/1. .:lo '<; AUGUST 1966 SEMIANNUAL ISSUE TH"'7 U! ~vn· SITY OF TEXAS f.Ll 3 1966 THE LIBRAR A Monthly Summary of B1tsiness and Economic Conditions in Texas BUREAU OF BUSINESS RESEARCH: THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW VOL. XL, NO. 8, AUGUST 1966 Editor: Stanley A. Arbingast/ Associate Editor: Robert H. Ryan/Managing Editor: D. E. Robertson Editorial Board: Stanley A. Arbingast, Chairman; John R. Stockton, Francis B. May, Robert H. Ryan, D. E. Robertson CONTENTS 201: THE BUSINESS SITUATION IN TEXAS by Francis B. May 204: PARK AND SHOP? by Robert H. Ryan 208: AN BCONOMIC SKETCH OF WEST TEXAS by Robert B. Williamson 212: TEXAS BUILDING AUTHORIZED JUNE AND FIRST-HALF 1966 by Robert R. Williamson CHARTS AND TABLES 201: TEXAS BUSINESS ACTIVITY 202: LEADING OIL PRODUCING STATES, JANUARY-MAY 1966 202: SELECTED BAROMETERS OF TEXAS BUSINESS 202: CONSUMER PRICES IN THE UNITED STATES 203: WHOLESALE PRICES IN THE UNITED STATES 203: RELATIONSHIP OF RETAIL SALES AND PERSONAL IN­ COME IN THE UNITED STATES, 1961-1965 203 : BUSINESS ACTIVITY INDEXES FOR 20 SELECTED TEXAS CITIES 204: TEXAS CITIES HAVE GENEROUS DOWNTOWN PARKING 205: MOST CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT PARKING IS IN LOTS AND GARAGES 206: ESTIMATES OF TOTAL RETAIL SALES IN TEXAS 207: RETAIL SALES TRENDS BY KINDS OF BUSINESS 212: ESTIMATES OF BUILDING AUTHORIZED IN TEXAS 213: BUILDING CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZED IN TEXAS 213: ESTIMATED VALUES OF BUILDING AUTHORIZED IN TEXAS 214: LOCAL BUSINESS CONDITIONS Published monthly by the Bureau of Busin...s Research, Graduate Second-clas"' postage psid at Austin, Texas. Content of this publication is BUSINESS RESEARCH COUNCIL John Arch White, Dean of the College of BusineBB Admin­istration (ex officio); John R. Stockton, Jessamon Dawe, Thomas E. Gossett, James R. Kay, Stephen L. McDonald, Kenneth W. Olm, and W. T. Tucker BUREAU OF. BUSINESS RESEARCH Director: John R. Stockton AB1ociate Director and Resources Specialist: Stanley A. Arbingast Assistant to the Director: Florence Escott Consulting Statistician: Francis B. May Administrative Assistant: Cynthia Bettinger Research Associate: Charles 0. Bettinger, Ida M. Lam­ beth, Robert M. Lockwood, Dennis W. Richardson, Donald E. Robertson, Robert H. Ryan, Elizabeth R. Turpin, Joyzelle Wilke, Robert B. Williamson Research Assistants: Robin Driggs, Delbert I. Hawkins, Robert E. Matlock, Jr., John W. Townsend Administrative Secretary: Margaret F. Smith Senior Secretary: Betty Sue Hoch Senior Clerk Typist: Lois Conrad, Carolyn Harris, Binnie D. McCreary, Sharon Wheat Cartographer : Mary Helen Parks, Mary Paxton, Eliza­beth E. Snoddy Library Assistant: Merle Danz Statistical Assistant: Mildred Anderson, Constance Cooledge, Jo Neman Statistical Technician: Doris Dismuke, Mary Gorham Senior Clerk: Salvador B. Macias Clerical Assistant: Peggy Bobo, Berge Garabedian, Rob­ ert Jenkins, Ross Kammlah Offset Presa Operator: Robert Dorsett, Daniel P. Rosas The Bureau of Business Research is a member of the Associated University Bureaus of Business and Economic Research. School of Business, The University of Texas, Austin, Texas, 78712. not copyrighted and may be reproduced freely. The views expreeaed by authors are not necessarily those of the Bureau of Business Research. Acknowledlfment of source will be appreciated. Subscription, $3.00 a year;individual copies, 25 cents. THE BUSINESS SITUATION IN TEXAS by Francis B. May TEXAS BUSINESS ACTIVITY INDEX-ADJUSTED FOR SEASONAL VAHI ATION-195i·l959 = 100 200 200 150150 100 100 50 50 0 0 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 NOTE: Shaded areas indicate periods of decline of total business activity in the United States. SOURCE: Based on bank debits reported by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas and adjusted for seasonal variation and changes in the price level by the Bureau of Business Research. AUGUST 1966 In June the seasonally adjusted index of Texas business activity rose 0.1 of a percentage point. At 177.3% of its average monthly value during the 1957-59 base period, it was at an all-time peak for the second consecutive month. It was 6.2% above June of last year. During the first half of the year the index of Texas business activity averaged 9% above the corresponding period of last year. The advance during the first quarter was 4.8% over the final quarter of 1965. During the second quarter, the pace of the advance slowed to 3.2% over the first quarter of this year. The boom has lost some of its steam. This doei; not mean that a downturn in general business activity in the state is imminent. During the sixty-four months since the current cyclical upswing began, the boom has slowed for one or two quar­t.era, only to surge upward again. With a war in progress, a downturn in general business activity is unlikely, al­though some sectors heavily dependent on an abundant supply of credit are feeling the ·pinch of tight money. A glance at the table of seasonally adjusted indexes of business activity for twenty Texas cities shows that in June there were eight advances, two virtually unchanged indexes, and ten declines. Two of the four largest Texas cities, Dallas and Houston, experienced a rise in June business activity. The Houston advance was 10%. Fort Worth and San Antonio had June declines. Comparison of the first half of the year with the same period of 1965 shows that eighteen of the twenty cities had substantially higher rates of business activity. Dallas business activity was up 12%. Fort Worth was up 6%. Houston was up 10%. San Antonio business activity, despite the June decline, averaged 10% above the first six months of 1965. High levels of economic activity have been experienced all over the state during this period. June production of crude oil in the state advanced a small fraction of one percent over the high level at­tained in May. At 107.2% of average monthly produc­tion during the 1957-59 base period, the seasonally ad­justed index was 10.4o/c above June 1965. It was the highest June value since 1957 when the effects of the closing of the Suez Canal and subsequent interruption of oil shipments from the Middle East were still being felt. The Texas Railroad Commission increased allowable pro­duction during this period in order to supply oil to Europe to make up the lack of Middle Eastern oil. Nationally, the demand for petroleum products con­tinued to be high in June, averaging 11.6 million barrels a day. This was a level of demand 6.2% higher than the average of 10.9 million barrels a day in June 1965. Gasoline demand was 5.4 million barrels a day, up 1.6% over June 1965. Kerosene demand was 606,000 barrels a day, up 25.5r;, over June 1965. Kerosene is the prin­cipal ingredient of jet engine fuel. Demand for distillate fuel oil was 1.6 million barrels a day, up 14.9% over June 1965. Residual fuel oil demand was 1.5 million bar­rels a day, up 14.4% from June 1965. High levels of business activity, air travel, and motor vehicle use pushed the level of demand up to an average of 12.1 million barrels a day during the first six months of the year. This was a 4.7'7c increase in demand. Earlier forecasts placed the prospective increase for the first half at 3.5% over 1965. Events have more than justified this opti­mistic forecast. During the January-May period, Texas produced 446.1 million barrels of oil, up 7.4 % over the comparable pe­riod of last year. Production of the six largest producing states during this period is shown below. LEADING OIL-PRODUCING STATES, J ANUARY-MAY 1966 January-May Percentage change production from State (thousands of barrels) January-May 1965 California 138,890 8.6 + Louisiana 272,249 + 12.2 New Mexico 53,089 6.3 + OklRhoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91,967 + 8.2 Texas 446,122 7.4 + Wyoming 54,879 8.3 United States . . 1,249,29 1 + 6.0 Source: World Oil, July 1966. These states produced 84.6% of total national output during this period. The remaining 15.4% was produced by twenty-five states, including Alaska, which produced 4,944,000 barrels. Texas produced 35.7% of the total. Louisiana, the second largest producer, accounted for 21.8% of the total. It is interesting to note that the southern Louisiana district, which contains the large off­shore producing areas, produced 246.8 million barrels during the January-May period. This exceeded produc­tion in four of the six largest producing states: Califor­nia, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Wyoming. Crude-oil runs to stills rose 3% in June after seasonal factors were taken into account. At 123.2% of average monthly runs during the 1957-59 base period, this index was 3.4% above June 1965. National crude runs to stills were 9,474,000 barrels daily in June, up 4.1% over June 1965. The national supply of refined products was expanded by June imports of an average of 895,000 bar­rels a day of residual fuel oil and 354,000 barrels a day of other products. Crude runs to stills during the first half were 3% above a comparable 1965 period. National crude runs to stills during the first half averaged 9,295,000 barrels a day, up 4.4'7< over the first half of 1965. End of June SELECTED BAROMETERS OF TEXAS BUSINESS (Indexes-Adjusted for seasonfll variation-1957-59= 100) Percent change Year-to. J un date Year-to­1966 date from average 1966 Index Jun 1966 May average May 1966 1966 1966 from 1965 Texas business activity . . 177.3 177.2 173.4 00 + 9 Crude petroleum production . 107.2* 107.0* 101.9 ** + Crude oil ru ns to stills . . ......123.2 120.0 117.1 + 3 + Total electric power use.. . 191.9* 188.0* 185.0 + 2 + 10 Industrial electric power use. . . 175.6* 180.5* 175.1 - 3 + 13 Bank debits .... 187.4 186.9 182.7 •• + 13 Miscellaneous freight carload­ ings in S. W . district. 82.5 84.0 82.2 + 5 Ordinary life insurance sales .... ]87.8 185.9 176.9 + + 10 Total retail sales . . . 136.4* 125.8* + + 3 Du rable-goods sales .......... 147.9* 127.9* + 16 + Nondu rable-goods sales . 130.4* 124.7* + 5 + Building construction authorized . 123.2 141.5 141.4 -13 + 13 New residential 98.0 110.1 109.1 -11 + 4 N ew nonresidential ..... 156.5 195.7 192.2 -20 + 30 Total nonfarm employment . . . 122.6* 122.3* 121.7 ** + 4 Manufacturing employment .....125.8* 124.2* 123.4 + 1 + 6 Total unem ployment 91.1< 78.6* 79.7 + 16 -24 Insured unem ployment 47.5 49.9 54.9 - 5 -35 Average weekly earnings- manufacturing .... .... 125.5* \25.5* 124.7 + 4 Average weekly hours- manufacturing 102.6* 103.2* 102.7 - 1 + 1 *Preliminary. *''Change is less than one-half of 1%. crude-oil stocks were 259.0 million barrels, up 2.0% over June 30, 1965. These stocks were sufficient for 27.3 days of refinery operation at the average volume of runs to stills in June. Total electric power use in June rose 2% after sea­sonal adjustment to 191.9% of average monthly con­sumption during the 1957-59 base period. This was a volume of consumption 10.7% above June 1965. It was the highest June value on record for this index. The rise was due to an upsurge in domestic and commercial power consumption. Industrial power use declined 3% in June. Total electric power use during the first half was 10% above the comparable 1965 period. Industrial power use, which rose 13%, gave the primary impetus to the index. Seasonally adjusted sales of ordinary life insurance rose 1% in June to 187.8% of average monthly sales during the 1957-59 base period. This was the highest June value of the index on record. It was 0.9% below the record sales in November 1965. During the first half, sales of ordinary life insurance CONSUMER PRI CES IN THE UNITED STATES -=«-.--''""NO'-'-EXT--.:..:""::..:';:;"':,;;fOr•..::.'::.:.":.r'O::.:.N•'""vw••:....-_:_'•c:,"•s:....o ":.::.O_;_;c.;:::.:'•:.:.cTl-rON:....'.:..;•,"c.co-.--,..--,1.;o l ;,O >,~ ~:~ ~ ~ :.~ '>.' 125~H--+-t--i';;!•' te"~t--+-..:,~-+--t--+--t--t--;1 2.> ~ ~ 'f~ i ·.· ---­ )00~~~i___j_ _J_.,,..;,j·~-. -L_,,,J=~~=l:=:'.t:::=t:~--l-----4100 ~H--+---"1...-~ ~ ~ ~ 75~H---t--t--<~S*·~+--1-~~-+---t--t--+-t--175 i' ! ~ 50 s 1954 '55 '56 ·57 '58 ·59 '60 '61 '62 '63 'M '65 1966 NOTF:: Sh"ded ,\ r eas ind1c-.ue pe r iod s of c!ecline of tot.1\ bu~iness ;.c1w1ty in the t..'nite ci St.lies. WHOLESALE PRICES IN THE U !TEO STATES INDEX -ADJUSTED fOlf SE•SONAt V.Ul.4TION -19511959· IOO 1sot~:~ ~ .;.; ~}'""":-r-__,-"":::..:;--=i~;:;:i .::..:..:r.::::c.r"'"'~~~;.,;~"'-'--r--.'