, presented to
Tucson community leaders on January 21,
1997, at the Westin La Paloma.

A

s 1997 begins, the expansion is
nearing the end of its sixth year,
making this the third-longest
uninterrupted growth period in postwar history. The economy is at full
employment and growing moderately.
Several “late-cycle” phenomena are
evident, but this does not mean that
recession lies ahead. Although rising
bankruptcies are a concern, a collapse
in consumer spending is not in the
cards. Consumers are still confident
and as long as employment is growing
and wages are increasing, they will
continue spending.
Rising levels of debt and the satisfaction of pent-up demand, however,
will produce only modest increases
in consumer spending. Wages and
prices are increasing at a rapid rate
in Arizona, but remain tame in other
parts of the nation. The outlook calls for
continued expansion for the national
and local economies. Moderate growth
coupled with low inflation and low
interest rates is expected. Job growth
will slow and the tide of newcomers
to Arizona should recede to more
normal levels.

The year just past brought a number of
revelations and paradigm shifts in the
world of business. Restructuring, which has
been the holy grail of management gurus of
the 1990’s, is out and strategic planning is in.
A recent study of companies that restructured
during the past several years found that
downsizing and job slashing did not improve
profitability in the long run. It simply produced a smaller company. Focus now has

shifted to questions of how to grow a company and how to retain valued employees.
A second major sea-change relates to the
question of “what happened to economic
anxiety?” This was a popular story that
appeared in the business press a few months
prior to the elections. With jobs plentiful and
wages rising faster than inflation – coupled
with continuing large gains in financial
markets for the second year in a row and

I N S I D E
OUTLOOK LUNCHEON POLL.....6
FORECAST TABLES ................7
ARIZONA ECONOMIC
INDICATORS........................8
WE’RE ON THE WEB!
Business College: http://www.bpa.arizona.edu
EBER: http://www.bpa.arizona.edu/ebr.html

EL LE R G R AD U AT E S CH OO L O F MA N AGE M EN T • CO L LE G E OF B U SI N ES S AND P UB L I C A D MI N IS T RA T I ON
THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA

TUCSON, ARIZONA

EXHIBIT 1
Total Bankruptcies – Arizona
(Seasonally adjusted annual rate)

EXHIBIT 2
Wage and Salary
Employment Growth
Phoenix-Mesa & Tucson MAs
(% change
vs year ago)

EXHIBIT 4
Building Permits – Total
Units Phoenix-Mesa MSA
(annual rate)

faded memories of the last recession that
ended almost six years ago – Americans
became much more upbeat about their
economic situation. According to the story,
economic anxiety virtually disappeared.
A recent survey finds that Americans have
reordered their list of major concerns. Now
topping the list are crime and education,
which have replaced the federal budget
deficit and trade as the most important
issues. Since President Clinton follows these
polls closely, one might expect the administration’s priorities during this second term
to reflect these changes.
In Arizona, a milestone was reached for
The University of Arizona during 1996 as
it joined the top 10 public universities for
research spending. A recent study found
that when indirect and induced effects are
included, the UA accounts for nearly 11%
of local employment and spending.
One revelation with potentially significant
consequences: We don’t measure inflation
very well. That’s the finding of a Senate
advisory panel headed by top economists,
which concluded that the current measure
of consumer prices overstates inflation by
1.1% per year. The panel estimated that
substitution by consumers as relative prices
change accounts for 0.4% of the difference.
Consumers’ increasing use of discount
stores, which are not measured well in
current sample methods, subtracts another
0.1%. The remaining over-statement, 0.6%,
is due to quality improvements. For example,
today’s new car with air bags, anti-lock
brakes, leather interior, high tech engine and
upgraded stereo system is a vastly different
product than a model of only few years ago.
(Autos are a special case and an attempt is
made to adjust for quality changes). Current
methods don’t address quality improvements
and therefore overstate inflation.

FIXING INFLATION MATTERS
With inflation overstated, our view of the
economy is distorted. If the new estimate
of inflation is used, growth in the nation’s
output is currently closer to three percent
than two percent and productivity growth is
much stronger than believed – two percent
per year, about double current estimates.
A corrected measure also means that over
the longer term, real median family income
actually increased by 36% over 1973-95,
rather than four percent as currently
measured. And, average hourly earnings

PAGE TWO

have risen by 13% rather than declined
by 13% over that same period.
Modifying the consumer price index (CPI)
would not only give a clearer picture of
the economy’s performance, it would help
balance the federal budget! A lower rate
of inflation means smaller cost of living
adjustments for Social Security recipients
and other federal retirees. And, since the
CPI is used to index federal income tax
brackets and personal exemption amounts,
fixing the CPI effectively raises taxes. It’s
estimated that if a corrected CPI were put
in place, it would slash the federal budget
deficit by $200 billion over five years.
Not everyone agrees that the CPI is overstated by as much as the study panel found.
Moreover, implementing any changes will
be not only politically difficult but hard to
accomplish technically. (How will quality
adjustments be made?) Some have argued
that if balancing the budget is the main motivation, it might be better to simply eliminate
the indexation of Social Security. Doing so
would balance the budget in only four years,
according to The WEFA Group, a leading
economic forecasting and consulting firm!

WILL CONSUMER DEBT DERAIL
THE EXPANSION?
Consumer delinquencies on credit cards
are rising and personal bankruptcies are
soaring. Data for Arizona show that bankruptcies at year end are nearly 30% higher
than one year ago (Exhibit 1), mirroring
national trends. This upward surge is due
largely to Chapter 7 filings by consumers,
making the current situation very different
from that of late 1980s. Then, business bankruptcies related to inflated (but collapsing)
real estate prices were the driving force.
The perception that rising personal bankruptcies are the result of excessive accumulation of debt and financial mismanagement
is not accurate. Contributing factors include
divorce, uninsured losses, large medical
bills, job loss, and fraud or abuse. Also
contributing are increased marketing of
personal bankruptcy services by the legal
profession, ease of filing, increased social
acceptance, ease of getting credit after filing
and lenience of bankruptcy courts and
judges. In short, bankruptcy is increasingly
the first option rather than the last resort.
Unfortunately, this trend holds negative
consequences for the economy because
losses incurred by financial institutions,
ARIZONA'S ECONOMY

EXHIBIT 3
Historical Job Growth
(Tucson and Phoenix metro areas compared)
average annual increase (%)

PHX

TUS

1965-95 (30 yrs)

5.5

4.7

1975-95 (20 yrs)

5.2

3.8

1985-95 (10 yrs)

3.4

2.7

1990-95 ( 5 yrs)

3.6

3.7

the 70’s

6.9

5.8

the 80’s

4.5

3.1

retailers and other businesses get shifted
onto consumers in the form of higher prices,
higher interest rates and reduced access
to credit.
Fortunately, this situation does not begin
to compare to the late 1980s. There is no
sign of serious construction loan problems.
Moreover, most households are not overextended. The value of household assets has
risen dramatically in recent years and household balance sheets are in better condition
now than any time in recent decades.
Although credit card delinquencies are high,
the overall delinquency rate on all consumer
loans is considerably below previous peaks.
The banking industry is healthy, profits are
strong, overall non-performing loans are
low, and the return on assets and equity are
high. Therefore, there is no reason to expect
a consumer-caused credit crunch in the
foreseeable future. Growing problems with
consumer debt will most likely have the
effect of slowing growth in spending.

OUTLOOK FOR
THE U.S. ECONOMY
The national outlook calls for moderate
growth, comparable to what we saw in 1996.
Real growth in the 2.0-2.5% range will keep
inflation below three percent, which will
keep interest rates relatively unchanged
from year end levels. Housing and auto
sales are no longer contributing to growth,
and will move marginally lower from current
high levels. Pent-up demand in the economy
has been satisfied and consumption will be
restrained by high levels of consumer debt
and tightened lending standards. But there is
no reason to expect a collapse in consumer
spending – as long as confidence remains
high and real wages continue rising. Barring
a major shock to the economic system, this
ARIZONA'S ECONOMY

is an environment conducive to continued
expansion.
The probability of recession remains low.
Should the Fed raise short term interest
rates, the bond market would likely suffer a
large sell off, thus boosting long term rates.
This, in combination with a weak foreign
sector and weaker auto and housing markets
could bring a couple of negative quarters
in 1997. The recession would be short and
mild, and the economy would be recovering
by year end.

