Differing rates of population, employment and real wage growth have resulted in greater rates of cross-border commuting since 1970. That commuting, which is often skewed towards the west in the morning and the east at night, is stressing the region’s transportation network. This sets up a range of challenges for each of the Big Four jurisdictions that they must meet in the future or face continued congestion without end.
First, let’s summarize the statistics on the Big Four that we gathered earlier in the series.
Population Growth, 1970-2007
Fairfax: 111.9%
Montgomery: 79.5%
Prince George’s: 23.9%
District of Columbia: -22.1%
Employment Growth, 1970-2007
Fairfax: 475.1%
Montgomery: 178.1%
Prince George’s: 120.3%
District of Columbia: 20.8%
Average Wage per Job, 2008
District of Columbia: $74,771
Fairfax: $70,147
Montgomery: $61,757
Prince George’s: $50,417
Real Wage Growth, 1970-2008
Fairfax: 67.9%
District of Columbia: 53.1%
Montgomery: 43.8%
Prince George’s: 29.4%
Number of Commuters to Jobs in D.C., 1970
Prince George’s: 96,482
Montgomery: 66,967
Fairfax: 47,802
Number of Commuters to Jobs in D.C., 2000
Prince George’s: 126,135
Montgomery: 99,675
Fairfax: 92,238
Average Commute Time, 2006-08
District of Columbia: 29.5 minutes
Fairfax: 30.8 minutes
Montgomery: 32.9 minutes
Prince George’s: 35.9 minutes
Percentage of Commuters Traveling at least 30 Minutes to Work, 2006-2008
District of Columbia: 48.9%
Fairfax: 51.8%
Montgomery: 56.0%
Prince George’s: 61.3%
On almost all of these measures, the rank order is the same: Fairfax first, Montgomery second, Prince George’s third and the District varying. Why? Our best guess is that it is a function of two factors that heavily impact economic development: taxes and schools.
Here is a tax comparison of some of the Washington area’s jurisdictions, helpfully (and perhaps not coincidentally) supplied by Fairfax: 
Fairfax has relatively moderate taxes and excellent schools. It is no surprise that they lead on most of our economic performance measures. MoCo’s schools are also excellent (though not decisively better than Fairfax’s) and its taxes are relatively high. Both the District and Prince George’s County suffer from twin problems: high taxes and poor schools. D.C. is partially protected from the economic development implications of those facts because of its location, but Prince George’s is not.
Each of the Big Four now faces a different set of challenges.
Fairfax will have to deal with the consequences of its success: crowded schools and roads. It is virtually inevitable that Fairfax will have to raise revenues to finance more infrastructure. In fact, it is already heading down that road with toll hikes and a commercial property tax district to finance the Silver Line and a special commercial property tax to pay for other transportation projects. MoCo went through similar problems after explosive growth in the 1980s. Its development impact taxes never recovered the full cost of paying for new infrastructure, but MoCo’s growth did slow significantly in later years.
Montgomery is now number two. It can no longer pretend that businesses and residents will come here simply because “we are Montgomery County.” MoCo will have to maintain its school quality and moderate its tax increases – not an easy feat in these days of perpetual budget deficits. If it does not make an effort to compete, MoCo’s growing wage gap with D.C. and Fairfax will cause its residents to increasingly commute to jobs elsewhere and face the staggering travel times suffered by inhabitants of Prince George’s County.
The District’s high taxes and poor schools have caused a great hollowing out of population over the past few decades, although that trend may be easing. While D.C. politicians often call for commuter taxes, it is the city’s own ineffective government that has caused many workers to buy houses across the border. The single most important determinant of whether D.C. can attract new residents over the long term is the success or failure of its current effort to improve its public schools. It’s too soon to judge whether Superintendent Michelle Rhee’s changes will be successful, but to have any chance of producing real change, she must greatly outlast the average superintendent tenure of three years. If D.C. goes back to its rotating cast of in-and-out school leaders, its population growth will stall and the morning backups on its streets to the suburbs will continue.
The consequence of the poor schools in Prince George’s has not been to hamper population growth, but rather has been to discourage the creation of high-paying jobs. Prince George’s residents benefit from relatively low-cost housing stock compared to D.C. and the other inner suburbs, but they pay for it greatly with long commutes across their borders. Prince George’s may have the toughest challenge of all: attracting good jobs, improving its schools and restraining its taxes, all in times of budget austerity.
The difficulties above are immense. But the Washington region contains many of the world’s smartest people, is one of the wealthiest places on Planet Earth and benefits mightily from the presence of the federal government. It must succeed in correcting its imbalances as a region. If it does, residents of every jurisdiction will benefit from less stress of long commutes on the region’s transportation network. If traffic flowed evenly in both directions – or better yet, if people lived closer to their jobs – there would be no need for multi-billion dollar projects like the ICC or widening I-270 or the Washington Beltway. But if the Washington region continues to see lopsided growth in some places alongside stagnation in others, then no amount of tax increases or project construction will ease the traffic congestion that is sure to follow in coming years.