--'--r--.---,,--­ , ;;; 1ao -:::::~ ~.} ~-:. 125125 ;;k ., .; ~~·~: ~;+---l--d.=-i~~~ ~l---+~~......,_-+---+~-t-':='.1~ ,---11 00 100 .,<, : _I.,.-'" ·. , ~ c 75,11rli11~ ~+---l--+---'~i---!---+--; >. w w l'IS·i ·55 '56 '57 '58 '59 '60 '61 '62 '6:1 'M '65 1966 were 10% above the first half of 1965. Over the past twenty years sales of ordinary life insurance in the state have shown a strong upward trend. At the current level of increase, 1966 will be another year of strongly rising sales. Total retail sales in Texas rose 8% in June after adjustment for seasonal factors. Durable consumer goods and nondurables both contributed to the increase. Sales of durable goods rose 16%. Sales of nondurables rose 5%. Nationally, June retail sales rose after two consecu­tive months of decline, due primarily to a reduced volume of sales of automobiles. June seasonally adjusted sales of $24.8 billion for the United States were 1.2% above May. Annual retail sales in the United States usually amount to about 53% of personal income. The table below shows the relationship for the past five years. RELATIONSHIP OF RETAIL SALES AND P ERSONAL INCOME IN THE UNITED STATES, 1961-1965 Sales as a Year Personal income (billions of dollars) Retail sales (billions of dollars) percentage of income 1961 ... 416.8 218.8 52.5 1962 ... 442.6 235.4 53.2 1963 ....464.8 246.4 53.0 1964 495.0 261.6 52.8 1965 . . ....... . .530.7 283.9 53.5 Source: Department of Commerce and Bureau of Business Research. Personal income in June rose $3.4 billion above May to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of $576.4 billion. If the average rate of 53.0% is applied, an estimate of $305.5 billion of 1966 retail sales is obtained. The June annual rate of retail sales was $298.1 billion. On the basis of personal income received, June sales should have been higher than they were. Instead of $24.8 billion, they should have been $25.5 billion. The rise in retail sales did not match the rise in personal income. Urban building permits issued in June declined for the fourth consecutive month. Declines in both residential and nonresidential permits issued contributed to the drop in the overall index. During the first half of the year, the index of total permits issued averaged 13% above the same period of 1965, but the behavior of the index was different in the two periods. During the first half of 1965, the index rose from 113.0% of the 1957-59 base value in January to 148.6% in June. During the first half of 1966, the index rose to 157.1% in February but declined in every AUGUST 1966 subsequent month. Neither of the component indexes fell in this consistent fashion. The index of residential construction rose during the first quarter but was ir­regularly lower in the second. Nonresidential construction was at high levels in the February-April period but de­clined in May and June. The combined effect was a consistent fall in total permits issued. Nationally, permits issued fell 14% in June. Housing starts declined with the major drop experienced in the West. The North Central states had a smaller decline. Both the Northeast and the South had gains in housing starts. A scarcity of mortgage money is a primary cause of the decline. High interest rates are another important factor. The seasonally adjusted index of total nonfarm em­ployment rose less than 0.5% in June. Manufacturing employment rose 1%. During the first half of the year, total nonfarm and manufacturing employment both av­eraged well above the first half of 1965. The index of total unemployment was down substantially from the first six months of 1965. Insured unemployment was down more than total unemployment. Average weekly earnings in manufacturing in June were unchanged from May after seasonal factors were taken into account. Average weekly hours declined 1%. During the first six months, both indexes averaged above the levels of the first half of 1965. It is apparent at midyear that the economy of both state and nation are operating at high levels from which future gains will come with less speed. When an economy is operating near capacity, future gains must await the building of more capacity. The tight money policy which has been pursued by the Federal Reserve in order to contain inflation is producing the desired result. Judging from the present high levels of interest rates and credit stringency, future action to restrain inflation should be through fiscal measures such as a tax increase. BUSINESS ACTIVITY INDEXES FOR 20 SELECTED TEXAS CITIES (Adjusted for seasonal variation-1957-59= 100) Percent change Year-to­ date Year-to­date June 1966 average 1966 Index June 1966 May 1966 average 1966 from May 1966 from 1965 Abilene ... 141.2 139.8 142.1 + 1 + 5 Ama rillo .... 164.5 171.0 172.3 4 + 9 Austin . ..........183.6 195.0 180.2 6 + Beaumont ..... . .. 184.0 173.1 175.5 + 6 + 12 Corpus Christi .142.3 131.1 135.7 + 9 + 5 Corsicana ... 139.1 150.5 140.3 - 8 + 11 Dallas .. 197.5 196.2 192.4 + + 12 El Paso ... 125.5 127.9 121.9 - 2 Fort Worth ...... 133.5 139.9 132.9 + 6 Galveston .... \09.7 113.3 112.8 Houston ..........195.4 178.1 185.2 + 10 + 10 Laredo Lubbock ... 161.7 ..... 160.7 158.7 160.5 164.7 164.9 + 2 •• + 6 + 4 P ort Arthur ......116.8 100.8 Ul.6 + 16 + 8 San Angelo ... .. 140.0 141.0 141.3 1 + 9 San Antonio ......156.7 166.9 162.5 - 6 + 10 Texarkana Tyler .... 171.6 .142.7 176.8 143.3 \ 73.1 144.4 - 3 •• + 14 + ' Waco . .... . . . . . .. 141.7 139.5 150.0 + + a Wichita Falls .....133.1 141.8 141.3 - 6 + 9 ..Change is less than one-half of ], o/o. Retail Trade PARK AND SHOP? Robert H. Ryan Texas retail shoppers dislike high downtown parking fees and inconven­ience. Their favorite solution: trading at planned retail centers outside the Central Business District. "No place to park." That is the chief reason thousands of Texans give for their growing reluctance to shop at downtown retail stores. Yet major Texas cities, by and large, have far more downtown parking than comparable cities elsewhere in the nation. Dallas tops the "norm" by 130% (see table below), and Austin, Houston, Fort Worth, and San Antonio all provide more parking spaces in their Central Business Districts ("CBD's" the Census Bureau calls them) than most cities with similar car populations. In short, there are a great many places to park down­town, for example, 45,000 in Dallas, as the table facing shows. Even though some 70% of the big-city CBD spaces are typically occupied every day by full-time business workers, retail shoppers are by no means crowd­ed out. Parking shortages alone can hardly account for the balky aversion of customers to CBD shopping. (See "The Decline of Downtown Shopping," Texas Business Review, April 1966.) TEXAS CITIES HAVE GENEROUS DOWNTOWN PARKING CBD parking spaces per l,000 cars registered in county P ercent excess City Estimated "norm"" Actual over "norm" Austin ...............77 126 64 Dallas ... .. 40 92 180 E l Paso ... 67 68 Fort Worth ... 52 75 44 Houston .....37 56 49 San Antonio ... 45 61 36 (t"Norm" represents typical ratio between number of automobiles registered and number of parking spaces in Central Business District, based on analysis of 18 cities by Wilbur Smith and Associates. (About one-third of the 18 cities departed rather sharply from their indicated "norms.") Source: "Norm" values, Wilbur Smith and Associates; actual values, Bureau of Business Research, The University of Texas. Well-wheeled Texans own more automobiles and use them far more than most Americans. Dallas and Tarrant (Fort Worth) counties register an automobile for every 2.2 residents, and Harris County (Houston) shows a ratio of 2.4 residents per car. (U. S. average: 3.0.) To­gether, Dallas and Houston have more cars than the U. S. S. R., and the top three dozen Texas counties report more automobiles in use than any entire continent except North America and Europe. Los Angeles is the only city in the world clearly more automobile-oriented than Dallas­Fort Worth and Houston. Even with above-average downtown parking facilities, there may be too little space to match Texans' heavy dependence on automobile trans.­portation. Many Texas retailing centers attract traffic at something close to a one-car/one-shopper ratio. Ten years ago the U. S. Bureau of Public Roads announced that Dallas had a higher density of moving and parked auto­mobiles downtown (34,000 per square mile) than any other city surveyed by the Bureau. As a result of Texans' automobility, urban transit com­panies have cut back bus routes even in the fastest­growing cities. Today's metropolitan populations scatter through increasingly remote subdivisions, and demand for transit service is too limited to make necessarily long routes economically workable. The decline of busses and disappearance of street cars considerably handicap down­town areas, traditional foci of public transportation lines. CBD retailing potential has been further compromised by the devolution of downtown as an entertainment center. Former window-shoppers now spend evenings at home be­fore the television set; their own air conditioning is as cool as that of downtown theaters. A major factor discouraging downtown shopping trips is the high cost of garage or lot parking in large cities. Demand for downtown property has raised real estate values to a level that often prohibits generous free park­ing privileges for shoppers. A CBD parking space is com­monly worth more than the car parked on it, and such a space must bring substantial returns. Off-street parking costs most where it is most needed. Land for parking lots generally leases for annual rentals of $60 to $75 per car space, but land used for Iota is seldom the most valuable. Good garage sites in a city core sell for $1,500 to $3,000 per space, and that cost is only the beginning. Construction of the garage itself may range from $1,800 a space for ramp structures to $3,000 for mechanized multilevel parking. Underground parking, often suggested as the ideal, aesthetically and for convenience, involves still higher building costs: typically $4,000 per car space. Just the debt amortization of an underground parking center may well exceed $20 a month per space. Recent studies, notably by Wilbur Smith and Associ­ates,1 have undertaken to measure downtown parking needs and costs. The Smith researchers estimate lot park­ing is economically feasible only where land costs no more than $5.00 a square foot. Even at that rate, purchase and development of a lot generally totals more than $2,000 per parking space. On really expensive land a garage wit.h three or more levels is likely to cost less than half as much per space as a lot, including building costs. 