TUCSON CONTINUES
TO LEAD IN THIS CYCLE
Since the late 1980s, Tucson’s economy
has lead the Phoenix-Mesa metro area
through the business cycle. Although Tucson’s
cycle is determined by a host of factors, including changes in the dollar-peso exchange
rate and major plant expansions and layoffs,
the defining factor in recent years has been
the building cycle. In the late 1980s, as the
savings and loan debacle unfolded, regulators forced financial institutions to mark
down their portfolios to reflect (depressed)
market values and the RTC began taking
control of failed institutions. The effects were
felt first in the areas outside of the state’s
financial center. It was not until a year or
so later that the medicine was applied in the
Phoenix area. Just as the downward correction in the building industry began a year
earlier in Tucson, so did the recovery phase.
By the time the national recession hit in
1990-91, Tucson’s economy as measured
by jobs was growing again (Exhibit 2). By
contrast, the Phoenix-area job base declined
in 1991.
From the end of the 1990-91 recession
until 1994, both metro areas registered the

THERE IS A GOOD CHANCE
THAT THIS EXPANSION
WILL GO INTO
THE RECORD BOOKS
AS THE LONGEST
IN HISTORY.

strongest growth in a decade. Job growth
peaked in mid-1994 in Tucson and came
down quickly in response to the year-end
peso devaluation, adjustments in home
building to lower levels and a plateauing
of manufacturing jobs. By the summer of
1995, Tucson’s economy had nearly stalled.
Job growth was barely positive. Then during
1996, Tucson’s economy accelerated once
again to near its long-term potential. In
a sense, Tucson’s economy came in for a
soft landing in 1995 and in subsequent
months rebounded to a new equilibrium
rate of growth near its long-term averages.
The new pace could last the remainder of
this decade.
Job growth in Metro Phoenix peaked some
six to eight months after Tucson’s peak.
Although the tempo subsequently slowed,
Phoenix-area employment continued to
expand at a strong pace – exceeding 4.5%.
And, just as in the Tucson area, job growth
accelerated during 1996, into the five to six
percent range.
A major difference between the two
metro areas during the past two years is that
Tucson’s construction industry has adjusted
to a lower level that’s more consistent with
trend growth, while construction activity
remains near peak levels in the Phoenix area.
Although construction activity in Phoenix is
being propped up by commercial building,
we expect residential building to follow
Tucson’s lead and move to lower levels
during 1997.

WHAT’S WRONG
WITH TUCSON?
That’s the question most often asked when
pundits compare job growth figures for the
Tucson and Phoenix-Mesa metro areas.
Recently, figures for Tucson have been running in the 2.5-3.0% range, while the latter
area records 5.5% growth. That begs the
question of what is the “normal” relationship
between these two economies. Moreover,
what should one expect from the two areas
at this stage of the business cycle?
As shown in Exhibit 3, Metro Phoenix
has consistently grown more rapidly than
Tucson. Only during the first five years of
this decade, did Tucson match the Phoenix
area. During the decade of the ’80s, job
growth in Tucson averaged 3.1% while the
Phoenix area grew at a 4.5% pace. And over
the past 10 years (1985-95), the comparison
is 2.7% and 3.4%, respectively. So, normal
PAGE THREE

EXHIBIT 5
Consumer Confidence Index
(1985 = 100)

or “trend-line” growth is 2.5-3.0% in
Tucson and 3.5-4.5% in the Phoenix area.
As 1996 came to an end, Tucson’s
economy was growing at trend-line, and
that’s about right for the mature stages of
this business cycle. Growth in the Phoenix
area, however, remains well above its long
term potential. Rather than asking what’s
wrong with Tucson, perhaps the question
should be “how long can Phoenix keep
up this rapid pace?”

HIGHLIGHTS FOR 1996

EXHIBIT 6
Consumer Price Inflation –
Metro Phoenix and US
(Seasonally Adjusted)

EXHIBIT 8
Wage and Salary
Employment Growth
The 90s Resemble the 80s

PAGE FOUR

Arizona remained one of the nation’s
“hot spots” during 1996, ranking near the
top for employment, personal income and
population growth.
Phoenix continued to be one of the fastestgrowing metro areas. Even so, the metro
Phoenix area is finally slowing. Although
single family permitting activity last year
was two to three percent higher than the
strong 1995, permitting declined throughout most of the year after rising to an early
peak (Exhibit 4). Likewise for retail sales.
Double-digit increases early in the year
receded to mid-single digit range during
the summer and fall.
Consumers remain optimistic about their
economic future. Arizona’s consumer
confidence index, as measured in a study
conducted by the Behavior Research Center
for Stockton Capital Management & Trust,
remained near its high point for this business cycle at a reading of 104 in the fourth
quarter. The index has remained above 100
for nine straight quarters. Readings for the
Phoenix area mirror the state-wide results
with readings recently topping 110. In Metro
Tucson, the index remained at a still-high
90.7 in the fourth quarter (Exhibit 5).
With or without an adjustment, inflation
at the national level is benign today. Not so
locally. The consumer price index for Metro
Phoenix, published by the Center for Business
Research at Arizona State University, has
been running at nearly double the national
rate for several quarters (Exhibit 6).
Nationwide, consumer prices on an average
annual basis increased by 2.9% in 1996
compared to 5.1% in Metro Phoenix. On a
fourth-quarter to fourth-quarter basis, the
increases were a preliminary 3.1% and 4.7%,
respectively. Entertainment, housing, transportation and other goods and services
registered increases in excess of 5.0%
during the past year in Metro Phoenix.

WAGES TAKE A GIANT STEP
According to a recent release from the
U.S. Department of Labor, the Tucson metro
area recorded the fifth largest gain in average pay levels during 1995. The 6.0% gain
boosts average annual pay to $23,622. As
shown in Exhibit 7, Tucson’s rank based
on level of pay is 188th. The six percent
gain was the largest in 15 years. Moreover,
if the results are adjusted for inflation, the
gain was the largest since 1972.
During 1995, average pay in the PhoenixMesa metro area increased 3.9% to $26,748.
Ranked by the level of pay, the Phoenix area
occupies the 90th place on the list, while
the percentage increase ranked 66th.
The Yuma metro area also was included
in the rankings. Yuma’s pay levels rose 1.6%
(a 272nd ranking) to $18,286 (308th).
Yuma ranks low because of its largely agricultural and tourism-based economy and
because it is a labor surplus area. Yuma’s
unemployment rate is chronically in the
20-30% range.
The study ranked some 311 metro areas
on the basis of dividing annual payrolls of
employees covered by unemployment insurance programs by the number of employees
who work for wages and salaries. Differences
from year-to-year reflect changes in occupational or industrial mix as well as rising
wage levels. Problems counting wages of
students on work study and the number of
government workers may have overstated
the increase between 1994 and 1995, but
the increase was still large. Wages also rose
solidly in 1994. The average across all 311
metro areas is $29,105, up 3.5% during 1995.

THE 90’S LOOK LIKE THE 80’S
Economic growth this decade is following
the pattern of the 1980s. Both decades began
with recession: in the 1980s, the shortest
recession on record – which lasted only
from January through July of 1980 – was
followed by a major recession stretching
from July 1981 through November of 1982.
The current decade began with a mild recession that lasted from July 1990 through
March of 1991. Both decades brought
recoveries with peak rates of growth in the
fourth year (1984 and 1994). The remainder
of the 1980s brought gradually slower rates
of growth each year as the business expansion matured. Like-wise, so far, in the ’90s.
Exhibit 8 shows this pattern as manifested
ARIZONA'S ECONOMY

EXHIBIT 7
Average Annual Pay Levels, 1995
1995

% chg
94-95

Rank
by level

Rank
by % chg

Phoenix-Mesa

$26,748

3.9

90

66

Tucson

23,622

6.0

188

5

Yuma

18,286

1.6

308

272

US, All Metro

29,105

3.5

-

-

Source: US Department of Labor

in Arizona’s employment growth. From
1994’s 6.7% gain, job growth slowed to 6.0%
in 1995 and to 4.6% last year.
The two decades differed in at least one
major aspect. During the 1980’s, the early
years were accelerated by a tax-induced
building boom in which an entire decade’s
supply of commercial properties was built
in only three to four years. Vacancy rates
soared and buildings stood empty. Subsequent changes in the tax law that removed
these tax incentives, along with financial
regulatory reform, severely depressed
the building and lending industries. During
the late 1980’s, Arizona’s saving and loan
industry virtually disappeared and many
developers sought bankruptcy protection.
By contrast, the 1990’s have proceeded in
a much more orderly fashion and few, if any,
excesses exist today. Lending has remained
cautious and based on cash flow rather than
some arbitrary future value as in the ’80s.
New development has matched demand
with little speculative building. Vacancy rates
remain low in all commercial categories.
If the remainder of the ’90s follows the
’80s, one should expect the next three years
to bring continued expansion at moderate
rates of growth. There is a good chance that
this expansion will go into the record books
as the longest in history. If it lasts through
November of 1998, it will replace the
1982-90 expansion as the second longest,
and if it continues through January of 2000,
it will exceed the longest expansion ever,
which spanned nearly the entire decade of
the 1960’s.

