My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 1995/12/04
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1995
>
Agenda Packets - 1995/12/04
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:51:27 PM
Creation date
7/2/2018 10:33:20 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
12/4/1995
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
12/4/1995
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
87
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
WORKING GROUP DISCUSSION REPORT <br /> COMMUNITY PARTNERS: <br /> AN INTRODUCTION TO THE BUSINESS BASE <br /> November 20, 1995 <br /> The Working Group has met five times over the past quarter to review the data generated by the <br /> Community Partners business survey. At each meeting two of the 10 chapters were summarized <br /> and various observations made. The following incorporates both into one document and distills <br /> the key points and findings of the survey. This document begins the process of evaluating the <br /> types of actions that might be best pursued in response to the data generated. <br /> Chapter One: Where Are We Today? <br /> Chapter-one-provides various informational pictures of the region, quantifying the make-up of <br /> the local economy's distribution of firms by type, ownership characteristics, sales volume and <br /> outlook, facility size and ownership,job categories, full and part-time jobs, and anticipated <br /> length of stay. Each of these are informative but some are, of course, more relevant than others. <br /> The Working Group was asked to rank these as to their information value and whether more or <br /> less information was required in future surveys. <br /> Work Group Question& Comments <br /> Raw Score Topic More or Less <br /> 15 Jobs &Employment * More <br /> 13 Break out by Sector * <br /> 13 Projected Time of Stay * <br /> 13 Business Outlook * <br /> 11 Facility Ownership * <br /> 10 Headquarters location <br /> 9 Sales Volume * <br /> 9 Facility Sizes <br /> 9 Minority and Female ownership Less <br /> 8 Legal Entity Less <br /> • <br /> • All members of the Working Group ranked the Jobs and Employment topic as high, and <br /> the one area where even more information should be generated. <br /> • Items with an * indicate that at least one member of the Working Group felt the data to be <br /> of high value. <br /> • Minority and female ownership, and legal entity of companies was seen as the least <br /> relevant of the data generated. <br /> 1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.