'Wilbur Smith and Auociates, P11rki"l1 '" tlw Cit11 c ... c.r, New Haven, 1966. On many exceptionally high-value sites, vertically mixed land use is recommended by planners, with parking floors topped by office or hotel space. Increasingly, Texas businesses are convinced of the advantages of incorporat­ing parking space in their building plans, as in the Americana building in Houston and banks in Houston, Austin, Dallas, and elsewhere. The costs of land and structure are not the only ex­penses to be met by downtown garages. Salaries and other operating expenses also run high: about 40% of gross revenue in park-yourself ramps and 55% in attendant-parking buildings. Altogether, the typical cost of a large downtown garage is about $20 a space per month. Revenues may run from $25 to $50, or even $75, if the garage is so well located that it can maintain a heavy rate of turn­over at high short-time fees. Monthly-rate parking is a near-necessity for many downtown employees. But often it is not the most profitable use of space from the de­veloper's point of view, when he can fill the space with short-time shoppers' and business visitors' cars at 50 cents an hour. On the other hand, the short-time rates are becoming distinctly unattractive to shoppers, now ac­customed to unlimited free parking at planned suburban shopping centers. Not that so-called "suburban" centers are necessarily in the true suburbs; but they are almost invariably on land enough lower in value to allow cus­tomer parking near the recommended rate of about five spaces per 1,000 square feet of building area. In attempting to make the most of high-value city­ core property, parking engineers face the necessity of looking ahead toward the year 2000 and forecasting not only traffic patterns but also the size of cars 35 years or more in the future. Countering the appearance of compacts and popular sports cars, standard models have grown longer since World War II, and attempts to market relatively compact luxury cars have been dis­ appointing. Ordinarily each parking space must be de­ signed for the longest car that may occupy it. And lengths are running to extremes. The revived Dusenberg Corporation is planning to bring out a car with an 82­ inch hood and a total length 20 inches greater than a standard Cadillac. Such boulevard yachts may never be­ come common. However, even the largest standard models now stretch as much as 19 feet from chrome to chrome. A standard Oldsmobile occupies about 15 square feet more space than a Ford Mustang and also requires somewhat wider access space. The difference is costly in terms of parking space worth $5.00 to $20.00 per square foot. The usefulness of parking space may be limited not only by its cost and placement in relation to stores and offices but also by its ease of approach from arterial streets. At rush hours inadequate street capacity in and out of parking centers can contribute to monumental jams. The 45,000 cars that could be parked in the Dallas Central Business District would stretch 150 miles bumper to bumper, and without adroitly designed traffic plans they might well be stretched bumper to bumper. According to Wilbur Smith surveys, only a tenth of all downtown parking is typically occupied by shoppers in large cities, compared with a third in smaller com­munities. Applied to Texas cities, t his ratio would in­dicate that of the 45,000 available CBD spaces in Dallas, shoppers would ordinarily be expected to occupy something on the order of 5,000 spaces, fewer than are available in Dallas' suburban NorthPark shopping center alone. This is not to say that only 5,000 spaces in the Dallas CBD are available to shoppers. Occupancy in the most centrally located lots and garages seldom averages much more than 90%. Yet, the best-located off-street parking is most crowded at the hours when shoppers are out in the largest numbers. In the intensively developed business cores of Houston, Dallas, and Fort Worth, roughly 70% of the available parking, in terms of "space-hours" may be taken by all-day employees of downtown business establishments. Usually much of the parking counted by city planners in their inventories is rather poorly located. A good many of the lots and some garages are ordinarily in the peripheral part of the CBD. Though these marginal facilities may charge lower rates, they are far enough from most commercial establishments that shoppers are loath to pay at all for the privilege of depositing their cars a long walk away from their destinations. In cities the size of Dallas and Houston, the average parker must walk about three blocks from his parking place to his destination. Since the most convenient places are the likeliest to be filled by early-bird shoppers and all-day employees, many midday visitors have even farther to walk. A few major Texas department stores have invested heavily in parking to protect the sales volumes at their downtown locations. In San Antonio, Joske's (Allied) has over 1,000 parking spaces in lots adjacent to the store, with provision for reduced rates for store customers. In Houston, Foley's (Federated) has built an 800-space ramp-type garage adjoining the department store. Few stores, however, can undertake large parking projects independently. In most of Texas' larger cities, groups of retailers have cooperative plans through which cus-­tomer's parking tickets are stamped for free or lower­rate parking in commercial garages and lots. MOST CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT PARKING IS IN LOTS AND GARAGES City Curb spaces Percent of total Lot spaces Percent of total Garage spaces Percent of total Total spaces Austin 4,330 39.2 6,726• 60.8 11,056 Dallas .... .... .. ····· ·· ······ 2,700 5.9 24,000 52.5 19,000 41.6 45,700 El Paso . . . . . .. . .. ..... ....... ... .... 2,225 28.4 3,777 48.1 1,845 23.5 7,847 Fort Worth 2,100 10.7 13,855 70.4 3,728 18.9 19,683 Houston 3.000 9.3 15,745 48.9 13,46~ 41.8 32,206 Snn Antonio ·· ·· · ·· · ····· ·· 1,821 11.4 9,740 61.2 4,355 27.4 15,916 •Includes garages. Source: Bureau of Business Research, The University of Texas, based on current reports from individ ual cities. AUGUST 1966 In some U. S. cities municipal governments have built extensive public parking, but this has not been the rule in Texas. In 1953, Houston had fewer than 15,000 off­street parking spaces downtown; today, the total is nearly 30,000, largely financed by private capital. Because of its indirect returns to downtown business, investment in parking yields large economic rewards. Even subway­and bus-oriented New York shoppers have indicated the main factor that would encourage them to do more buy­ing in Manhattan would be the availability of more con­venient parking space. Moreover, surveys have proven consistently that shoppers in private automobiles make significantly larger purchases than public-transit or pe­destrian shoppers. Establishments that generate the most traffic and re­quire the most parking spaces for their size are banks (5.4 spaces per 1,000 square feet), bus depots (4.8 spaces), and libraries (4.1 spaces). Department stores, where persons tend to spend more time and come in smaller numbers, average 2.8 spaces needed per 1,000 square feet of store area ; furniture stores, which occupy much space but have relatively few customers, average 0.6 spaces.2 When public institutions are located in congested areas, they, too, contribute to traffic load and parking needs. Traffic engineers recommend that hospitals should be provided with 1.0 to 1.5 spaces per bed, auditoriums with one space for three or four seats, manufacturing plants with a space for every two or three employees, and colleges and universities with at least half as many park­ing spaces as students. (The University of Texas, with 26,000 students, has 4,535 on-campus parking spaces, many of them restricted to faculty-staff use or metered.) An actual case study of one Texas city further points up the magnitude of the measures that traffic planning authorities must take. Detailed analyses by the San Antonio-Bexar County ·Urban Transportation Study show that 185,000 persons entered downtown San Antonio between 7 :00 a.m. and 6 :00 p.m. on a typical June day, roughly a third of the entire San Antonio population. Of these, 76% came by car, mostly by themselves (an average of 1.6 persons per car); 14% arrived in city busses; and 10% were on foot. Altogether, on this typical day 86,000 automobiles entered the CBD (plus 15,000 trucks), and during peak hours at midday, there were about 13,700 vehicles in the CBD ; 10,700 of them were parked, mostly in lots, and 3,000 were in circulation. Even at this rate, only 63% of San Antonio's downtown park­ing spaces were occupied at hours of maximum use (noon to 2:00 p.m.). Figures on total occupancy are a bit mis­leading, however, for many of the 5,000 empty spaces to be found at a peak hour are unattractive in location or fee, or they are vacant only briefly as cars come and go. More significantly, the study found that 43% of parkers in downtown San Antonio used curb spaces, which make up only 11 % of the total supply of spaces. In fact, 10% of the cars parked at curb meters during the survey pe­riod stayed beyond their limit and were tagged as "red meter violations." Even more parkers habitually feed ad­ ditional coins to their meters, defeating the purpose of metered parking: to produce high turnover. 'H. K. Evans. "Parking Study Applications," TTajfic QuaTteTly, April 1963, The Eno Foundation, Saugatuck, Connecticut. ESTIMATES OF TOTAL RETAIL SALES IN TEXAS (Millions of dollars) P ercent changes Type of store J une 1966 J an-Jun 1966 J un 1966 June 1966 from from May 1966 J un 1965 J an-Jun 1966 from Jan-Jun 1.965 TOTAL . . . 1,230.4 7,001.2 + 5 + 4 + s Durable goods* 490.8 2.808.8 + 17 + 1 Nondurable goods . 739.6 4, 192.4 -1 + 7 + 5 "Contains automotive stores, furniture stores, and lumber, building material, and hardware stores. **Change is less than one-half of 1 o/c. Additional San Antonio data show the parking occu­pancy rate in four major shopping centers, 1.23 cars per space during an eight-hour day, is nearly as high as the downtown rate of 1.36 cars per space. One suggested, though vague, solution to the problem of accommodating shoppers' cars is to regard downtown parking as a "terminal function" and to convince drivers that they cannot expect to leave their cars at the doorstep of the store of their choice. Planners point to Venice, where Renaissance builders . lacked both the foresight and the dry-land area to design facilities for automobile traffic. There, cars may be left in Europe's largest garage before the driver enters the water-bound center of the city. But Venice is a remarkably special case, and Texas shoppers may not easily be convinced that they should park on the edge of a downtown district and transfer to "shoppers' busses" or other means of transit. Some planners have pointed out that the cores of most cities now perform two unrelated functions that work at cross purposes. They serve as business centers, in which thousands of full-time workers are employed in offices. And they also serve as retailing and personal service centers, with stores, banks, medical buildings, theaters, and other institutions that generate heavy traf­fic and large short-term parking demands. A hopefully recommended plan is the divorcement of these two functions, the evolution of a double-core city in which retailing and similar activities would be carried on in a planned downtown shopping center with even larger and more specialized establishments than outlying centers afford, and with plenty of low-cost parking in­corporated in the center-plus an office center with only enough shops and restaurants to serve the convenience of business workers. There is not much indication to date that the bicentric city will evolve spontaneously, and there may be doubt that urban planners can bring off such a project. City planning, for all its promise, has a fairly grim history. Hardly anyone since Napoleon III performed radical surgery on the heart of Paris has managed to impose grand-scale changes on a city already fully developed. Even so, proposals to revamp extensive downtown areas in Dallas and Houston might help make downtown shop­ping enough more attractive to win back some lost cus­tomers-and stores. Meanwhile the parking problems afflicting downtown retailing seem due to get worse before they are solved­if they ever are. Migration of middle-and upper-middle­income families outward from the city core has been countered slightly by new apartment construction. Even TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW so, the majority of the highest-potential retail customers live farther from downtown than ever before. Nor is their access to the CBD as convenient as merchants might wish. Expressway systems have lagged in devel­opment, and some routes have become prematurely ob­solete by reason of undercapacity. Further, it now seems as natural for an expressway to engender shopping centers as for a cat to have kittens, and the expressway centers are mostly more accessible from residential areas than their downtown competitors. Moreover, they may be more modern and better stocked. Radio pleas that "the great stores are downtown" sometimes prompt a com­parison in the minds of listeners that may not be favor­ able to the downtown stores. The variety of stores in major centers is comparable with that of Central Business District stores. Dallas' CBD contained 383 retail establishments according to 1963 Census of Business data, 