Pinal Counties combined) will be moving
toward a slower pace that is sustainable over
the longer term. The residential building
cycle is now past its peak and will drift downward throughout the next two years. Look
for a decline of nearly 10% to under 35,000
units permitted. Commercial building will
remain strong and prevent the building cycle
from becoming a bust. Nonag employment
will grow by some 50,000 (a 3.9% increase),
down from nearly 68,000 in 1996. Manufacturing payrolls will receive a boost from
new semi-conductor fab plants and continue
to grow by about 4.0%, roughly the same
as in 1996. Population gains will slow from
over 90,000 to under 85,000 per year. And,

THERE IS NO REASON
TO EXPECT A
CONSUMER-CAUSED
CREDIT CRUNCH
IN THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE.
GROWING PROBLEMS
WITH CONSUMER DEBT
WILL MOST LIKELY
HAVE THE EFFECT
OF SLOWING GROWTH

THE OUTLOOK CALLS FOR
“TREND-LINE” GROWTH
Growth in the Phoenix metro area remained above trend in 1996, but was slowing
as the year came to an end. The PhoenixMesa metro area economy (Maricopa and
ARIZONA'S ECONOMY

sales gains will moderate from the Super
Bowl-inflated 9.0-9.5% range of 1996 into
the 4.5-5.0% range. Even with slower growth,
the Phoenix metro area will likely remain
one of the fastest-growing metro areas in
the nation.
While Phoenix works on its “soft-landing”
scenario, the Tucson metro area has already
reached a stable equilibrium and is expected
to turn in results similar to those experienced in 1996. Look for Tucson’s economy
to generate 9,000-10,000 new jobs this
year, a growth rate of nearly three percent.
Population will grow by 16-17,000. Residential home building will match last year’s
number with 6,500-7,000 units permitted.
Retail sales and restaurant & bar sales will
grow by four to six percent. The fastestgrowing sectors are expected to be in
communications and services.
The key to the local outlook in 1997 is
population growth. Should migration flows
remain strong, as they have during 1996, the
economy could continue growing at a faster
pace than described above. The Phoenix
area could continue to grow at above-trend
rates and Tucson could accelerate above
trend-line. This uncertainty is complicated
by measurement problems – there is a good
deal of disagreement concerning how fast
population is currently growing. Indicators
of population growth, such as the gain in new
residential electric customers, suggests that
the inflow of new residents remains large.

IN SPENDING.

DEVELOPMENTS TO WATCH
Deregulation promises to bring major
changes to the banking, electric utility and
telecommunications industries. Consolidation in the banking industry as geographic
barriers vanish coupled with vast improvements in information technology are allowing
banks to deliver (and set prices for) their
services much more efficiently. Consumers
will see the difference in the way they obtain
money and loans, using outlets in grocery
stores rather than traditional branches,
which will become fewer in number. Bank
mergers and new names are other signs of
change. The most recent example in Arizona
was the purchase of First Interstate Bank by
Wells Fargo.
In an effort to further deregulate the
electric utility industry, consumers will soon
be given a choice of electricity providers.
In the past, utilities have provided service
to customers only within their service area.
PA G E F IV E

Soon, utilities will find other companies marketing power to their traditional customers,
and will be expanding their services to
others’ markets. Many details remain to be
worked out here, and the next year or two
promise to be quite interesting.
In the communications area, competition
will soon increase in the cellular market as
new companies with new technologies provide service. And, just as consumers were
given a choice of long-distance providers,
they soon will have a choice of who provides
local service (or dial tone).
The impact on the local economy of
deregulating these industries is unknown
but may be rather large. In theory, as regulated industries are opened to competition,
prices fall and that’s good for consumers.
As an example, the price of electricity in
Arizona may decline by 20%, according to
industry analysts. It also means fewer companies as the result of mergers, and that means
fewer jobs as overlapping functions are
eliminated. Where the remaining employees
of the new enterprise are located will create
some winners and losers among states and
communities. New industries are likely to
be born to employ these displaced workers.
For example, who will provide the time-ofday metering that will be required for the
delivery of electricity? Finally, these changes
will require huge efforts to educate consumers so that they can make informed choices.
The outlook for the economy looks
relatively tame, but the restructuring that’s
taking place within these industries makes
this an exciting time for both consumers
and industry employees. n

S P O N S O R S

Arizona Joint Legislative Budget
Committee
Arizona Public Service Company
Bank One Arizona
City of Tucson
Estes Homes
Pima County
Salt River Project
Tucson Electric Power Company
Tucson Newspapers
U S West Communications
U S West Dex
Wells Fargo Bank

PAGE SIX

GROWTH AND WATER ISSUES TOP LIST
OF CONCERNS FOR TUCSON LEADERS
Compiled by Maile Nadelhoffer, Research Specialist

A

t the 16th Annual Economic Outlook Luncheon held in Tucson on January 21st , attendees
were asked to express their level of concern about a variety of local and national issues.
Eighteen issues were considered, and attendees were asked to rate each issue on a scale
of 1 to 10 in terms of the anticipated importance of each issue’s impact on quality of life/standard
of living in the Tucson community in 1997. The issues in this survey were suggested in part by topics
of discussion raised during GroupSystems dialogue sessions at the Economic Forecasting Project’s
Annual Meeting, held at the UA College of Business and Public Administration on January 10th.
Out of the approximately 450 people who attended the Outlook Luncheon, 106 turned in completed
surveys. We do not pretend that this sample is representative of the Tucson population at large.
However, these results do reflect the concerns of a large group of community and business leaders.
When the issues are ranked according to their mean ratings, the top five ranked issues are all
growth related issues. “Tucson’s vision for long term economic development” topped the list with
a mean rating of 8.4, 36% of the respondents gave this issue the highest rating of ten, and more
than half (54%) rated this issue at nine or better. “Tucson’s water issues” followed very closely
with a mean rating of 8.34. Respondents also expressed high levels of concern about Tucson’s
ability to attract high-tech industry and traffic congestion. The sixth issue was “tax equity”, the
only issue in the top third of the list not directly related to growth, however, this was followed
closely by another growth related issue, “air quality”, with a mean rating of 7.77. There is then a
significant break in the ranking and the next issue, “Arizona’s high tax on business equipment,”
follows with a mean rating of only 7.44. Concerns about education and worker skills and training
appear in the middle third of the list.
Whereas last year national issues such as the size of the federal budget deficit were of primary
concern to many Tucsonans, this year local issues appear to have taken president. In this survey
“federal budget deficit” appears at the bottom of the middle third of the list with a mean rating of
only 7.1, and “major stock market correction” appears in lower third of the ranking. “Foreign
competition” finishes last.
The following is a list of the issues ranked in descending order according to their mean rating
in the Economic Outlook Poll:
rank

issue

mean rating

1

Tucson’s vision for long term economic development

8.40

2

Tucson’s water issues

8.34

3

ability to attract and expand high-tech cluster industries

8.16

4

traffic congestion

8

5

attitudes towards growth

7.95

6

tax equity issues (how the State of Arizona shares its revenues
with cities and counties)

7.84

7

air quality

7.77

8

Arizona’s high tax on business equipment

7.44

9

financing education

7.41

10

finding skilled workers

7.29

11

focusing education on workplace skills

7.14

12

federal budget deficit

7.10

13

major correction in the stock market

6.75

14

impact fees

6.54

15

affordable housing

6.41

16

deregulation of the electric power, communications,
and banking industries

6.26

17

this spring’s bond election

6.17

18

foreign competition

5.85

ARIZONA'S ECONOMY

F O R E C A S T

T A B L E S

Forecasts for Arizona
Personal Income ($ mill)
percent change
Per Capita Personal Income
percent change
Aggregate Retail Sales ($ mill)*
percent change
Population (000s, mid-year)
percent change
Net Migration (000s)
Wage & Salary Employment (000s)
percent change
Goods-Producing
percent change
Construction
percent change
Manufacturing
percent change
Service-Providing
percent change
Trade (Wholesale & Retail)
percent change
Services
percent change

1995
86,419.5
9.4
20,488.6
5.8
37,788.5
7.8
4,217.9
3.4
100.3
1,793.8
6.0
326.5
5.1
119.9
10.6
194.0
2.1
1,467.2
6.2
446.6
7.3
526.0
8.5

1996
93,947.7
8.7
21,608.4
5.5
40,706.9
7.7
4,347.7
3.1
86.5
1,876.4
4.6
341.5
4.6
128.0
6.7
200.3
3.2
1,534.8
4.6
458.7
2.7
560.1
6.5

1997
100,309.9
6.8
22,450.7
3.9
42,832.8
5.2
4,468.0
2.8
79.6
1,941.8
3.5
348.9
2.2
128.9
0.7
206.5
3.1
1,592.9
3.8
470.1
2.5
591.7
5.6

1998
106,687.3
6.4
23,291.3
3.7
44,731.4
4.4
4,580.6
2.5
72.3
1,999.0
2.9
349.3
0.1
126.2
-2.1
209.5
1.5
1,649.7
3.6
486.3
3.4
619.9
4.8