Friday, April 09, 2010
Population, Jobs and Commutes in the Washington Region, Part Seven
Thursday, April 08, 2010
Population, Jobs and Commutes in the Washington Region, Part Six
In the first five parts of this series, we examined differing rates of growth in population, employment and real wages across the Washington region and explored historic shifts of commuting patterns among its Big Four jurisdictions: D.C., Fairfax, MoCo and Prince George’s. Today we will look at what those patterns mean for people traveling to work.
Below are the percentages of people traveling less than or more than thirty minutes to work, as well as mean travel times, for every jurisdiction in the region from the U.S. Census Bureau. 
It comes as little surprise that the jurisdictions with the longest travel times are all outer suburbs: Charles and Calvert Counties in Maryland and Stafford, Spotsylvania, Warren and Prince William Counties in Virginia. Small cities (like Fairfax and Fredericksburg Cities) and inner jurisdictions like D.C., Alexandria and Arlington have the shortest commutes. But Prince George’s County is an outlier. It has a higher percentage of its people traveling 30 minutes or more (61.3%) than many outer counties including Stafford, Spotsylvania, Calvert and Warren. It also has a longer average commute (35.9 minutes) than does Frederick (33.8 minutes). The failure of Prince George’s County to create high-wage jobs for its residents is exacting a stunning cost on them in their daily commutes.
There is also a notable difference between the Maryland and Virginia suburbs. In the five Maryland counties, 57.7% of commuters traveled thirty minutes or more. In Virginia, that percentage was 52.8%. Maryland commuters had a mean travel time of 34.8 minutes while Virginia commuters had a mean travel time of 33.3 minutes. Let’s remember that our dataset includes very distant outer suburbs in Virginia (like Stafford, Warren and Spotsylvania) while it excludes distant Maryland suburbs like Washington and St. Mary’s Counties.
Here are the average commute times for the Big Four in 2006-08:
District of Columbia: 29.5 minutes
Fairfax: 30.8 minutes
Montgomery: 32.9 minutes
Prince George’s: 35.9 minutes
And here are the percentages of commuters traveling at least 30 minutes to work:
District of Columbia: 48.9%
Fairfax: 51.8%
Montgomery: 56.0%
Prince George’s: 61.3%
For the three suburban jurisdictions, the rank order of travel times - Fairfax first, Montgomery second and Prince George’s third – is an exact match for the rank order in population growth, employment growth and real wage growth. This is not a coincidence. Creating abundant high-wage jobs near where residents live, which has been a specialty of Fairfax for the last few decades, pays off in lower commuting times.
We’ll wrap up our findings tomorrow.
Wednesday, April 07, 2010
Population, Jobs and Commutes in the Washington Region, Part Five
In Part Two, we saw that Fairfax County was adding population and employment, and seeing increases in real wages, at much higher rates than MoCo or Prince George’s County. And in Parts Three and Four, we saw how the commuting patterns to jobs inside each of the Big Four had changed since 1970. Here’s a summary of those changes.
D.C. was a larger jobs magnet in 2000 than it was in 1970, drawing in 271,803 net commuters – a 52% increase – from Fairfax, MoCo and Prince George’s. While it is true that there has been a slight rise in the number of reverse commuters, or D.C. residents working in the suburbs, that has been utterly swamped by suburban growth. The biggest source of commuters for the Big Four is Prince George’s County, which now has about as many cross-border commuters to the rest of the Big Four as Fairfax and MoCo combined. Following are two maps that show net flows among the Big Four in both 1970 and 2000.
Finally, consider the percentage of employed residents in each jurisdiction who worked inside that jurisdiction in both years.
Percentage of D.C. employed residents who work in D.C., 1970: 67%
Percentage of D.C. employed residents who work in D.C., 2000: 73%
Percentage of Fairfax employed residents who work in Fairfax, 1970: 40%
Percentage of Fairfax employed residents who work in Fairfax, 2000: 58%
Percentage of MoCo employed residents who work in MoCo, 1970: 51%
Percentage of MoCo employed residents who work in MoCo, 2000: 59%
Percentage of P.G. employed residents who work in P.G., 1970: 40%
Percentage of P.G. employed residents who work in P.G., 2000: 39%
Prince George’s County’s role in this system is obvious. Because it has not had robust employment or real wage growth, its residents are forced to work elsewhere. That fact combined with the jobs explosion in Northern Virginia is impacting our transportation network, creating a system of congested, one-way flows.
We’ll see what that means for commuting times in Part Six.