119 of them eating and drink­ing places. Outside the CBD are three Dallas centers with about 150 stores each and six more with about 50 stores or more. Indeed, according to Census reports, only three U. S. cities (New York, Chicago, and Detroit) had more planned regional shopping centers than Dallas in 1963. Houston had 1,063 CBD retailers in 1963 and over 750 in 15 outlying centers. It should be admitted that the number of stores in an area is not always an accurate indicator of depth or variety in merchandise. Lines are badly blurred between various types of retailing. The Census Bureau recently reported that one Dallas automobile dealer also sells groceries and one grocery store sells automobiles, one eating place sells jewelry, and one florist sells meals and snacks. In any case, the larger shopping centers do offer wide variety and copious parking lots. According to the Di­ rectory of Shopping Centers, 30 planned centers in Dallas have a total of about 60,000 parking places, a third more than the entire downtown area, and virtually all of them free of parking fees. Shoppers have long since found that most downtown parking places, even those vacant only at slack hours, are not as well located in relation to shoppers' destinations as shopping center parking spaces. The CBD shopper is almost certain to have to walk considerable distances be­ tween stores if he cares to visit more than one. By con­ trast, shopping center stores are compactly arranged to minimize walking distances, especially in recently built mall-type centers with air-conditioned arcades or shaded plazas between stores. At San Antonio's Wonderland and North Star Mall centers, some 60 stores are enclosed in each air-conditioned complex, and the two centers together afford about 8,000 parking spaces, over four times the number of curb spaces in the entire San An­ tonio CBD. Perhaps the most opulent retailing center in Texas is Dallas' NorthPark. Advertised as the world's largest air­conditioned mall, it is studded with fountains and land­scaped indoor "plazas" and lined with about a hundred stores, specialty establishments, and restaurants. The two ends and apex of the L-shaped mall are occupied by major department stores: J. C. Penney, Titche­Goettinger, and Neiman-Marcus. Altogether the center displays a range of merchandise that not ma~y cities can match in their downtown shopping districts, and displays AUGUST 1966 them better than an unplanned environment. Moreover, the mall is surrounded by parking areas large enough to handle 6,000 cars, as many parking spaces as might generally be available to shoppers in the Dallas CBD. About seventy acres in and around the NorthPark center have been reserved for apartments, a medical center, offices, and recreational facilities. And it is not out of the question to imagine that major industrial or commercial firms might find the location to have considerable merit. (In Minneapolis, a city comparable in size with Dallas, the largest manufacturing company, General Mills, moved its administrative headquarters from downtown to a suburb about ten years ago. Since then, downtown Minneapolis has undergone massive renovation.) Even in smaller Texas cities, retail shoppers are turn­ing outward to planned centers. In Brownsville and Hurst are centers with 4,000 parking spaces each; in Odessa a 260,000-square-foot air-conditioned mall has been planned; and in Bryan, Euless, and Farmers Branch new centers are now under way. In all, Texas towns and cities now have more than 400 planned shopping centers, ranging from neighborhood-oriented clusters of conven­ience stores with 150 parking spaces or so, to the regional retail complexes with parking spaces well into the thousands. A recent satire, describing life on earth as seen by hovering Martians, observed that Earthians (automo­biles) are infested by wiggly parasites. Speaking of the parasites, the Martian narrator said, "when detached from their hosts, the little bodies show only extremely limited capacity for independent active motion."3 It would follow that human activity, including shopping, is dictated in good part by the habits of automobiles, which require extravagant areas of parking space when they gather in large numbers. "Paul A. Weiss. " Life on Earth."' 2'he Rockefeller Institute Review. November-December 1964. RETAIL SALES TRENDS BY KINDS OF BUSINESS Percent change Normal seasonal* Actual Jan-Jun Number of 1966 reporting J un Jun 1966 J un 1966 from establish-from from from Jan-JWl Kinds of business m en ts May May 1966 J un 1965 1965 DURABLE GOODS Automotive stores 354 •• + 9 -2 + 1 Furniture & household appliance stores . 140 + 5 •• + 3 + 7 Lumber, build ing material, and hardware stores ...... 227 •• + 7 + 8 + 8 NONDURABLE GOODS Apparel stores .... .. 285 -4 -7 + 9 + 7 Drugstores . . . . . ......... 196 - 10 -7 + 3 + Eating and dr inking places .. 106 •• + + 7 + 3 Food stores 237 -5 + + 8 + 3 Gasoline and service stations 79 + 1 + 6 + - 1 Gene ral merchandise stores .. . .. 290 -20 -8 + 5 + 7 Other retai l stores. ... 266 + 3 -3 + 9 + 8 ¢:Average seasonal change from preceding month to current month. ••Change is less than one-ha lf of 1%. AN ECONOMIC SKETCH OF WEST TEXAS By Robert B. Williamson To the casual observer, West Texas may be seen as a vast land of dry, treeless plains, sparsely settled and given over mainly to the raising of cattle. This view may have been valid fifty years ago, and it might seem true today, based on superficial impressions one could get from a car or plane window traveling some routes across the region. It is true that West Texas is a large region located mainly in the plains, that it is under­populated in terms of its economic potential, and that it still raises cattle and retains the zest, color, and friendliness of the cattle country. However, all of this is only part of the picture today. In the past fifty years, beginning after World War I, the development of modern West Texas began. The development was led by the large-scale production, first, of dryland cotton and then irrigated cotton, the dis­covery of large new reserves of oil and gas, the lo­cation of major military bases within the region during World War II, and a significant growth in manufacturing activities. Types of manufacturing which showed espe­cially large increases included those related to military demand, such as for aircraft, and to the growth of the region's petroleum and agricultural production. Also, various kinds of consumer-goods manufacturing increased in the region as its own and neighboring markets grew in size. Because these major changes are relatively recent and the resulting opportunities have not been fully developed, the West Texas economy is still young and vigorous. Growth rates in the region since mid-century generally have continued to exceed those of the nation. From 1950 to 1964, the population of West Texas grew an estimated 30'7<, compared with a population growth of 26% for the country as a whole. Another outstanding characteristic of the region's present-day economy is its diversity. The diversity stems partly from the basically dissimilar character of the areas or subregions of West Texas and partly from the manifold opportunities for growth within each of the areas. For example, various authorities identify six to ten or more separate and distinct economic sub­ regions in West Texas.1 . The evolution away from an economy founded solely on livestock grazing has occurred to varying degrees in each of these areas, prompted in part by choice and part by necessity. The southern High Plains area, embracing the major cities of Lubbock, Mid­ land, and Odessa, provides a noteworthy example of eco­ nomic growth proceeding along diversified lines-irrigated cotton farming, oil and gas production, and petrochemical manufacturing, to mention the major departures from a simple range economy. West Texas in this article is considered to be the 132-county area delineated by the West Texas Chamber of Commerce. As such, the region extends to the left of a line running south from a point near Lake Texoma 1Names commonly given to some of the major economic subregions Rre, from east to west, Grand Prairie, West Cross Timbers, Rolling Plains, Edwards Plateau. High Plains, and Trans-Pecos. on the Oklahoma boundary to the vicinity of Austin to the Mexican border below Del Rio. Maximum distances across the region exceed 500 miles in both the east-west and north-south directions. Located within the region are ten metropolitan areas, as defined by the U. S. Bureau of the Census. These are Abilene, Amarillo, El Paso, Fort Worth, Lubbock, Midland, Odessa, San An­gelo, Waco, and Wichita Falls. The larger of the West Texas cities outside these metropolitan areas are Big Spring, Borger, Brownwood, Del Rio, Denton, Pampa, and Plainview. The overall size of the West Texas economy can be measured by the population and personal income of the region. Its population presently is over 3 million, and its personal income as of 1964, was over $7 billion, or nearly one-third of the state totals in both cases. The per capita income level in West Texas, while slightly belo\\· the national average, is an estimated So/( higher than the Texas average. Soil resources, climatic conditions, and native vege­tation in West Texas vary among the different eco­nomic subregions. In much of the cultivated areas of West Texas, the soils are reasonably productive. How­ever, there is a range from the poor quality, shallow and sandy soils found in much of the Trans-Pecos area to the highly productive soils found in various areas, such as in the High Plains. The average length of the frost-free growing season varies from 180 days or less in the northwest corner of the Panhandle to around 200 days in the High Plains to 250 days in the southeastern part of the region. Native vegetation ranges from the oak trees and shrubs of the West Cross Timbers area in the east to mesquite trees on the Rolling Plains in the north-central part of the region to plains grasses in the west, interspersed with cedar brakes and in the southwest with mountain forests. Level elevations range from around 500 feet above sea level on the eastern edges of the region to over 5,000 feet in the western portions. Basic water supplies are more than adequate for the present stage of the region's economy, although there is a continuing need for improvements in the development and distribution of the basic supplies. Precipitation av­ erages range from over 32 inches per year in the east of the region to less than 10 inches west of Van Horn. Several major rivers drain the West Texas area. In­ cluded are the Canadian, Red, Trinity, Brazos, and Colorado rivers and the Rio Grande. These rivers and their tributaries spread over most of the region except for the far western area between the smaller Pecos River and the Rio Grande. Total surface runoff supplies of water from all watersheds in West Texas have been estimated to be at a long-run average of over 7 million acre-feet per year. This compares with the region's total water consumption for all uses, except for irrigation water pumped from underground supplies, of about 2.6 million acre-feet in 1963. Much of the rainfall is not channeled into rivers but instead percolates into under· ground deposits. THE WEST TEXAS REGION Additional large amounts of groundwater are used in irrigation. The largest area of irrigated farming in Texas and one of the largest in the nation is in the High Plains area around Lubbock. There are several productive fresh-water aquifers in West Texas, the most important of which is the Ogallala formation underlying the High Plains. One estimate has placed water use from just this one formation for irrigation in the southern High Plains at a rate of around 3.4 million acre-feet per year. Admittedly, there has been concern about the rate of withdrawals exceeding recharge to the for­mation and about the resulting fall in the water table. Even so, after extensive irrigation for nearly thirty years, the annual supply of water continues to be very large, and the groundwater supplies probably will sup­port high levels of agriculture in the High Plains area for many more years. Total water