1999
113,167.5
6.1
24,131.3
3.6
46,972.2
5.0
4,689.7
2.4
70.5
2,054.4
2.8
350.6
0.4
124.9
-1.0
212.2
1.3
1,703.8
3.3
501.9
3.2
647.0
4.4

Forecasts for Phoenix-Mesa Metro Area
Personal Income ($ mill)
percent change
Per Capita Personal Income
percent change
Aggregate Retail Sales ($ mill)*
percent change
Population (000s, mid-year)
percent change
Net Migration (000s)
Wage & Salary Employment (000s)
percent change
Goods-Producing
percent change
Construction
percent change
Manufacturing
percent change
Service-Providing
percent change
Trade (Wholesale & Retail)
percent change
Services
percent change

1995
57,630.6
11.0
22,480.5
7.1
24,961.2
9.0
2,563.6
3.6
64.1
1,219.6
6.7
237.7
5.1
81.3
8.9
151.4
3.2
981.9
7.2
297.9
6.2
362.3
7.8

1996
62,806.1
9.0
23,662.3
5.3
27,285.3
9.3
2,654.3
3.5
64.7
1,287.3
5.6
250.3
5.3
87.8
8.0
157.5
4.0
1,037.1
5.6
311.8
4.7
388.9
7.3

1997
67,149.4
6.9
24,515.4
3.6
28,621.7
4.9
2,739.1
3.2
58.0
1,338.0
3.9
259.2
3.6
90.4
3.0
163.8
4.0
1,078.8
4.0
321.4
3.1
412.8
6.1

1998
70,985.0
5.7
25,229.1
2.9
30,006.4
4.8
2,813.6
2.7
46.9
1,374.0
2.7
261.7
1.0
89.5
-1.1
167.2
2.1
1,112.4
3.1
329.4
2.5
431.9
4.6

1999
74,989.3
5.6
26,017.8
3.1
31,418.7
4.7
2,882.2
2.4
40.7
1,406.8
2.4
261.8
0.1
87.6
-2.0
169.1
1.1
1,145.1
2.9
337.2
2.3
450.1
4.2

Forecasts for Tucson Metro Area
Personal Income ($ mill)
percent change
Per Capita Personal Income
percent change
Aggregate Retail Sales ($ mill)*
percent change
Population (000s, mid-year)
percent change
Net Migration (000s)
Wage & Salary Employment (000s)
percent change
Goods-Producing
percent change
Construction
percent change
Manufacturing
percent change
Service-Providing
percent change
Trade (Wholesale & Retail)
percent change
Services
percent change

1995
14,480.3
6.6
19,053.0
3.6
6,300.6
3.8
760.0
2.9
16.8
302.4
2.7
50.0
5.5
19.9
4.9
27.9
5.7
252.4
2.1
68.5
1.1
93.0
5.2

1996
15,329.2
5.9
19,743.2
3.6
6,657.1
5.7
776.4
2.2
11.8
310.2
2.6
51.0
2.0
20.1
1.4
28.6
2.3
259.2
2.7
69.1
0.8
95.8
3.0

1997
16,196.5
5.7
20,422.2
3.4
6,962.6
4.6
793.1
2.1
12.0
319.9
3.1
51.7
1.3
20.3
1.0
29.1
1.6
268.3
3.5
70.4
1.9
101.0
5.5

1998
17,069.8
5.4
21,065.4
3.1
7,299.9
4.8
810.3
2.2
12.5
328.9
2.8
52.2
1.0
20.5
0.9
29.4
1.2
276.7
3.1
72.4
2.8
105.7
4.6

1999
17,984.7
5.4
21,747.7
3.2
7,659.8
4.9
827.0
2.1
11.7
336.4
2.3
51.9
-0.5
20.8
1.3
28.9
-1.8
284.5
2.8
74.4
2.8
109.9
4.0

* Aggregate Retail Sales includes retail, food, restaurant & bars and gasoline sales.
Source: Economic and Business Research Program, Karl Eller Graduate School of Management, College of Business and Public Administration, The University of Arizona

A R IZO N A' S E CO N OMY

P AG E SE VE N

A R I Z O N A

E C O N O M I C

YUMA METROPOLITAN REGION
Civilian Labor Force, ADES
Employment
Unemployment
Unemployment Rate (%)
Employees on Nonagricultural Payrolls, ADES
Total
Mining
Construction
Manufacturing
Trans., Comm. & Publ. Util.
Trade
Finance, Ins. & Real Estate
Services
Government
Sales ($000s) ADOR
Gross Retail
Retail
Restaurants & Bar
Gasoline, EBR
Gallons (000s) ADOT
Contracting
Value of Construction Contract Awards ($000s) F.W. Dodge
Total
Residential Building
Non-Residential Building
Non-Building
Number of Dwelling Units Awarded, F.W. Dodge
Total
One Family Houses
MOHAVE-LA PAZ REGION
Civilian Labor Force, ADES
Employment
Unemployment
Unemployment Rate (%)
Employees on Nonagricultural Payrolls, ADES
Total
Mining
Construction
Manufacturing
Trans., Comm. & Publ. Util.
Trade
Finance, Ins. & Real Estate
Services
Government
Sales ($000s) ADOR
Gross Retail
Retail
Restaurants & Bar
Gasoline, EBR
Gallons (000s) ADOT
Contracting
Value of Construction Contract Awards ($000s) F.W. Dodge
Total
Residential Building
Non-Residential Building
Non-Building
Number of Dwelling Units Awarded, F.W. Dodge
Total
One Family Houses

I N D I C A T O R S

% change versus year ago for:
most
most
recent
recent
month
12-months

AUG
96

SEP
96

OCT
96

NOV
96

DEC
96

72,400
45,100
27,300
37.7

72,275
45,775
26,500
36.7

68,700
46,025
22,675
33.0

66,575
47,150
19,425
29.2

63,025
46,275
16,750
26.6

3.2
-5.7
39.0
34.8

-1.2
-1.7
0.3
1.2

34,800
0
1,500
1,300
1,800
11,200
1,200
9,100
8,700

35,700
0
1,600
1,300
1,800
11,300
1,200
9,100
9,400

36,300
0
1,600
1,300
1,800
11,600
1,200
9,300
9,500

36,900
0
1,600
1,300
1,800
11,900
1,200
9,200
9,900

36,800
0
1,600
1,300
1,800
12,000
1,200
9,200
9,700

-2.6
...
-5.9
-7.1
-5.3
-7.7
0.0
3.4
0.0

0.0
...
-7.4
-8.1
0.0
-3.6
-5.4
7.5
1.3

53,988
42,736
6,229
5,023
3,751
11,731

60,472
48,899
5,929
5,644
4,386
11,724

70,072
56,699
6,805
6,568
5,240
9,897

76,689
63,197
7,559
5,933
4,983
7,524

...
...
...
...
...
...

7.0
6.2
16.5
4.2
-7.5
-9.0

0.7
-0.9
6.0
8.8
0.5
7.0

15,077
5,365
5,159
4,553

13,046
7,495
4,366
1,185

19,136
15,275
951
2,910

14,734
5,154
8,635
945

7,588
4,138
2,147
1,303

-66.0
15.6
-86.3
-57.9

-2.7
29.4
-38.2
7.2

77
77

97
97

239
99

67
67

53
53

3.9
8.2

33.8
14.0

68,800
64,200
4,600
6.7

69,025
63,925
5,100
7.4

70,750
63,975
6,775
9.6

69,100
65,150
3,950
5.7

70,000
65,300
4,700
6.7

4.4
4.4
5.6
1.1

5.3
5.4
3.8
-1.8

37,900
200
2,600
3,600
2,000
11,300
1,500
9,200
7,500

37,800
200
2,600
3,600
2,000
11,200
1,500
9,100
7,600

38,100
200
2,600
3,700
2,000
11,200
1,500
9,100
7,800

38,100
200
2,500
3,600
2,000
11,300
1,500
9,200
7,800

38,000
200
2,500
3,600
2,000
11,300
1,500
9,100
7,800

0.5
0.0
-7.4
-2.7
0.0
-1.7
7.1
2.2
5.4

0.7
4.3
-8.8
-2.9
7.1
-0.1
-2.7
1.7
5.3

83,060
59,360
10,446
13,254
9,899
15,564

71,763
52,489
10,161
9,113
7,081
15,711

81,227
58,972
10,570
11,685
9,321
15,733

80,699
60,727
9,421
10,551
8,861
13,673

...
...
...
...
...
...