Tuesday, April 06, 2010
Population, Jobs and Commutes in the Washington Region, Part Four
Yesterday, we examined commuting patterns to jobs inside the District of Columbia and Prince George’s County. Today, we’ll look at who holds jobs inside MoCo and Fairfax.
Montgomery County
In 1970, MoCo had 164,948 jobs. Of those jobs, 110,587 (67%) were held by MoCo residents. Prince George’s residents held 19,454 (12%) of MoCo-based jobs and D.C. residents held 16,201 (10%). No other jurisdiction’s residents accounted for more than 3% of jobs in MoCo.
In 2000, MoCo had 419,168 jobs, an increase of 154% over 1970. Of those jobs, 267,130 (64%) were held by MoCo residents, 40,245 (10%) were held by Prince George’s residents and 22,860 (6%) were held by Frederick County residents. The percentage of MoCo jobs held by MoCo residents has not changed very much since 1970, perhaps because MoCo has seen similar levels of population and employment growth over that period. The percentage of MoCo jobs accounted for by D.C. residents has fallen from 10% to 5% because of D.C.’s absolute decline in population.
Fairfax County
In 1970, Fairfax had 115,137 jobs. Of those jobs, 78,126 (68%) were held by Fairfax residents. Prince William County residents held 7,835 (7%) of Fairfax-based jobs, Arlington residents held 6,758 (6%) and Alexandria residents held 6,400 (6%). No other jurisdiction’s residents accounted for more than 3% of jobs in Fairfax.
In 2000, Fairfax had 543,213 jobs, a staggering increase of 372% over 1970. Of those jobs, 155,675 (53%) were held by Fairfax residents and 56,124 (10%) were held by Prince William residents. MoCo, Alexandria and Arlington residents all accounted for around 4% of jobs based in Fairfax. The percentage of Fairfax jobs held by Fairfax residents has slipped since 1970 because Fairfax’s job growth has been so rapid that it cannot be met domestically. And in Part Two, we saw that Fairfax’s real wage growth was 68% between 1970 and 2008 – significantly higher than many nearby jurisdictions. That attracts residents of nearby counties to commute into Fairfax.
Tomorrow, we’ll put all of the Big Four’s commuting patterns together to show how their differing rates of population, employment and real wage growth are affecting regional commutes.
Monday, April 05, 2010
Population, Jobs and Commutes in the Washington Region, Part Three
In Part Two, we demonstrated significant differences between jurisdictions in the Washington region in population growth, employment growth and real wage growth since 1970. Those differences have impacted the region’s commuting patterns in very large ways since then.
The U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) offers many data series at the national, state and county levels. One series it offers is a matrix of commuting patterns by county. For each county, BEA estimates both the residence of job holders inside the county as well as the job locations of county residents. We gathered the former measure – residence of county job holders – for each of the Washington area’s Big Four jurisdictions in 1970 and 2000. Here is the story for each of the Big Four in both of those years.
District of Columbia
In 1970, D.C. had 504,611 jobs. Of those jobs, 220,277 (44%) were held by D.C. residents. Prince George’s residents held 96,482 (19%) of D.C.-based jobs, MoCo residents held 66,967 (13%) and Fairfax residents held 47,802 (10%).
In 2000, D.C. had 668,739 jobs, an increase of 33% over 1970. Of those jobs, 190,560 (29%) were held by D.C. residents, 126,135 (19%) were held by Prince George’s residents, 99,675 (15%) were held by MoCo residents and 92,238 (14%) were held by Fairfax residents. The drop in D.C. residents’ job-holding percentage of D.C. jobs is due to the absolute drop in D.C.’s population over that period of time. The percentage of D.C. jobs held by residents of the outer suburbs (defined as excluding MoCo, Prince George’s, Fairfax, Arlington and Alexandria) increased from 4% in 1970 to 14% in 2000.
Prince George’s County
In 1970, Prince George’s had 153,808 jobs. Of those jobs, 111,239 (72%) were held by Prince George’s residents. D.C. residents held 12,553 (8%) of Prince George’s-based jobs and MoCo residents held 11,027 (7%). No other jurisdiction’s residents accounted for more than 4% of Prince George’s jobs.
In 2000, Prince George’s had 293,883 jobs, an increase of 91% over 1970. Of those jobs, 155,675 (53%) were held by Prince George’s residents, 26,825 (9%) were held by MoCo residents and 26,264 (9%) were held by Anne Arundel County residents. The combined percentage of Prince George’s jobs accounted for by residents of Howard, Anne Arundel, Charles and Calvert Counties rose from 7% in 1970 to 21% in 2000.