storage in the Ogallala formation has been estimated at 300 million to 400 million acre-feet. Water-supply facilities have been developed at a rapid pace in West Texas in the past few decades. There are now 58 major surface reservoirs in operation or under construction in the region, with a total available ca­pacity of about 16 million acre-feet. A portion of this capacity is committed to supplying water needs outside West Texas, but the bulk is available for use in the region. Furthermore, another 22 major reservoirs have been identified in planning studies as possibilities for West Texas. West Texas is richly endowed with oil and gas re­sources, accounting for approximately one-fifth and one­sixth, respectively, of the current national production of these two minerals. The Midland portion of the Permian basin provides the largest part of this produc­ tion. The Midland basin has already produced over 8 billion barrels of oil, and the remaining known reserves are nearly as great. Continuing improvements in sec­ ondary recovery methods promise to extend significantly these vast petroleum reserves. Amongl_~he other major minerals produced commercially in f West Texas are gypsum, lime, talc-soapstone, graphite, mercury, and dimension stone. The human resources of West Texas include a labor force of approximately 1.1 million workers out of a total population of about 3.2 million. The population density is less than the state average of 36 persons per square mile, with the range varying from less than 10 persons per square mile for wide areas of the region to over 100 persons per square mile in most of the region's metro­ politan areas. Educational levels in West Texas compare favorably with those of the state as a whole. The median number of school years completed by men 25 years of age and older exceeds 9 years in most of the counties of West Texas. And, West Texas has all but 3 of the 25 counties in the state reporting median school-years-completed in excess of 12 years. Ten years is the median number of school-years-completed by males 25 years old and older in Texas as a whole. The relatively small propor­tion of nonwhite persons is another distinctive character­istic of the West Texas population compared with that of the rest of the state, although there are sizeable numbers of Spanish-speaking groups who have not been completely assimilated into local populations. AUGUST 1966 The educational facilities of the region include 34 locally produced sorghum and other grains, is an im­ universities and colleges with a total enrollment of ap­proximately 100,000 students. A dozen of these schools, with a total enrollment of about 60,000, are state sup­ported. The three largest of the colleges, all state supported and all with over 10,000 students each, are Texas Technological College at Lubbock, North Texas State University at Denton, and Arlington State College at Arlington. Other large colleges in West Texas are Texas Christian University, Texas Western College, Baylor University, and West Texas State University. Important to the region in this era of increasing tour­ism and recreation are its tourist attractions and tourist facilities. Examples of West Texas tourist attractions are its 16 state parks, a national park, and a national wildlife refuge, as well as numerous local public and commercial park and camping areas. The national and state parks all have camping facilities. Some of the outstanding attractions for the camper or sightseer are the Big Bend National Park, the Guadalupe and Davis Mountains, and the Palo Duro Canyon. Another special attraction is the Mexican border area. Man-made lakes in the region lure both local and visiting sportsmen. Although nonagricultural activities have grown in rela­ tive importance in West Texas, agriculture is still very important as a source of direct employment and income and as a supplier of raw materials and market oppor­ tunities for other local industries. Agriculture accounts for about 11% of total employment in West Texas. Ag­ riculture's shares of total employment in the state and nation are somewhat less, being about 8% and 6%, re­ spectively. The total value of farm sales in the region, according to the latest official estimates available for 1964, amounted to about $1.1 billion, excluding govern­ ment payments. This represents nearly 50% of the state total of farm sales and 3% of the national total. The important types of farming in West Texas differ considerably from one area to the next. Examples of the agricultural diversity within the region are the number of dairies, small livestock ranches, and peanut and other small field-crop farms found in the eastern part; the large specialized cotton, grain-sorghum, and wheat farms of the High Plains; and the large cattle, sheep, and goat ranches found mainly in the southwest. The major agricultural product of West Texas in terms of value of sales is cotton. Farm sales of cotton in the region in 1964 amounted to over $400 million, or about one-sixth of all farm sales of cotton in the United States. The next most important farm products in the region are cattle and calves. Sales of sorghum grain comprise the third largest category of agricultural income. The region accounts for over one-third of all sorghum-grain sales in the nation. Other leading sources of farm in­ come are wheat and the sheep, lamb, and wool group of products. The cattle industry in West Texas has shown a smaller growth rate than the region's cotton industry. The num­ ber of cattle and calves on farms in West Texas has generally increased at a rate of less than 1o/o per year during the postwar period, a rate of growth, incidentally, about one-half that of the cattle industry nationally. On the other hand, grain-sorghum production has in­ creased significantly in both the region and the nation, and the growth of cattle feeding in the region, based on portant development that has great potential. The relatively rapid growth of nonagricultural indus­tries in West Texas has reshaped the region's economy to the extent that manufacturing now accounts for more employment than does agriculture. And, as already im­plied in the discussion of the share of total employment in agriculture, nearly 90'/r of the jobs in the region are provided by nonagricultural activities. Mineral production is a nonagricultural industry that was of early importance in West Texas, and it remains one of the region's major industries. The yearly value of mineral production in West Texas, according to the latest official figures for 1963, is around $2.4 billion, or about 12% of the national total. The major minerals produced in the region are crude oil and natural gas. A total of more than 600 million barrels of oil was pro­duced in the region in 1965, a level surpassed only in the peak years of 1956 and 1957. The growth rate of oil production in West Texas has been significantly high­er than the industry growth rates for the state and the nation. From 1947 to 1965, West Texas oil output showed an average increase of between 3% and 4% per year, compared with a national increase in oil produc­tion of less than 2.5% per year. Natural-gas production in West Texas in 1964 amounted to nearly 2.8 trillion cubic feet. It is estimated that the postwar growth of gas production in the region has significantly exceeded the nearly 6% annual rate reported for the national total of gas production. Manufacturing is of growing importance in West Texas. The total value added by manufacturing in the region in 1963 was an estimated $1.4 billion, based on partially complete data from the Census of Manufactures. There are now close to 150,000 manufacturing workers in West Texas. This represents over 13o/o of the re­gion's total employment and more than one-fourth of total factory employment in the state. Approximately 80% of all the factory employment in West Texas is concentrated in the region's ten metropolitan areas. From 1950 to 1965, total manufacturing employment in these areas rose at a rate of almost 4% per annum, or more than the corresponding yearly gains of about 3% in Texas as a whole and only about 1.5% in the nation. Roughly one-half of all metropolitan-area manufacturing employment in West Texas is in the Fort Worth metro­politan area, but the other areas of the region are gaining in importance. Ranking manufacturing indus­tries in West Texas are aircraft and parts manufactur­ing, food processing, apparel manufacturing, machinery and fabricated metal products manufacturing, petroleum refining and chemical production, and the stone-clay­glass products industry. Government activities have provided basic support to the economy of West Texas, especially in the case of those government activities financed with funds ob­tained from outside the region. Available current data on types of employment in the ten metropolitan areas show that all levels of government have more than 90,000 civilian workers, and this amount directly accounts for about 13% of the total civilian employment in these areas. Furthermore, this type of employment increased at an annual rate of over 5% per year from 1950 to 1965. In addition to the civilian government workers, there are military personnel stationed at ten Air Force bases and three Army forts in the region. Census reports in­dicate that there were approximately 75,000 military personnel Jiving in the area of these installations as of 1960. Under present defense policies, the region's mili­tary bases will not generate much future economic ex.­pansion for the region. In fact, present plans call for two of the Air Force bases, at El Paso and Waco, to be closed this year and one at Amarillo to be phased out by mid-1968. Other important industries in West Texas which bring in funds from outside the region are the components of the large trade and service industry groups which serve tourists. In a region as large as West Texas, much of the region's economic growth can be generated in­ternally by relying on the growth of markets in the region without reference to outside markets. The growth of production, trade, and services to serve the region's own markets undoubtedly has made a significant contri­bution to the past economic development of West Texas and will continue to do so in the future. An objective appraisal of the economy of West Texas must recognize the existence of problems as well as ad­ vantages. Beginning with agriculture, there is the prob­ lem of the relatively fixed supply of underground water and its rapid withdrawal for irrigation. Mitigating the seriousness of this problem is the apparently very large supply of underground water which is still available. Another restrictive factor for the region's important cot­ ton industry is the existence of restrictive government agricultural-production policie·s-", However, there are in­ dications that over the Jong run these policies may be­ come less restrictive; such a de\;elopment could work to the advantage of an efficient producing area such as the High Plains of West Texas. It appears likely that production of major crops in West Texas will maintain their recent high levels and that there probably will be some further growth in output. Cattle-feed production and the feeding of cattle are especially good candi­ dates for growth. At the same time that agricultural output is rising, total employment in farming probably will continue its downward trend because of increasing productivity. In the case of the region's oil and gas industry, the major problem is, of course, the limited amount of oil and gas reserves. This fact and the governmentally­ restricted level of domestic oil output will tend to keep down oil-well drilling activity in the region. On the other hand, known oil and gas reserves in the region remain very large, and improvements in secondary re­ covery techniques probably will enlarge the usable amounts of reserves. Oil production in the region de­ clined during the 1958-1962 period, but this followed a period of overproduction which culminated in the 1956­ 1957 production buildup to meet world oil needs cre­ ated by the short-Jived Suez Canal crisis. Since 1962, oil output in West Texas has resumed its upward trend and is expected