10.3
8.5
3.1
31.5
16.7
9.2

10.7
9.0
6.3
24.3
13.8
-2.3

18,542
11,829
3,123
3,590

18,435
13,279
3,774
1,382

17,690
11,979
4,333
1,378

15,361
9,594
4,052
1,715

17,375
10,805
4,904
1,666

27.3
24.1
82.9
-26.4

0.6
13.6
-45.9
31.3

130
130

164
164

141
141

114
108

121
121

10.0
12.0

8.9
7.6

See notes at bottom of Arizona - Quarterly table.
PAGE EIGHT

ARIZONA'S ECONOMY

A R I Z O N A

COCHISE-SANTA CRUZ REGION
Civilian Labor Force, ADES
Employment
Unemployment
Unemployment Rate (%)
Employees on Nonagricultural Payrolls, ADES
Total
Mining
Construction
Manufacturing
Trans., Comm. & Publ. Util.
Trade
Finance, Ins. & Real Estate
Services
Government
Sales ($000s) ADOR
Gross Retail
Retail
Restaurants & Bar
Gasoline, EBR
Gallons (000s) ADOT
Contracting
Value of Construction Contract Awards ($000s) F.W. Dodge
Total
Residential Building
Non-Residential Building
Non-Building
Number of Dwelling Units Awarded, F.W. Dodge
Total
One Family Houses
GILA-GRAHAM-GREENLEE REGION
Civilian Labor Force, ADES
Employment
Unemployment
Unemployment Rate (%)
Employees on Nonagricultural Payrolls, ADES
Total
Mining
Construction
Manufacturing
Trans., Comm. & Publ. Util.
Trade
Finance, Ins. & Real Estate
Services
Government
Sales ($000s) ADOR
Gross Retail
Retail
Restaurants & Bar
Gasoline, EBR
Gallons (000s) ADOT
Contracting
Value of Construction Contract Awards ($000s) F.W. Dodge
Total
Residential Building
Non-Residential Building
Non-Building
Number of Dwelling Units Awarded, F.W. Dodge
Total
One Family Houses

E C O N O M I C

I N D I C A T O R S

% change versus year ago for:
most
most
recent
recent
month
12-months

AUG
96

SEP
96

OCT
96

NOV
96

DEC
96

59,175
50,975
8,200
13.9

59,500
50,350
9,150
15.4

59,200
50,025
9,175
15.5

58,325
50,350
7,975
13.7

56,925
50,000
6,925
12.2

-0.3
-1.6
10.4
10.7

1.5
0.7
7.4
5.7

41,400
0
1,900
2,100
2,300
10,700
800
9,300
14,300

41,400
0
2,000
2,300
2,200
10,800
900
9,300
14,300

42,000
0
1,900
2,300
2,200
10,800
800
9,300
14,700

42,200
0
1,900
2,100
2,400
10,900
900
9,300
14,700

42,300
0
1,800
2,100
2,400
11,100
900
9,200
14,800

1.4
-100.0
-10.0
0.0
4.3
-1.8
0.0
4.5
4.2

2.8
-100.0
0.4
4.1
4.1
-2.7
-12.0
5.5
7.7

58,724
45,604
7,672
5,448
4,069
11,055

56,430
46,105
6,900
3,425
2,661
10,872

59,656
45,647
7,845
6,164
4,917
10,178

60,976
48,617
7,572
4,787
4,020
8,959

...
...
...
...
...
...

7.5
8.1
4.5
6.2
-5.7
-5.9

2.9
3.1
1.0
3.6
-4.5
-12.4

20,976
9,229
6,278
5,469

23,035
6,466
9,200
7,369

28,514
12,381
13,734
2,399

15,887
9,753
890
5,244

5,896
4,294
1,602
0

15.2
-8.5
1,502.0
-100.0

54.3
62.9
67.9
25.7

89
87

86
86

280
84

56
53

54
54

-10.0
-10.0

24.4
4.2

34,900
32,050
2,850
8.2

35,225
32,150
3,075
8.7

35,225
32,050
3,175
9.0

34,975
32,250
2,725
7.8

34,600
31,950
2,650
7.7

-3.1
-3.7
3.9
7.3

1.3
1.1
3.4
1.8

25,300
2,900
1,700
2,100
800
5,400
600
5,100
6,700

25,900
3,000
1,700
2,100
800
5,500
600
5,100
7,100

25,900
3,000
1,600
2,100
800
5,500
600
5,100
7,200

25,900
3,000
1,800
2,100
800
5,400
600
5,000
7,200

26,000
3,000
1,700
2,100
800
5,400
700
5,000
7,300

0.0
7.1
0.0
5.0
0.0
-3.6
16.7
-2.0
-1.4

3.9
6.7
-0.5
10.2
5.5
-3.4
-1.4
8.7
5.1

40,084
30,398
5,494
4,192
3,131
11,667

37,151
29,681
5,023
2,447
1,901
14,665

40,493
31,015
5,280
4,198
3,349
18,287

37,859
29,950
4,512
3,397
2,853
10,226

...
...
...
...
...
...

4.2
4.3
-2.1
12.7
0.1
7.7

5.6
6.0
4.8
3.1
-5.4
25.4

8,504
2,815
1,409
4,280

9,730
4,118
5,040
572

14,111
3,792
8,499
1,820

3,736
3,415
0
321

4,964
4,682
0
282

28.8
54.7
-100.0
-62.6

-20.9
23.3
-46.6
-38.5

35
33

38
38

37
37

33
33

39
39

21.9
21.9

11.9
29.2

See notes at bottom of Arizona - Quarterly table.
ARIZONA'S ECONOMY

PAGE NINE

A R I Z O N A

APACHE-NAVAJO REGION
Civilian Labor Force, ADES
Employment
Unemployment
Unemployment Rate (%)
Employees on Nonagricultural Payrolls, ADES
Total
Mining
Construction
Manufacturing
Trans., Comm. & Publ. Util.
Trade
Finance, Ins. & Real Estate
Services
Government
Sales ($000s) ADOR
Gross Retail
Retail
Restaurants & Bar
Gasoline, EBR
Gallons (000s) ADOT
Contracting
Value of Construction Contract Awards ($000s) F.W. Dodge
Total
Residential Building
Non-Residential Building
Non-Building
Number of Dwelling Units Awarded, F.W. Dodge
Total
One Family Houses
COCONINO-YAVAPAI REGION
Civilian Labor Force, ADES
Employment
Unemployment
Unemployment Rate (%)
Employees on Nonagricultural Payrolls, ADES
Total
Mining
Construction
Manufacturing
Trans., Comm. & Publ. Util.
Trade
Finance, Ins. & Real Estate
Services
Government
Sales ($000s) ADOR
Gross Retail
Retail
Restaurants & Bar
Gasoline, EBR
Gallons (000s) ADOT
Contracting
Value of Construction Contract Awards ($000s) F.W. Dodge
Total
Residential Building
Non-Residential Building
Non-Building
Number of Dwelling Units Awarded, F.W. Dodge
Total
One Family Houses

E C O N O M I C

I N D I C A T O R S

% change versus year ago for:
most
most
recent
recent
month
12-months

AUG
96

SEP
96

OCT
96

NOV
96

DEC
96

52,325
43,375
8,950
17.1

51,350
43,050
8,300
16.2

51,325
42,875
8,450
16.5

50,350
43,100
7,250
14.4

50,575
43,325
7,250
14.3

0.5
-0.7
9.0
8.4

1.1
0.5
3.9
2.8

40,800
900
1,800
1,800
2,900
7,200
1,500
11,000
13,700

41,300
900
1,800
1,800
2,900
7,100
1,500
10,900
14,400

41,400
900
1,800
1,800
2,900
7,000
1,500
11,100
14,400

41,400
900
1,800
1,800
2,800
7,100
1,500
10,800
14,700

41,700
900
1,800
1,800
2,800
7,100
1,500
10,900
14,900

2.5
-10.0
5.9
5.9
-3.4
4.4
7.1
-2.7
6.4

3.1
-10.0
12.2
-0.9
-0.6
1.9
8.4
1.2
2.2

65,357
49,628
6,324
9,405
7,024
11,054

53,807
42,396
5,392
6,019
4,677
13,955

52,421
39,011
5,227
8,183
6,527
8,920

46,760
36,163
3,754
6,843
5,747
7,227

...
...
...
...
...
...

-5.5
-7.6
-2.6
5.4
-6.4
-8.0

-30.1
-36.5
4.6
2.0
-6.7
33.4

19,982
12,935
41
7,006

6,007
4,159
1,248
600

11,185
4,115
5,286
1,784

10,001
3,774
4,063
2,164

7,447
2,041
5,034
372

-60.1
40.0
-35.9
-96.0

-19.9
27.7
-35.1
-41.4

156
156

46
46

43
43

38
38

25
25

47.1
47.1

37.8
39.6

120,350
112,925
7,425
6.2

120,200
112,425
7,775
6.5

118,650
111,275
7,375
6.2

118,250
112,025
6,225
5.3

116,000
109,775
6,225
5.4

-3.6
-3.4
-6.7
-3.3

-0.9
-0.8
-2.2
-1.6

90,100
1,000
6,400
5,400
2,900
24,600
2,400
24,100
23,300

91,700
900
6,400
5,500
2,900
24,700
2,400
23,900
25,000

91,400
900
6,400
5,500
2,900
24,600
2,300
23,600
25,200

92,200
900
6,300
5,500
2,900
24,800
2,400
23,400
26,000

90,800
900
6,100
5,500
2,800
24,500
2,300
23,700
25,000

-0.2
0.0
5.2
-1.8
-3.4
-1.2
-4.2
2.6
-2.0

1.9
2.8
7.6
-5.9
-1.7
0.1
-3.4
1.6
5.8

175,036
124,082
31,725
19,229
14,361
46,365

169,423
126,512
31,743
11,168
8,678
46,871

164,556
116,703
29,823
18,030
14,383
45,563

148,429
110,348
24,311
13,770
11,565
44,693

...
...
...
...
...
...