The percentage of Prince George’s jobs held by Prince George’s residents has declined substantially since 1970, as it has in D.C., but for a different reason. D.C. has seen falling population since 1970, but Prince George’s has grown. In the case of Prince George’s County, since its real wage growth from 1970 through 2008 was a minuscule 29.4% - or less than one percent per year – its residents are commuting outside of the county for work in much larger numbers. As other jurisdictions create high-wage jobs, they are increasingly drawing Prince George’s County residents to fill them. And at the same time, residents of other Maryland counties are taking Prince George’s jobs in rapidly growing numbers. The implications for the region’s transportation network are significant.
We’ll examine MoCo and Fairfax tomorrow.
Friday, April 02, 2010
Population, Jobs and Commutes in the Washington Region, Part Two
Everyone knows that both population and employment have grown by significant amounts in the Washington Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) since 1970. But the jurisdictions in the area have grown at very different rates.
From the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), here are the populations for every jurisdiction in the Washington MSA in 1970 and 2007.
The “Big Four” Jurisdictions – Fairfax County in Virginia, Montgomery and Prince George’s Counties in Maryland and the District of Columbia – accounted for 77% of the MSA’s population in 1970 and 64% of the MSA’s population in 2007. Consider their rates of population growth over those 37 years.
Fairfax: 111.9%
Montgomery: 79.5%
Prince George’s: 23.9%
District of Columbia: -22.1%
Again from BEA, here are the employments for every jurisdiction in the Washington MSA in 1970 and 2007.
The Big Four accounted for 77% of the MSA’s employment in 1970 and 71% of the MSA’s employment in 2007. Consider their rates of employment growth over those 37 years.
Fairfax: 475.1%
Montgomery: 178.1%
Prince George’s: 120.3%
District of Columbia: 20.8%
Here are the shares of the Big Four and the other counties of the region’s population and employment in 1970 and 2007.
The story of the last 37 years in terms of population and employment is simple. All of Virginia, including Fairfax, is on the rise. D.C. has hollowed out. Prince George’s County has slipped, especially in relative population. Montgomery County has held its own and the outer Maryland counties (Calvert, Charles and Frederick) have gained.
Finally, here is the average wage per job in 2008 dollars from BEA in 1970 and 2008.
Arlington and the District were the two highest wage jurisdictions in both 1970 and 2008. Let’s put aside both of them for a moment as their unique proximity to the Capitol and the Pentagon give them both labor market advantages that no other jurisdiction in the country enjoys. Here are the real wage growths for the remainder of the Big Four over the 38-year period.
Fairfax: 67.9%
Montgomery: 43.8%
Prince George’s: 29.4%
Whether we measure population growth, employment growth or real wage growth, the story remains the same: Fairfax first, Montgomery second and Prince George’s last, with the District varying. These realities impact the region’s transportation network in ways that we will begin examining in Part Three.
Thursday, April 01, 2010
Population, Jobs and Commutes in the Washington Region, Part One
The story of growth is an old one. Cities create jobs and attract residents, who eventually empty out into the suburbs. Those residents then drive back into the cities for work, loading roads with in-out traffic flows. As inner suburbs mature, produce their own jobs and become more dense, growth spills to the outer suburbs to create sprawl. Soon the entire regional transportation network becomes jammed, necessitating expensive new road and transit projects, endless congestion or both. Such is the inevitable result of decades of population and employment growth.
This is the conventional wisdom. For the Washington area, this paradigm holds but only up to a point. Why? Because it’s incomplete.
In a major new research project, MPW looks back on the history of population and employment growth, wage increases and transportation commutes in the Washington region from 1970 on. We examine these phenomena in every jurisdiction in the Washington Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), which includes the District of Columbia; Calvert, Charles, Frederick, Montgomery and Prince George’s Counties in Maryland; Arlington, Clarke, Fairfax, Fauquier, Loudoun, Prince William, Spotsylvania, Stafford and Warren Counties and Alexandria, Fairfax, Falls Church, Fredericksburg, Manassas and Manassas Park Cities in Virginia and Jefferson County in West Virginia.
The Washington MSA from Wikipedia.
We find that the patterns of growth have defined employment opportunities and commutes across the region, creating winners and losers. Some jurisdictions have seen significant growth driven primarily by jobs. Others have become teeming bedroom communities. Some have seen strong wage growth while others have not. Some have emerged as major players in the D.C. area while others are struggling to keep up. And the unevenness of growth, both in type and magnitude, has impacted the region’s transportation flows perhaps even more than the sheer volume of new residents and jobs.
All of the above illuminates very different challenges in coming years for each of the area’s major jurisdictions. There may even be grounds for a potential common agenda across the region to balance growth, reduce its impact on our transportation network and spread the benefits of expansion more evenly around the area. With their fragmented structure, this is a difficult challenge for the state and local governments in our region. But if they cannot take it on and the imbalances of the past forty years carry forth into the future, no amount of transportation spending will be enough to remedy the unimaginable congestion that will follow.
We’ll start looking at population and employment counts in Part Two.