to show further growth. Also, gas pro­ duction is expected to continue growing at a relatively high rate for some time to come. A large part of the region's manufacturing is concen­ trated in the aerospace industry in the Fort Worth area, perhaps as much as one-fifth or more of the total in terms of employment. This degree of specialization rep­resents a problem, especially since the region's aero­space industry, as now constituted, depends heavily on military demands which are variable and highly un­certain for the long-run. In fact, military procurement curtailments caused aerospace employment cutbacks in the region from the spring of 1957 until the current upturn which began in 1963. However, based on present military procurement programs, some further growth of the region's aerospace industry seems assured for the remainder of the 1960's. Furthermore, the helicopter production and space program capabilities of the local industry should provide some opportunities for expansion outside the military markets. Petrochemical manufacturing in West Texas, under present technological conditions, cannot be expected to enjoy a really large expansion comparable to the in­dustry's growth on the Texas Gulf Coast. A factor tending to restrict petrochemical growth in West Texas is the industry's large water requirements in compari­son with the region's relatively limited developed sup­plies of water available for industrial use. Another ad­verse factor in the case of far western sites is the great distance to major national markets. Advantages for petrochemical production in West Texas include the large local supplies of natural gas and oil for use as raw material inputs and as low-cost fuel. Also, the re­gion offers some "external economies" for the petro­chemical industry because of the availability of labor skills and of supply and service facilities developed ini­tially to serve the region's large oil industry. Further­more, the fact that petrochemical production complexes already have been established at some West Texas lo­cations provides a stimulation to further growth, be­cause of the economies and other attractions of agglom­eration in the petrochemical industry. Altogether, condi­tions appear favorable for a further expansion of petro­chemical manufacturing in West Texas, with plastics and synthetic rubber-materials production expected to lead the growth. In other industries, opportunities appear to be good for further increases in such consumer-goods manufac­turing industries as apparel, rubber and plastic products, food products, and various durable-goods categories. Gov­ernment military installations in the region are not likely to support much economic growth in the near fu­ture, but the civilian employment of all levels of gov­ernment is likely to increase at a fairly fast rate. Most types of service employment, both private and public, are likely to increase rapidly, in response to local as well as to tourist and other outside demands. Professional services employment, such as in education and medicine, probably will have one of the fastest growth rates in the region during the coming years. The overall economy of West Texas experienced some slowdown in growth beginning about 1957, with the cur­tailment in oil and aircraft production being largely responsible for the change. However, underlying condi­tions in the region's basic industries have already im­proved. The outlook is for overall economic growth in West Texas during the next couple of decades or so to maintain the better-than-national average growth re­corded since 1950. AUGUST 1966 TEXAS BUILDING AUTHORIZED JUNE AND FIRST-HALF 1966 by Robert B. Williamson Texas nonfarm building authorizations during the first half of 1966, while 1270 - 16 AUGUST 1966 Percent change Percent change City and item June 1966 June 1966 from May 1966 June 1966 from June 196;; Jan-June 1966 Jan-June 1965 Jan-June 1966 from Jan-June 1965 BAYTOWN: see HOUSTON SMSA BEAUMONT-PORT ARTHUR-ORANGE SMSA (Jefferson and Orange; pop. 312,799r) Building permits, less federal contracts . ..... $ 2,315,717 -41 + 6 $ l5,599,371 $ 18,000,272 -13 Bank debits (thousands) II . ..... $ 5,387,664 + 8 + 17 $ 30, 772,800 $ 27,095,916 + 14 Nonfarm employment (area ) . Manufacturing employment (area) . 114,500 35,400 + 1 + 2 + 2 + 2 113,917 34,317 110,617 34,150 + 3 •• Percent unemployed (area) .... 4.9 + 32 -22 4.2 5.7 - 26 BEAUMONT (pop. 127,500r) Reta il sales - St 9 - 8 + Apparel stores .... . Automotive stores .. .. . .......... . - 4t ••t 9 6 + 8 -19 + + 4 General merchandise stores.. . ...... . . .. .. . . - 20t 14 + 6 + Lumber, building material, Postal and hardware stores . receipts• .. .. .. .. .. .. .............$ ..t 146,590 -1 -15 + •• $ 9l0,639 $ 867,699 + 13 + 6 Building permits, less federal contracts . .$ 1,451,309 -46 + 14 $ 8,255,132 $ 9,189,513 -10 Bank debits (thousands) . End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . .$ ....$ 297,746 114,763 + •• + 19 + 4 $ $ 1,706,553 116.086# $ 1.471,535 112,341# + 16 + Annual rate of deposit turnover.... .. .... . 31.2 + 4 + 13 29.3# 2U# + 12 Groves (pop. 17,304) Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 9,858 -14 + 11 $ 57,061 $ 45,601 + 25 Building permits, less federal contracts . . $ 112,950 ~ 68 -11 $ 1,593,030 $ 834,886 + 9l Bank debits (thousands) ..................... . . $ 7,500 - 3 + 14 $ 42,936 $ 36,926 + 16 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . . . Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . $ 3,892 23.3 + •• -32 + 60 $ 4,374# 19.4# $ 4,976# 15.1# -12 + 28 Nederland (pop. 15,274r) Postal receipts• ....... . .... . ... . ......... • .... $ Building permits, less federal contracts... ..... .$ Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . . . . . $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. .... .. ...$ Annual rate of deposit turnover...... ......... . 10,553 120,834 7,160 4,949 18.0 8 + 7 + 8 5 6 67,872 $ 991,835 + $ + 9 $ 41,200 + $ 4,883# + 4 16.9# $ 62,217 $ 38,650 $ 4,728# 16.3# + + + + Orange (pop. 25,605) Retail sales ... .. ... . .. . . .. ... . -St -1 + l1 + 9 Postal receipts• .. $ 29,629 -7 + 14 $ 178,481 $ 164,127 + 9 Building permits,. less federal contracts . . $ 193,389 + 32 + 31 $ 983.688 $ 1,245,754 -21 Bank debits (thousands) . . . $ 36,491 + 4 + 16 $ 217,396 $ 186,021 + 17 End-of-month deposits (thousands)f. . . . . . $ 28,759 + 7 + 10 $ 27,746# $ 25,367# + 9 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 15.7 + 1 + 15.7# 14.7# + Nonfarm placements ...... . .. . . . . . ... . 223 + 15 + 10 1,102 1,024 + Port Arthur (pop. 66,676) Retail sales -St -2 + 10 + 9 Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 59,532 -14 + 12 $ 374,467 $ 327,741 + 14 Building permits, less federal contracts . . $ 318,967 -39 -39 $ 3,043,374 $ 3,219,288 -6 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . $ 78,683 + 12 + 21 $ 456,376 $ 405,996 + 12 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . . . $ Annual rate of deposit turnover......... . . 41,098 23.1 + 1 + 17 -2 + 24 $ 42,406# 21.5# $ 42,629# 18.9# -1 + 14 + 80 -7 $ 491,137 $ 952,652 Port Neches (pop. 8,696) Postal receipts• ... .. ... . . . . . .. $ 8,134 -18 -1 $ 53,942 $ 49,341 + 9 Building permits, less federal contracts... .$ 75,198 -48 Bank debits (thousands) 10,570 .. $ -19 -18 $ 73,514 $ 79,275 -7 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t. .$ 7,546 + 16 + 17 $ 7,013# $ 6,753# + 4 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 18.1 -25 -26 20.9# 23.6# -11 BEEVILLE (pop. 13,811) Postal receipts• . . . ........... $ 12,908 + 6 -6 + 10 $ 83,896 $ 79,016 Building permits, less federal contracts. . .$ 120,065 -49 +463 $ 672,290 $ 524,384 + 28 Bank debits (thousands) . . $ 12,568 + 6 + 9 $ 70,052 $ 68,490 + 2 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..........$ 14,066 7 -6 $ 15,225# $ 15,226# •• Annual rate of deposit turnover. 10.4 + 2 + 9 + 12 9.2# 9.0# Nonfarm placements .................. ... . . 120 5 -10 681 624 + 9 Percent change Percent change City and item June 1966 June 1966 from May 1966 --1.\me 19 66 frcm June 1965 Jan-June 1966 Jan-June 1965 J an-June 1966 from Jan-June 1965 BELTON (pop. 8,163) Postal receipts• . ... . $ 9,789 -6 6 $ 77,816 $ 79,092 ­Building permits, less federal contracts. . .. $ 51,300 -39 -21 $ 569,239 $ 411,975 + 38 End-of-month deposits (thousandslt . .. . . $ 9,013 + + 3 8,992# $ 9,027# •• BIG SPRING (pop. 31,230) Retail sales - 3t •• -33 + Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . .. ... . . . . .. $ 34,826 8 + 12 21 5,272 $ 200,642 + 7 Building permits, less federal contracts . .$ 143,710 -74 -24 1,782,471 s 1.800,594 Bank debits (thousands) . . .. $ 4!,787 + + 13 $ 256,005 $ 220,753 + 16 ~nd-of-month deposits (thousands) t ...... . ....$ 25,245 - 3 + $ 27,281# 24,328# + 12 Annual rate of deposit ~rJ>over . 19.5 + 8 + 18.7# 18.1# + 3 Nonfarm placements 307 + 40 + 15 1,278 1,214 + 5 BISHOP: see CORPUS CHRISTI SMSA BONHAM (pop. 7,357) Retail sales Automotive stores Postal receipts• . . . ... $ Building permits, less federal contracts . . .. .$ Bank debits (thousands) ....... $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . . ... .$ Annual rate of deposit turnover. . ......... . . ••t 8,490 ll J,500 10,750 9,402 14.8 + 29 + + 23 + 17 + 15 + 10 + JO + 7 + 28 + 21 + 12 + 48,018 47,442 + 53,902 $ 48,895 + 10 8,484# $ 7,940# + 7 12.8# 12.2# + BORGER (pop. 20,911) Postal receipts• . . . . .... $ 18,250 - 1l -· 3 115,844 119,472 - 3 Building permits, less federal contracts.........$ 58,576 - 14 ... 3 486,991 676,110 - 28 Nonfarm placements 117 - 31 -33 751 1,014 - 26 BRADY (pop. 5,338) Postal receipts• . .$ 5,725 + 6 24 $ 36,080 $ 34,344 + Building permits, less federal contracts. . .$ 13,525 -79 + $ 277,255 $ 113,300 +145 Bank debits (thousands) . .$ 8,001 + 17 + 14 $ 46,643 $ 36,001 + 30 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . $ 7,872 l + 7 $ 7,678# $ 7,\78# + 7 Annual rate of deposit turnover. .. . 12.1 + 15 + 12.1# 10.0# + 21 BRENHAM (pop. 7,740) Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . ... $ 10,601 - 8 - 8 $ 66,942 $ 63,552 + Building permits, less federal contracts... .... .. $ 73,954 + 16 + 12 $ 832,115 $ 1,068,709 -22 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 12,768 2 + 8 $ 80,731 $ 74,354 + 9 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ...... ... .. $ 14,070 3 + 14,642# $ 14,150# + 3 Annual rate of deposit turnover........ , ... . 10.7 + 11.0# 10.5# + BROWNFIELD (pop. 10,286) Postal receipts• ....... .. . . . . .... $ 12,606 - 4 + $ 73,837 $ 67,486 + 9 Building permits, less federal contracts. Bank debits (thousands) .......... . .... $ . . . .....$ 170,605 17,929 + 47 •• + fi4 -48 $ $ 473,560 134,126 $ $ 302,175 \ 70,551 + 57 -21 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . .$ 14, 106 l + 4 $ lfi,742# $ 15,117# + 4 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 15.2 + 6 -50 16.6# 22.4# -26 BROWNSVILLE-HARLINGEN-SAN BENITO SMSA (Cameron; pop. 141,6711 ) Building permits, less federal contracts . Bank debits (thousands) II. Nonfarm employment (area) . Manufacturing employment (area) . Percent unemployed (area) . .. $ .. $ 929,368 l,209,708 37,000 6,370 8. 1 + -12 + l + 13 + 11 -25 + 2 + 5 + 24 -10 4, 142,567 8,598,696 37,000 fi,9 18 6.8 $ $ 5,445,255 7.097,788 35,442 fi.265 8.2 -24 + 13 + 4 + 12 -17 BROWNSVILLE (pop. 48,040) Retail sales ... .. ... . . .. ... . ..... . . Automotive stores - 3t ••t + l + 6 + 8 + 11 + 17 Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 40,114 + 3 + 9 $ 253,359 223,228 + 13 Building permits, less federal contracts . . .. .$ 617,568 +187 + $ 2,484,645 3,872,565 -36 Bank debits (thousands) . . ...... .. ....... $ 35,754 + 2 + 14 $ 247 ,083 $ 217,006 + 14 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . Annual rate ·of deposit turnover . . . $ 21,591 19.5 -3 + 3 + 2 + 6 22,957# 21.2# $ 20,982# 20.5# + 9 + 3 Nonfarm placements . . .......... . 