6.7
5.4
9.9
12.7
0.1
39.3

6.9
7.0
7.8
4.3
-4.9
36.8

53,752
32,016
8,606
13,130

47,146
23,536
15,033
8,577

37,814
24,690
9,247
3,877

27,430
20,113
5,054
2,263

32,651
19,784
5,544
7,323

24.9
-5.9
232.6
112.4

-1.3
-8.9
-27.3
79.1

469
219

228
215

249
226

244
165

177
160

7.3
4.6

1.1
6.3

See notes at bottom of Arizona - Quarterly table.
PAGE TEN

ARIZONA'S ECONOMY

A R I Z O N A

E C O N O M I C

PHOENIX-MESA METROPOLITAN REGION (MARICOPA AND PINAL)
Civilian Labor Force (000s) ADES
Employment
Unemployment
Unemployment Rate, Seas. Adj. (%)
Employees on Nonagricultural Payrolls (000s) ADES
Total
Mining
Construction
Manufacturing
Durable
Nondurable
Trans., Comm. & Publ. Util.
Trade
Wholesale
Retail
Finance, Ins. & Real Estate
Services
Government
Sales ($000s) ADOR
Aggregate Retail Sales
Retail
Food, EBR
Restaurants & Bars
Gasoline, EBR
Contracting
Value of Construction Contract Awards ($000s) F.W. Dodge
Total Awards
Residential Building
Non-Residential Building
Non-Building
New Housing Units Authorized, Census C-40
Total Units
Single Family Units
2-4 Unit Structures
5-plus Unit Structures
Housing Sales and Prices, ARMLS
Total Sales ($000s)
Total Units
Average Price ($)
Phoenix Skyharbor International Airport, PSIA
Total Passengers
Total Aircraft Movements

I N D I C A T O R S

% change versus year ago for:
most
most
recent
recent
month
12-months

AUG
96

SEP
96

OCT
96

NOV
96

DEC
96

1,388.2
1,334.9
53.3
3.8

1,398.1
1,340.1
58.0
3.9

1,397.3
1,341.9
55.4
3.6

1,416.9
1,369.6
47.3
3.3

1,412.4
1,368.5
43.9
3.2

2.2
2.0
10.0
6.7

2.5
2.5
3.4
1.0

1,263.5
5.1
90.3
156.2
119.4
36.8
66.0
322.0
79.4
242.6
89.9
386.3
147.7

1,291.9
5.1
89.1
156.2
119.4
36.8
65.9
325.8
80.0
245.8
90.2
388.5
171.1

1,302.2
5.1
90.8
156.2
119.5
36.7
66.3
332.2
81.6
250.6
90.7
392.0
168.9

1,324.1
5.2
91.0
156.0
119.2
36.8
66.4
341.9
82.9
259.0
91.6
396.4
175.6

1,324.8
5.1
90.3
155.5
118.8
36.7
67.0
347.0
83.8
263.2
92.8
397.6
169.5

5.0
-1.9
6.0
2.9
4.1
-0.8
3.4
7.2
10.7
6.1
5.7
6.0
0.6

5.1
-1.1
7.3
4.2
5.6
-0.2
1.9
5.4
8.5
4.5
2.9
6.6
3.8

2,117,361
1,505,265
275,988
225,703
110,406
459,484

2,157,492
1,517,084
283,227
243,137
114,044
469,697

2,253,474
1,545,841
294,626
265,874
147,133
465,588

2,273,121
1,591,821
302,775
265,387
113,138
442,838

...
...
...
...
...
...

7.9
7.4
5.6
12.8
10.7
11.5

9.5
9.1
6.0
10.4
22.5
23.6

642,023
372,426
219,657
49,940

746,751
436,626
281,817
28,308

517,278
329,290
142,317
45,671

562,324
278,562
116,027
167,735

555,843
312,419
183,022
60,402

-15.4
-9.3
-35.6
111.9

7.5
11.7
-4.7
14.9

2,487
2,397
32
58

3,554
2,323
16
1,215

3,202
2,133
33
1,036

1,893
1,722
71
100

...
...
...
...

-36.7
-21.7
20.3
-86.4

9.8
4.1
-40.6
36.4

508,908
3,856
131,978

356,513
2,808
126,963

455,569
3,585
127,076

402,255
3,170
126,894

411,674
3,108
132,456

6.0
-2.3
8.5

20.6
14.7
5.5

2,544,393
35,140

2,301,864
33,656

2,647,839
35,112

2,376,390
33,016

...
...

2.2
1.7

8.8
-10.2

PHOENIX-MESA METROPOLITAN REGION (MARICOPA AND PINAL) - QUARTERLY DATA

Demographics & Vital Statistics (000s, seas adj) ADHS & EBR
Population
Natural Increase
Births
Deaths
Net Migration
Personal Income by Source ($mil, SAAR) EBR
Total Personal Income
Earnings by Place of Work
Less: Contributions for Social Insurance
Plus: Adjustment for Residence
Plus: Dividends, Interest & Rents
Plus: Transfer Payments
Per Capita Personal Income ($, SAAR) EBR

% change versus year ago for:
most
most
recent
recent
quarter
4-quarters

IV
95

I
96

II
96

III
96

IV
96

2,597.6
6.3
11.4
5.1
16.3

2,620.3
6.4
11.5
5.1
16.3

2,642.9
6.5
11.6
5.2
16.2

2,665.6
6.5
11.7
5.2
16.1

2,665.6
6.6
11.8
5.2
-6.6

2.6
5.2
3.9
2.4
-140.5

3.3
5.3
4.0
2.4
-35.3

59,617
43,361
2,641
-32
9,804
9,125
22,950

60,865
44,306
2,699
-32
9,996
9,294
23,229

62,159
45,268
2,752
-32
10,206
9,470
23,519

63,453
46,229
2,805
-32
10,416
9,645
23,804

64,747
47,190
2,858
-32
10,626
9,821
24,290

8.6
8.8
8.2
0.2
8.4
7.6
5.8

9.0
9.2
8.2
0.8
8.9
7.9
5.5

See notes at bottom of Arizona - Quarterly table
AR IZ ON A 'S ECON O MY

PAGE ELEVEN

A R I Z O N A

E C O N O M I C

TUCSON METROPOLITAN REGION (PIMA)
Civilian Labor Force (000s) ADES
Employment
Unemployment
Unemployment Rate, Seas. Adj. (%)
Employees on Nonagricultural Payrolls (000s) ADES
Total
Mining
Construction
Manufacturing
Durable
Nondurable
Trans., Comm. & Publ. Util.
Trade
Wholesale
Retail
Finance, Ins. & Real Estate
Services
Government
Sales ($000s) ADOR
Aggregate Retail Sales
Retail
Food, EBR
Restaurants & Bars
Gasoline, EBR
Contracting
Value of Construction Contract Awards ($000s) F.W. Dodge
Total Awards
Residential Building
Non-Residential Building
Non-Building
New Housing Units Authorized, Census C-40
Total Units
Single Family Units
2-4 Unit Structures
5-plus Unit Structures
Housing Sales and Prices, TAR
Total Sales ($000s)
Total Units
Average Price ($)
Tucson International Airport, TAA
Total Passengers
Total Aircraft Movements

I N D I C A T O R S

% change versus year ago for:
most
most
recent
recent
month
12-months

AUG
96

SEP
96

OCT
96

NOV
96

DEC
96

367.6
354.2
13.4
3.7

370.8
355.9
14.9
3.8

371.1
356.1
15.0
3.7

372.8
360.0
12.8
3.5

373.6
361.5
12.1
3.4

-0.6
-0.9
9.0
13.3

-0.0
-0.3
5.9
7.1

302.5
2.4
20.5
27.7
22.7
5.0
13.4
68.7
10.4
58.3
12.2
92.9
64.7

309.8
2.3
20.2
28.0
22.9
5.1
13.4
69.0
10.4
58.6
12.3
93.7
70.9

311.8
2.3
20.4
28.2
23.0
5.2
13.3
69.8
10.4
59.4
12.3
93.8
71.7

314.2
2.3
20.2
28.3
23.1
5.2
13.5
71.0
10.5
60.5
12.5
95.4
71.0

315.5
2.3
20.2
28.2
23.1
5.1
13.5
71.5
10.5
61.0
12.6
94.1
73.1

2.0
0.0
-1.0
1.8
2.7
-1.9
-2.2
0.7
6.1
-0.2
5.9
1.0
5.8

2.3
5.7
2.5
1.3
2.2
-2.5
0.4
1.7
6.3
0.9
3.5
1.6
4.4

509,693
351,294
73,664
57,367
27,368
90,107

520,601
352,383
75,596
61,156
31,465
96,488

535,722
357,631
78,639
60,784
38,668
90,754

535,582
360,745
80,814
60,734
33,289
94,433

...
...
...
...
...
...

3.8
2.9
2.8
5.0
14.2
2.4

4.3
3.8
3.1
5.3
10.9
6.0

70,146
40,848
23,757
5,541

73,157
48,510
17,593
7,054

124,890
48,266
66,589
10,035

68,477
40,430
21,892
6,155

46,208
32,414
9,529
4,265

-28.8
-29.7
-31.7
-11.6

-5.9
-11.4
8.2
-8.2

440
416
8
16

412
385
22
5

390
383
7
0

341
337
4
0

...
...
...
...

-8.6
-9.2
100.0
...

-19.7
4.0
-42.9
-69.0

92,080
722
127,534

80,714
626
128,935

82,259
629
130,778

69,046
532
129,785

...
...
...

-5.6
-12.9
8.4

9.8
2.2
7.5

269,231
19,588

249,728
17,995

287,290
20,114

270,615
19,671

302,025
18,468

3.5
-9.9

2.4
-0.9

TUCSON METROPOLITAN REGION (PIMA) - QUARTERLY DATA

Demographics & Vital Statistics (000s, seas adj) ADHS & EBR
Population
Natural Increase
Births
Deaths
Net Migration
Personal Income by Source ($mil, SAAR) EBR
Total Personal Income
Earnings by Place of Work
Less: Contributions for Social Insurance
Plus: Adjustment for Residence
Plus: Dividends, Interest & Rents
Plus: Transfer Payments
Per Capita Personal Income ($, SAAR) EBR

% change versus year ago for:
most
most
recent
recent
quarter
4-quarters

IV
95

I
96

II
96

III
96

IV
96

766.1
1.2
2.8
1.7
3.0

770.3
1.2
2.8
1.7
3.0

774.4
1.2
2.8
1.7
3.0

778.5
1.2
2.9
1.7
3.0

778.5
1.2
2.9
1.7
-1.2

1.6
0.9
2.1
2.9
-139.0

2.1
0.9
2.0
2.7
-46.3

14,790
9,319
582
121
2,960
2,973
19,304

15,011
9,464
593
123
2,992
3,025
19,488

15,223
9,596
601
125
3,026
3,077
19,659

15,435
9,727
610
128
3,060
3,129
19,827

15,648
9,859
619
131
3,095
3,182
20,100

5.8
5.8
6.2
8.3
4.6
7.0
4.1

5.9
5.8
6.0
8.9
4.7
7.2
3.7

See notes at bottom of Arizona - Quarterly table
PAGE TWELVE

ARIZONA'S ECONOMY

A R I Z O N A

ARIZONA MONTHLY DATA
Civilian Labor Force (000s) ADES
Employment
Unemployment
Unemployment Rate, Seas. Adj. (%)
Employees on Nonagricultural Payrolls (000s) ADES
Total
Mining
Construction
Manufacturing
Durable
Nondurable
Trans., Comm. & Publ. Util.
Transportation
Trade
Wholesale
Retail
Finance, Ins. & Real Estate
Services
Government
Federal
State & Local
Schools
Hours Worked Per Week, Manufacturing, ADES
Average Hourly Earnings ($) ADES
Copper Mining
Construction
Manufacturing
Utilities
Retail Trade
Wholesale Trade
Sales ($000s) ADOR
Aggregate Retail Sales
Retail
Food, EBR
Restaurants & Bars
Gasoline, EBR
Gallons (000s) ADOT
Utilities
Communications
Amusements
Rentals - Real Property
Rentals - Personal Property
Contracting
Mining - Metal, Oil & Gas
Hotel/Motel
Value of Construction Contract Awards ($000s)
Total Awards
Residential Building
Non-Residential Building
Non-Building
New Housing Units Authorized, Census C-40
Total Units
Single Family Units
2-4 Unit Structures
5-plus Unit Structures
Bankruptcy Filings, U.S. Bankruptcy Court
Total
Chapter 7
Chapter 11
Chapter 13

E C O N O M I C

I N D I C A T O R S

% change versus year ago for:
most
most
recent
recent
month
12-months

AUG
96

SEP
96

OCT
96

NOV
96

DEC
96

2,163.7
2,037.7
126.0
5.4

2,176.5
2,043.7
132.8
5.6

2,172.4
2,044.3
128.1
5.5

2,187.3
2,079.6
107.7
5.3

2,177.1
2,076.6
100.5
5.0

1.3
0.8
12.0
8.7

1.8
1.7
3.0
1.1

1,838.4
12.6
126.6
199.8
152.8
47.0
93.3
55.6
461.2
97.2
364.0
109.1
547.4
288.4
44.9
243.5
134.8
42.7

1,875.9
12.5
125.7
200.4
153.0
47.4
93.2
55.7
464.7
97.9
366.8
109.9
550.0
319.5
45.1
274.4
157.5
42.5

1,889.7
12.5
127.1
200.9
153.4
47.5
93.4
56.1
471.8
99.4
372.4
110.6
555.1
318.3
44.2
274.1
164.5
42.0

1,914.2
12.5
127.4
200.3
153.0
47.3
94.0
56.6
483.8
100.0
383.8
111.0
559.4
325.8
44.5
281.3
166.0
42.6

1,916.8
12.6
125.7
199.9
152.8
47.1
94.8
57.2
488.9
100.5
388.4
112.3
561.0
321.6
45.5
276.1
167.8
43.0

4.0
1.6
3.7
2.4
3.2
-0.2
2.7
4.0
4.4
4.0
4.4
4.2
5.0
3.1
1.1
3.4
3.9
1.9

4.3
1.4
5.5
3.1
4.1
-0.1
1.9
2.8
3.7
4.0
3.6
2.0
5.4
5.1
2.4
5.5
5.6
2.2

17.01
12.69
11.62
18.02
10.62
13.19

17.53
12.95
11.70
18.95
11.05
13.04

17.88
13.42
11.68
18.27
10.62
12.49

18.37
13.22
11.86
17.98
10.51
13.38

17.74
13.29
11.80
18.16
10.87
13.68

7.8
6.3
3.6
6.7
5.0
14.6

3.7
4.6
1.8
5.4
3.2
10.6

3,198,088
2,208,367
444,434
350,960
194,326
145,128
513,023
131,221
36,415
323,587
202,207
657,027
98,386
84,692

3,224,407
2,215,549
456,092
369,441
183,326
142,455
479,358
137,592
32,970
310,222
205,533
679,983
118,401
105,458

3,358,805
2,251,519
474,449
392,208
240,629
191,951
401,321
135,559
46,657
272,679
216,536
664,920
104,374
132,014

3,364,097
2,301,568
487,570
383,250
191,709
161,005
325,724
147,297
47,605
355,360
215,359
629,573
119,175
118,518

...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...

7.2
6.3
7.3
10.6
11.9
-0.6
6.2
20.6
47.2
31.3
23.2
10.6
-27.1
21.2

7.4
6.4
7.1
8.8
16.7
7.1
4.5
12.2
5.8
3.0
6.4
18.7
-15.3
12.1

849,002
487,463
268,030
93,509

937,307
544,189
338,071
55,047

770,618
449,788
250,956
69,874

717,950
370,795
160,613
186,542

677,972
390,577
211,782
75,613

-16.5
-9.8
-35.1
43.8

4.7
8.6
-6.9
11.7

3,518
3,329
73
116

4,619
3,266
69
1,284

4,250
3,058
93
1,099

2,675
2,437
101
137

...
...
...
...

-33.2
-23.1
12.2
-81.6

2.6
2.0
-30.7
9.0

1,797
1,315
18
463

1,756
1,278
32
446

1,928
1,452
22
453

1,706
1,270
20
416

...
...
...
...

23.3
21.0
-37.5
37.7

23.7
25.4
-20.3
22.9

See notes at bottom of Arizona - Quarterly table.
A R IZ ON A 'S E CO N OMY

PAGE THIRTEEN

A R I Z O N A

E C O N O M I C

ARIZONA - QUARTERLY DATA
Demographics & Vital Statistics (000s, seas adj) ADHS & EBR
Population
Natural Increase
Births
Deaths
Net Migration
Personal Income Derivation ($mil, SAAR) EBR
Total Personal Income
Earnings by Place of Work
Less: Contributions for Social Insurance
Plus: Adjustment for Residence
Plus: Dividends, Interest & Rents
Plus: Transfer Payments
Components of Earnings ($mil, SAAR) BEA
Wages and Salaries
Other Labor Income
Proprietor’s Income
Farm
Nonfarm
Per Capita Personal Income ($, SAAR) EBR
Average Wage Per Employee, Annual Rate ($) E
Measures of Financial Institutions
Banks and S&Ls Combined ($mil) ASBD
Assets
Loans
Liabilities
Deposits
Equity Capital
Capital:Asset Ratio (%)

I N D I C A T O R S

% change versus year ago for:
most
most
recent
recent
quarter
4-quarters

IV
95

I
96

II
96

III
96

IV
96

4,268.8
9.4
18.4
9.0
23.8

4,301.2
9.3
18.4
9.1
22.4

4,332.4
9.0
18.0
9.0
21.7

4,362.9
9.1
18.1
9.0
21.2

4,393.2
9.1
18.2
9.0
21.2

2.9
-2.5
-1.2
0.1
-10.9

3.1
-0.8
0.5
1.8
-13.7

88,830
61,333
4,249
283
15,745
15,719

92,186
63,788
4,419
292
16,335
16,191

92,804
64,143
4,441
294
16,244
16,564

94,639
65,424
4,519
298
16,536
16,899

96,161
66,421
4,579
302
16,843
17,175

8.3
8.3
7.8
6.7
7.0
9.3

8.7
9.0
8.3
6.1
8.2
8.0

49,711
5,878
5,744
432
5,312
20,809
27,008

51,733
6,051
5,880
491
5,388
21,433
27,653

52,704
6,082
6,126
630
5,496
21,421
27,987

...
...
...
...
...
21,692
...

...
...
...
...
...
21,889
...

11.1
7.2
11.9
70.7
7.6
5.2
6.8

10.2
8.1
11.7
94.8
7.6
5.5
5.9

38,527
23,303
35,558
32,546
2,969
8.6

39,505
23,735
36,640
32,593
2,865
8.1

39,810
24,161
36,140
32,512
3,670
10.1

31,064
21,266
28,558
25,909
2,506
8.9

...
...
...
...
...
...

-14.8
-4.8
-14.7
-15.8
-15.7
NA

3.9
4.9
3.7
-0.3
6.4
NA

MEASURES OF INFLATION AND PRICES

Consumer Price Index (1982-84=100) ASU & BLS
Metropolitan Phoenix
Western Region (U.S.)
U.S. - All Urban Consumers
U.S. - Urban Wage Earners
Price Indexes (1992=100) BEA
Gross Domestic Product
Personal Consumption Expenditures

IV
95

I
96

II
96

III
96

IV
96

161.3
154.3
153.6
150.9

162.9
156.4
155.0
152.3

168.4
157.5
156.5
153.9

167.6
158.6
157.4
154.6

168.6
158.7
158.5
155.8

4.5
2.9
3.2
3.2

5.1
2.7
2.9
2.9

108.4
108.3

109.0
108.9

109.6
109.8

110.1
110.2

110.8
110.9

2.2
2.4

2.1
2.2

MEASURES OF INFLATION AND PRICES - MONTHLY DATA

Consumer Price Index (1982-1984=100) BLS
U.S. - All Urban
U.S. - Wage Earners
Sources and abbreviations:
ADES: Arizona Department of Economic Security
ADHS: Arizona Department of Health Services
ADOR: Arizona Department of Revenue
ADOT: Arizona Department of Transportation
ARMLS: Arizona Regional Multiple Listing Service
ASBD: Arizona State Banking Department
ASPB: Arizona State Parks Board
ASU: Arizona State University, College of Business,
Research Centers
PAGE FOURTEEN

% change versus year ago for:
most
most
recent
recent
quarter
4-quarters

OCT
96

SEP
96

OCT
96

NOV
96

DEC
96

157.3
154.5

157.8
155.1

158.3
155.5

158.6
155.9

158.6
155.9

BEA: Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department
of Commerce
BLS: Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor
Census C-40, Bureau of the Census, U.S. Department
of Commerce
EBR: Economic & Business Research Program, The
University of Arizona
F.W. Dodge, Division of McGraw Hill Information Systems
Co. (proprietary data provided by special permission)
NPS: National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior

% change versus year ago for:
most
most
recent
recent
month
12-months
3.3
3.3

2.9
2.9

NSCCC: Nogales-Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
PSIA: Phoenix Skyharbor International Airport
SAAR: Seasonally adjusted at annual rates
TAA: Tucson Airport Authority
TAR: Tucson Association of Realtors
USINS: U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service,
U.S. Department of Justice
U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of Arizona
USCS: U.S. Customs Service, U.S. Department of the Treasury

AR I ZO NA 'S EC ONO M Y

A R I Z O N A

E C O N O M I C

JUL
96

I N D I C A T O R S

AUG
96

SEP
96

OCT
96

NOV
96

% change versus year ago for:
most
most
recent
recent
month
12-months

TRAVEL AND TOURISM
Visits to Parks & Other Recreational Areas, ADOT, NPS & ASPB
Northern Arizona
Historical
Scenic
Water Based Recreation
Southern Arizona
Historical
Scenic
Water Based Recreation

2,793,180
211,403
969,857
1,611,920
177,363
41,886
87,853
47,624

2,543,342
209,966
828,292
1,505,084
149,024
26,061
86,272
36,691

1,977,342
200,159
669,722
1,107,461
191,242
39,688
122,346
29,208

1,756,978
178,249
543,390
1,035,339
226,341
47,097
151,082
28,162

1,079,010
104,975
287,789
686,246
229,557
43,293
166,932
19,332

-15.9
5.2
10.9
-25.8
11.5
-6.5
20.4
-7.9

-5.9
-0.5
-7.7
-5.8
-7.5
-3.3
-9.1
-5.2

International Border Crossings, USINS & USCS
U.S. Citizens
Aliens
Vehicles

588,032
1,548,887
...

609,724
1,497,677
...

669,717
1,748,139
...

706,664
1,788,255
...

836,221
1,589,184
...

2.0
-9.1
-1.5

3.3
-3.3
-7.2

See notes at bottom of Arizona - Quarterly table.

TO ORDER
Check the appropriate box below and include a check or money order, where applicable.
Arizona’s Economy
q free of charge in the United States

q $12.00 (U.S.) international subscription

Arizona Economic Indicators
q $16.00 in the U.S., Fall 1996 and Spring 1997
q $22.00 (U.S.) international subscription, Fall 1996 and Spring 1997
1990 Arizona Statistical Abstract, includes 1980 Census data.
q Quantity ordered: __ $26.50 (includes $3 shipping and handling)
q Quantity ordered:__________ $30.00 (U.S.) international order
1993 Arizona Statistical Abstract, includes 1990 Census data.
q Quantity ordered: __ $27.95 (includes $3 shipping and handling)
q Quantity ordered:__________ $36.00 (U.S.) international order
Name: ____________________________________________________________

ARIZONA'S ECONOMY IS PUBLISHED QUARTERLY BY THE KARL
ELLER GRADUATE SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT, COLLEGE OF
BUSINESS AND PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION, THE UNIVERSITY
OF ARIZONA, TUCSON, ARIZONA 85721. 520-621-2155.
COPYRIGHT 1997 BY THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA. REQUESTS
FOR COPIES, PERMISSION TO REPRINT AND CHANGE OF
ADDRESS NOTICES SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO THE STAFF.
DEAN ...........................................................MARK A. ZUPAN

Organization: ____________________________Title: _______________________

ASSOCIATE DEAN
OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS...................................LISA FAHEY

Address: __________________________________________________________

PUBLICATIONS DIRECTOR...............................DIANA HUNTER

City: ______________________State:____________________Zip:_____________
Country: ___________________Telephone: (

) _________________________

Total amount enclosed: $ __________________
q Address Change. Please fill in old address in shaded box.
Please make check or money order payable to:
Economic and Business Research Program
Mail to: Publications Office
College of Business and
Public Administration
McClelland Hall 204
PO Box 210108
The University of Arizona
2/97
Tucson, Arizona 85721-0108

AR IZ ON A 'S ECON O MY

Name: ______________________________________
Organization: __________________________________
Title: ________________________________________
Address: ______________________________________
City: ________________________________________
State: __________________ Zip: ________________
Telephone: ____________________________________

ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS
RESEARCH PROGRAMS
520-621-2155
ECONOMIC IMPACT
& FISCAL ANALYSIS....................ALBERTA CHARNEY
621-2291
FORECASTING PROJECT .................MARSHALL J. VEST
621-4075
FREE TRADE STUDIES ......................ARTHUR L. SILVERS
621-4822
STATE DATA CENTER ...........................PIA MONTOYA
621-2523
DATA REFERENCE..................................VALORIE RICE
621-2109

PAGE FIFTEEN