582 + 14 -25 3,170 3,959 -20 For an explanation of symbols, please see p. 214. AUGUST 1966 Percent change Percent change 'City and item June 1966 June 1966 from May Hl66 June 1966 from June l!"Sn Jan-June 1966 Jan-June 1965 Jan-June 1966 from Jan-June 1965 Harlingen (pop. 41,207) Retail sales - 3t + 1 + + 10 Automotive stores *"t + 6 1 + 12 Postal receipts• ... . .... . . . Building permits, less federal contracts . $ $ 39,152 256,200 10 -59 + 3 -56 $ 240,832 1,391,900 $ $ 216,740 1,232,265 + 11 + 13 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . $ 39,620 - 4 2 254,242 $ 233.182 + End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . ..... $ 21,626 + 7 $ 22,566# $ 20,370# + 11 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 22.0 4 9 22.3# 22.7# . 2 Nonfarm placements 552 + 9 2,926 3,080 - 5 La Feria (pop. 3,047) Postal receipts• $ 2,061 + 2 -14 $ 14,313 14,293 Building permits, less federal contracts . ... . $ 18,800 +470 + 27 $ 36.430 43,490 -16 Bank debits (thousands) . . .. ... . $ 1,651 -16 $ 11,666 10,674 + 9 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . . ... $ 1,444 + 1,649# 1,474# + 12 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 13.2 -21 13.9# 14.4# - 3 Los Fresnos (pop. 1,289) Postal receipts• ....$ 1,810 + 69 + 7 $ 8,606 $ 7,897 + Bank debits (thousands) . $ 1,493 + 16 - 7 $ 7,716 $ 7,236 + End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . .$ 1,127 12 -11 1,243# $ 1.252# Annual rate of deposit turnover. .. ...... . . . 14.9 + 22 + 12.2# 11.5# + Port Isabel (pop. 3,575) Postal receipts• .. . ... . .... . ........ . ....$ Building permits, less federal contracts . . . $ Bank debits (thousands) ... .... ....... ........ . $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover . 3,206 21,950 1,882 1,335 17.1 + 14 +193 2 + 3 2 + 12 + 32 + 21 + 22 -1 $ 19,958 $ 5\,831 10,806 1,395# 15.5# 18,195 74,650 9,171 1,186# 15.4# + 10 -31 + 18 + 18 + San Benito (pop. 16,422) Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... $ Building permits, less federal contracts . . . . $ Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t. . .... $ Annual rate of deposit turnover.......... . . 7,310 14,850 5,490 5,703 11.3 -11 + 96 4 + 3 -20 50,132 + 8 $ 141,437 + $ 35,654 + !l 6.0!!7 # 7 11.6# 48,668 U3,130 33,576 5,627# 11.H# + 3 -34 + 6 + BROWNWOOD (pop. 16,974) Postal receipts• . $ 26,625 19 -19 1H6,3!l3 $ 201,0;)0 -7 Building permits, less federal contracts . ..... . .. $ 79,900 + 14 -87 487,090 $ 2,328, 1 ;)6 -7!1 Bank debits (thousands) . . .... . ... .. .... .. .. $ 21,871 + 3 -12 $ 12!l,193 126,ii 2» + 2 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t. . ... $ 14,486 -6 $ 14,331# ~ 13,803# + + Annual rate of deposit turnover . 18.4 + 1 -11 18.0# 18.r.# Nonfarm placements .......... . . .. , .. 157 + 20 + 3 787 7!l2 BRYAN (pop. 27,542) Postal receipts• ..... . . .... .. . . $ 35,126 + 12 + 14 $ 192,444 $ 184,734 + 4 Building permits, less federal contracts........$ 597,946 5 +112 $ 3,395,287 2,950,801 + 15 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...$ 40,183 + 2 + 14 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . . .. $ 25,899 + + 8 Annual rate of deposit turnover . ......... . . 19.1 4 + 4 Nonfarm placements 292 9 + 4 $ 1,868 $ 1,691 + 10 CALDWELL (pop. 2,202r) Postal receipts• $ 3,077 -10 + 9 $ 20,198 $ 17,669 + 14 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. $ 3,452 + 10 + 18 $ 19,27 4 $ 16,206 + 19 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . ....$ 4,565 - 1 + 13 $ 4,595# $ 4,061# + 13 Annual rate of deposit turnover........... . . 9.0 + 10 + 3 8.4# 8.0# + CAMERON (pop. 5,640) Postal receipts• . $ 6,085 -21 $ 44,949 $ 43,333 + 4 Building permits, less federal contracts .........$ 43,875 +192 $ 90,475 $ 114,250 -21 Bank debits (thousands) . . ..... .$ 5,808 + 6 + 20 $ 35,811 ,$ 30,534 + 17 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . . ... .$ 5,636 4 + 2 $ 5,704# 5,273# + 8 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 12.1 + 7 + 13 12.5# 11.5# + Percent change Percent change City and item June 1966 J une 1966 from May 1966 June 1966 from June 1965 J an-June 1966 Jan-June 1965 J an-June 1966 from Jan-June 1965 CANYON: see AMARILLO SMSA CARROLLTON: see DALLAS SMSA CISCO (pop. 4,499) Postal receipts• .. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . $ 4,842 -20 + 10 $ 30,907 30,774 •• Bank debits (thousands) . .. . $ 4,300 8 2 $ 25,880 24,295 + 7 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t. . . . . $ 3.897 + 6 + 3,906# 3,627# + 8 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . . ... ... . ... . 13.6 8 13.3# 13.4# CLEBURNE: see FORT WORTH SMSA CLUTE: see HOUSTON SMSA COLLEGE STATION (pop. 11,396) Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . ..........$ 27,023 + 7 + 11 $ 167,641 $ 147,679 + 14 Building permits, less federal contracts . . $ 213,863 + 93 - 1 $ 1,532,715 $ 1,077,734 + 42 Bank debits (thousands) . . .. .. . . $ 6,556 9 - 1 $ 41,937 s 34,889 + 20 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . $ 4,777 + 1 + 27 $ 4,810# $ 4,106# + 17 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 16.6 6 -16 17.5# 16.9# + 4 COLORADO CITY (pop. 6,457) Postal receipts• ... .... ... . .. $ 5,921 -13 -13 $ 38,542 s 38,820 - 1 Bank debits (thousands) . ....$ 5,441 + l + 8 s 39,773 $ 31,084 + 28 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . .. $ 6,594 + 19 $ 7,366# $ 6,079# + 21 Annual rate of deposit turnover... . . . . .... . 9.6 + 5 -10 10.7# 10.1# + 6 CONROE: see HOUSTON SMSA COPPERAS COVE (pop. 4,567) Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . ........ . $ 4,270 -11 + 3 s 28,546 $ 27,706 + 3 Building permits, less federal contracts. . .... .$ 87,880 +145 -64 $ 245,618 $ 1,602,226 -85 Bank debits (thousands) . .. ...... . . ..... .... ...$ 3,372 +145 + 84 $ 10,8-08 $ 11,028 - 2 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . . . $ 1,176 - 4 -22 $ 1,307# $ 1,815# -28 Annual rate of deposit turnover.. ... . .... . . . 33.6 + 156 +145 16.6# 12.4# + 34 CORPUS CHRISTI SMSA (Nueces; pop. 268,7021 ) Building permits, less federal cont.racts. .$ 3,010,826 -23 + 4 $ 20,775,537 $ l7,849,815 + 16 Bank debits (thousands) 11 .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 3,851,280 + 8 + 13 $ 21,946,344 $ 20,063,436 + 9 Nonfarm employment (area) . 82,700 + + $ 81,767 s 80,783 + Manufacturing employment (area). 10,600 + 2 + $ 10,412 $ 10,355 + Percent unemployed (area) . ......... . 5.0 + 32 -26 3.9 5.5 - 29 Aransas Pass (pop. 6,956) Postal receipts• .. .. . .. .... .. . . .. . . . .. . . $ 4,977 9 - 8 33,315 $ 33,331 •• Building permits, less federal contracts . ...$ 58,820 +652 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . $ 5,218 + + 1,4 $ 30,266 $ 27,843 + End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . .$ 5,042 + 4 + 4 $ 5,135# $ 4,985# + 3 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 12.6 + 4 + 11 11.7# 11.1# + 5 Bishop (pop. 3,825r) Postal receipts• . .... .. .. . . .$ 3,684 + 7 - 2 $ 19,837 $ 18,430 + 8 Building permits, less federal contracts . ..... . $ 0 $ 309,000 $ 171,900 + 80 Bank debits (thousands) . ·· · ··· ········· .$ 2,032 + 11 + 20 $ ll,984 $ 10,068 + 19 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . ..... $ 2,215 - 1 + 21 $ 2,319# $ l,998# + 16 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 11.0 + 13 - 3 10.2# 10.0# + 2 CORPUS CHRISTI (pop. 204,850r) Retail sales .. ···· ·· ... . .. - 3t + 12 + 6 + Drug stores -lOt 4 + 6 + 4 General merchandise stores . - 20t + 4 + 15 + 9 Postal receipts• .. . ..... ... .. $ 226,365 - 8 + 6 ! ,396,062 s 1,307,686 + 7 Building permits, less federal contracts . .$ 2,622,923 - 27 9 $ 18,168,405 s 15,033,671 + 21 Bank debits (thousands) . ....$ 279,047 + 9 + 14 s 1,601,800 $ 1,470,595 + 9 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . ... . $ l36,955 + + 6 $ 135,755# $ 130,788# + 4 Annual rate of deposit turnover.. . 25.1 + 9 + 7 23.5# 22.5# + 4 AUGUST 1966 Percent change Percent change City and item June 1966 J une 1966 from May 1966 J une 1966 from . June 1965 Jan-June 1966 Jan-June 1965 Jan-June 1966 from Jan-June 1965 Robstown (pop. 10,266) Postal receipts• ............. .\ .. $ 9,414 + + 24 .54,998 48,998 + 12 Huilding permits, less federal contracts . $ 37,928 + 58 + 72 386,026 275,307 + 40 Bank debits (thousands) . .... $ 9,942 + 1 $ 62,49\J 58,863 + 6 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . $ 8,677 3 + 9,310# 9,086# + 3 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 13.5 + 4 13.2# 12.8# + Sinton (pop. 6,008) Postal receipts* $ 8,904 + 17 + 57 48,068 $ 45,954 + 5 Building permits, less federal contracts . . ... $ 42,040 11 T.:>!t 231,891 $ 273,529 -15 Bank debits (thousands) . $ 4,941. + 8 + 15 28,604 $ 26,462 + 8 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . ... $ 4,402 2 1 4,984# 4,76!J# + Annual rate of deposit turnover . 13.3 + 13 + 17 11..5# 11.0# + CORSICANA (pop. 20,344) Postal receipts< .... $ 21,423 - 5 + 17 $ 148,016 $ 136,766 + Building permits, less fedPral contracts . .$ l,467,379 +731 $ 3,633,070 $ 3,448,693 + Bank debits (thousands) . .$ 22,739 .5 + 25 140,316 $ 121,590 + 15 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . $ 22,308 + 2 t,::;. 22,524# 21,721# + 4 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 12.4 7 + 22 12.4# 11.1# + 12 Nonfarm placements 262 + 7 - 8 1,375 l,411 - s CRYSTAL CITY (pop. 9,101) I Building permits, less federal contracts. ....$ 320,258 580,587 $ 446,737 + so Bank debits (thousands) . .... $ 3,685 + 23,791 $ 19,645 + 21 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . . $ 3,1.71 + 3,200# $ 2,979# + 7 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . . . . . . .. 13.9 7 14.9# 13.3# + 12 DALLAS SMSA (Collin, Dallas, Denton, and Ellis; pop. 1,261,7871) Building permits, less federal contracts. $ 27,367,474 + 11 -30 $181,493,960 $175,406,581 + 3 Bank debits (thousands) 11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. $ 63,292,212 + 2 + 14 $366,581,360 $317,478,500 + 15 Nonfarm employment (area) . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 569,600 + 1 + 6 $ 560,033 $ 530,350 + 6 Manufacturing employment (area) . 134,975 + 2 + 9 $ 131,275 $ 119,438 + 10 Percent unemployed (area) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . 3.2 + 33 -26 2.7 3.6 - 25 Carrollton (pop. 9,832r) Postal receipts* $ 11,676 + + 38 $ 67,158 $ 55,298 + 21 Building permits, less federal contracts. ....$ 364,000 +374 - 63 $ 2, 742,415 $ 3,020,400 - 9 Bank debits (thousands) . ·········· ....... . ....$ 8,561 + 32 $ 49,812. $ 38,683 + 29 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t. ....$ 3,921 + 4 + 22 $ 3,763# $ 3,162# + 19 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 26.7 7 + 10 26.7# 24.4# + 9 DALLAS (pop. 679,684) Retail sales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . - 4 + 6 + - 2 Apparel stores ... ······· · ····· ·· · ·· · · -17 8 + 5 - 1 Automotive stores . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. + 1 + 18 8 - 19 Eating and drinking places . •< + 5 + 5 General merchandise stores. . . ·· ·· ····· 9 s + 8 + Lumber, building material, and hardware stores . 2 5 3 + 8 Postal receipts• ············ ... . ..... ....$ Building permits, less federal contracts . ....$ Bank debits (thousands) . .... · ····· · · .... . . .. .. $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . .... $ Annual rate of deposit turnover . 3,377,087 16,605,907 4,972,327 1,432,583 42.0 + + - 6 9 •• 1 + -+ + 7 36 3 2 •• 20,623,645 $100,306,700 $ 29,140,187 $ 1,412,320# 40.9# $ 19,512,116 $ 98,449,897 $ 27,819,946 $ l,369,519# 40.4# + + + + + 6 2 3 Denton (pop. 26,844) Postal receipts• ··········· ....$ 54,116 + 2 + 42 $ 312,364 $ 269,146 + 16 Building permits, less federal contracts. . .. . $ 880,347 + 62 -23 $ 7,138,091 $ 7,841,812 -9 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ...$ 35,213 6 + 11 $ 215,631. $ 195,663 + 10 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t. .... $ 24,983 + 2 + 7 24,993# $ 22,342# + 12 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . .. . . . . . . ... 17.1 8 2 •• 17.1# 17.5# Nonfarm placements 143 -26 -36 1,060 1,132 -6 Percent change Percent change City and item June 1966 June 1966 from May 1966 June 1966 from June 1965 J an-June 19C6 J an-June 1965 Jan-June 1966 from Jan-June 1966 Ennis (pop. 10,250r) Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...$ 12,556 4 6 $ 71,435 $ 78,018 - 8 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . ..... $ 7,894 + 4 + 15 $ 48,586 $ 42,607 + 14 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . . ........$ 7,372 + 2 + 2 $ 7,518# $ 7,292# + 3 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 12.9 + 2 + 11 12.9# 11.6# + 11 Garland (pop. 50,622r) Retail sales - st - 2 + 18 + 10 Postal receipts• . . . . ...$ 57,131 12 + 9 $ 348,114 $ 313,599 + 11 Building permits, less federal Bank debits (thousands) . . . contracts . . .. $ . ...........$ 1,470,019 41,260 + 20 •• -43 + 18 $ $ 9,196,691 248,606 $ $ 9,672,585 225,355 -5 + 10 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . Annual rate of deposit turnover . ......$ 20,076 25.0 + 3 •• + 4 + 13 $ 19,877# 2.4.9# $ 19,193# 23.5# + 4 + 6 Grand Prairie (pop. 40,150r) Postal receipts• . .......... ..........$ 33,159 -13 + 10 $ 210,335 $ 196,242 + 7 Building permits, less federal contracts . . . $ 783,942 + 44 + 56 $ 6,383,447 $ 7,137,862 -11 Bank debits (thousands) End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . ..... $ ....$ 22,335 12,339 + 2 •• + 7 + 3 $ $ 124,377 13,098# $ $ 119,825 11.369# + 4 + 15 Annual rate of deposit turnover....... ..... . 21.7 + + 19.0# 21.l# -10 Irving (pop. 60,136r) Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . .. $ 47,197 -47 - 7 $ 364,983 $ 320,528 + 14 lluilding permits, less federal contracts . . ...$ 1,414,526 2 -46 $ 12,321,389 $ 13,691,046 -10 Bank debits ·(thousands) ............ . ..........$ 43,569 5 + 6 $ 264,465 $ 240,954 + 10 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . ....$ 23,292 + 2 + 23 $ 22,637# $ 18,728 # + 21. Annual rate of deposit turnover. 22.6 7 -11 23.3# 25.8# -10 Justin (pop. 622) Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .........$ 770 -17 $. 4,608 $ 4,262 + 8 Building permits, less federal contracts... ......$ 0 $ 56,003 $ 71,500 -22 Bank debits (thousands) . . .. . ............. . ....$ 1,281 + 32 + 8 $ 6,774 $ 6,164 + 10 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . . . $ 489 - 35 -42 725# 825# -12 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 24.7 + 61 + 40 18.1# 15.0# + 21. McKinney (pop. 13, 763) Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...$ 15,481 - 3 + 18 $ 102,050 $ 81,448 + 25 Building permits, less federal contracts. . .. . $ 95,340 -72 -49 $ l,007,460 $ 510,434 + 97 Hank debits (thousands) . . . . . . .........$ 11,171 + 1 -11 $ 68,957 $ 73,345 6 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t. . .$ 11,260 + 21 + 10 $ 9,949# $ 10,657# 7 Annuel rate of deposit turnover. 13.1 - 8 -12 14.l# 13.7# + 3 Nonfarm placements 168 + 34 + 47 756 BU 7 Mesquite (pop. 27,526) Postal receipts• . . . ..................... . .• . .. .$ 21,955 -10 + 42 $ 135,810 $ 101,94.4 + 33 Building permits, less federal contracts. . . $ 982,115 + 98 + 16 $ 4,503,311 $ 4,174,746 + 8 Bank debits (thousands) . . .. $ 11,047 -30 + 3 $ 74,282 $ 61,523 + 21 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . .$ 7,831 + 9 + 11 $ 7,578# $ 6,876# + 10 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 17.7 -33 - 3 19.5# 17.8# + 10 Midlothian (pop. 1,521) Building permits, less federal contracts . ....$ 36,500 + 74 +109 $ 187,850 $ 154,390 + 22 Bank debits (thousands) . . .. . .. $ 1,163 + 11 + 6 $ 6,668 $ 6,392 + 4 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . Annual rate of deposit turnover. .$ 1,472 9.5 + 1 + 9 + 6•• $ 1,495# 8.9# $ l ,460# 8.7# + 2 + 2 Pilot Point (pop. 1,254) Building permits, less federal contracts. .$ 8,000 - 50 -78 $ 89,000 $ 216,902 -59 Bank debits (thousands) . . .. . . . .. ... .. . ...... . . $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . .$ 1,560 1,803 + 2 •• + 29 -16 $ $ 8,920 1,856# $ $ 7,431 1,619# + 20 + 15 Annual rate of deposit turnover. . .... . 10.4 + 2 + 13 9.6# 9.1# + 5 AUGUST 1966 P ercent change Percent change City a nd item June 1966 June 1966 from May HJ66 June 1966 from June 1965 Jan-June 1966 J an-June 1965 J an-June 1966 from J an-June 1965 Plano (pop. 10,102r) Postal receipts• ..... ... $ 10,111 -21 + 38 $ 64,597 $ 46,387 + 39 Building permits, less federal contracts. .. .. . $ 807,928 + 78 + 53 $ 6,456,844 $ 2,498,496 +168 B11nk debits (thousands) . ....$ 5,906 + 4 + 55 32,181 $ 24,936 + 29 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t. .... $ 3,666 3 + 25 3,920# $ 2,958# + 33 Annual rate of deposit turnover.. in.o + 10 + 22 16.4# 16.9# -3 Richardson (pop. 34,390r) Postal receipts• ... Building permits, less federal contracts . Bank debits (thousands) . End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . . $ . . $ ... $ . ... $ 56,183 1.638,558 26,053 13,200 -5 + 11 9 + 4 + 25 + 64 + + 317,370 14,814,534 160,767 13,198# $ $ 269,811, 6,705,781 147,455 12,444# + 18 +121 + 9 + Annual rate of deposit turnover . 24. 1 10 24.3# 22.9# + Seagoville (pop. 3,7 45) Postal receipts• .$ 5,681 + 26 + 15 36,787 $ 29,796 + 23 Building permits, less federal contracts . Bank debits (thousands) .. End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . Annual rate of deposit turnover . .. .. . $ . . . $ $ 18,738 3,846 2,352 20.4 + + 17 + 8 + 10 -70 + 26 + 32 + 3 $ $ $ 97,387 23,637 2,152# 21.9# $ $ $ 298,440 20,777 1,875# 21.3# -67 + 14 + 15 + 3 Waxahachie (pop. 12,749) Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ..... . ..$ 15,180 -40 + 14 $ 134,898 $ 123, 734 + 9 Building permits, less federal contracts..... ... $ Bank debits (thousands) . . ... ... $ 77,250 12,169 + 15 + 2 -25 + !) $ 476,449 76,393 $ $ 785,249 69,490 -39 + 10 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . Annual rate of deposit turnover. Nonfarm placements $ 11,059 13.2 131 ¢0 •• + 41 + 21 10 + 9 10,926# 13.9# 632 $ 9,798# 14.0# 474 + 12 -1 + 33 DAYTON: see HOUSTON SMSA DEER PARK: see HOUSTON SMSA DEL RIO (pop. 18,612) Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 16,495 -13 + 7 $ 110,458 $ 97,556 + 13 Building permits, less federal contracts . . .$ 193,344 + 50 +146 $ 1,,1 28,431 $ 683.307 + 65 Bank debits (thousands) . . ... $ 14,472. -12 - 8 $ 88,851 $ 84,728 + End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . .... $ 16,999 - 4 + 2 $ 17,388# $ 15,597# + 11 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 10.8 -11 -14 10.2# 10.9# - 6 DENISON (pop. 25,766r) Postal receipts• .. .. ... ..... ...... $ Building permits, less federal contracts . . . $ Bank debits (thousands) . . . . $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . .... .$ Annual rate of deposit turnover............ . Noniarm placements 25,823 158,555 20,333 17,294 14.2 289 + -18 2 + 4 + 24 + 3 -44 + 9 + + + 76 $ l.50,402 $ 1,024,826 $ 117,568 $ 17,027# 13.8# 1,248 $ 143,610 $ 1,570,943 $ 109,482 $ 15,500# 14.!# 954 + 6 + 7 -35 + 10 + 31 -2 DENTON: see DALLAS SMSA DONNA: see McALLEN-PHARR-EDINBURG SMSA DUMAS (pop. 10,547r) Postal receipts• ... .. $ 9,104 -19 + 27 $ 54,712 $ 48,057 + 14 Building permits, less federal contracts . .$ 95,850 +383 -37 $ 1,007,500 $ 1,664,226 -39 Bank debits (thousands) .......... . . ... $ 10,881 -11 + 6 $ 73,502 $ 70,366 + End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . .. $ 11,596 2 + 2 $ !2,209# $ 11,155# + Annual rate of deposit turnover......... ... . 11.1 - 8 + 2 11.9# 12.7# Percent change P ercent change City and item June 1966 June 1966 from May 1966 June 1966 from June 1965 J an-June 1966 J an-June 1965 Jan-June 1966 from J an-June 1965 EAGLE PASS (po1>. 12,094) Postal receipts• .. .. . Building permits, less federal contracts . Bank debits (thousands) End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . Annual rate of deposit turnover . .$ . .$ .. $ . . . $ 10,505 47,509 7,127 4,815 17.4 --+ 5 49 2 + 15 + 22 + 27 + + 13 63,1 14 620,327 42,268 5,1 53# 16.3# $ $ 55,769 581,177 37,115 4,539# 16.3# + 13 + 7 + 14 + 14 EDINBURG: see McALLEN-PHARR-EDINBURG SMSA EDNA (pop. 5,038) Postal receipts• ..... . . . .... . ... . '.$ 6,644 7 38,014 34,957 + 9 Bank debits (thousands) . 5,582 $ 36,143 $ 33,731 + 7 " '$ End-of-month deposits (thousands) i. '' ' . $ 6,748 + + 13 $ 7,002# 6,616# + 6 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 10.1 2 -10 10.2# 10.0# + EL PASO SMSA (El Paso; pop. 339,9491) Postal receipts• .. .. .. . .. .. .. ..........$ 3,413,068 -31 -28 $ 29,383,569 $ 31,542,437 7 Building permits, less federal contracts... ... .. .$ 4,971,372 + 5 $ 29,051,988 $ 28,691,748 + Nonfarm employment (area) 102,500 + + 8 99,750 94,317 + Manufacturing employment (area) . ! 8,850 + + 15 18,150 16,520 + 10 Percent unemployed (area) . 5.3 + 18 -27 4.7 6.1 - 23 EL PASO (pop. 276,687) Retail sales at + + 4 2 Automotive stores ..t + 10 + 5 Drug stores lOt 12 + 3 + 3 Food stores ... .. . - St + 3 2 3 Postal receipts• .. . ...$ 354,171 - 8 -12 $ 2,243,741 $ 2,206,659 + 2 Building permits, Jess federal contracts . . .$ 3,411,068 -31 -28 $ 29,356,919 $ 31,485,637 7 Bank debits (thousands) . . ...............$ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . .... .$ 390,988 187,112 6 + 7 4 $ 2,406,584 $ 199,784# $ 2,375,674 s 199,996# + •• Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . 25.0 2 + 8 24.0# 23.7# + ENNIS: see DALLAS SMSA EULESS: see FORT WORTH SMSA FORT STOCKTON (pop. 6,373) Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .........$ 6,768 -5 -12 $ 42,921 $ 42,130 + 2 Building permits, less federal contracts. .$ 43,100 -67 -4 $ 491,900 $ 463,675 + Bank debits (thousands) . . .................$ 6,069 -14 + 11 $ 39,553 $ 35,392 + 12 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t. ...$ 7,201 3 + 9 $ 7,662# $ 7,018# + 9 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 10.0 -J1 + 10.3# 10.0# + 8 FORT WORTH SMSA (Johnson and Tarrant; pop. 611,2931 ) Building permits, less federal contracts. ....... .$ 11,553,323 + 10 -13 $ 63,891,701 s 59,564,774 + 7 Bank debits (thousands) 1 . .........$ 13,713,588 5 + 7 s 82,233,l 56 s 74,236,632 + 11 Nonfarm employment (area) . ..... .. .. . 251,600 + + 6 246,917 236,117 + 5 Manufacturing employment (area) . 71,575 + + 14 69,133 61,400 + 13 Percent unemployed (area) . ..... ..... 3.7 + 32 -21 2.9 4.0 -28 For an explanation of symbols, please see p. 214. AUGUST 1966 White Settlement (pop. 11,513) Percent change Percent change City and item June 1966 j;me 1966 from May 1966 June 1966 from June 1965 Jan-June 1966 Jan-June 1965 Jan-June 1966 from Jan-June 1965 Cleburne (pop. 15,381) Postal receipts• .. .. ...... . .... .. . . .. .... .. $ 19,378 + 4 + 19 $ 112,847 $ 104,078 + 8 Building permits, less federal contracts . ........$ 47,900 -58 -95 $ 1,197,585 $ 1,523,102 -21 Bank debits (thousands) .... End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . .. ... $ .... $ 14,126 13,077 + 2 •• + 4 + 2 $ $ 87,273 12,786# $ $ 80,766 12,566# + 8 + 2 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 13.0 + + 13.6# 12.8# + Euless (pop. 10,500r) Postal receipts• .... . ...... .............. .... $ 9,227 + 16 + 14 $ 50,802 $ 42,562 + 19 Building permits, less federal contracts . .... $ 209,300 + 54 -10 $ 1,005,287 $ !.632,492 -38 Bank debits (thousands) . . .$ 10,772 + 3 + 68 $ 55,944 $ 35,623 + 57 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . . ... $ 3,596 + 40 $ 3,697# $ 2,426# + 52 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 34.6 + + 13 30.2# 29.2# + FORT WORTH (pop. 356,268) Retail sales ... . .............. . - 4 •• + 8 Apparel stores . ······ · ··· 15 -12 + 1 Automotive Food stores stores .. . . . . . . . . . . .... . . ········ ··· ··· ··· ··· ·· 2 •• + + - 10 •• + Lumber, building material, and hardware stores . •• 5 - 2 + Postal receipts• . . ....... . . $ 928,887 6 + 11 $ 5,846,229 5,549,575 + Building permits, less federal Bank debits (thousands) . contracts . ....$ ...........$ 5,806,155 l,071,660 + 24 •• + 6 + 6 $ 28,103,151 $ 6,159,938 $ 25,991,220 $ 5,609,241 + 8 + 10 End-of-month deposits (thousandsH . .... $ 425,881 + + 3 $ 425,353# $ 415,276# + 2 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 30.3 + 3 28.8# 26.9# + 7 Grapevine (pop. 4,659r) Postal receipts• .. . . . ...... . ..... .. . $ Building permits, less federal contracts . ........$ Bank debits (thousands) . $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .... $ Annual rate of deposit turnover. 5,392 34,829 5,110 3,782 15.9 --+ + 12 65 6 4 8 + 12 -44 + 21 + 9 + $ $ $ $ 34,371 440,978 29,199 4,019# 14.6# $ $ $ $ 30,789 425,068 24,473 3,450# 14.2# + 12 + 4 + 19 + 16 + 3 North Richland Hills (pop. 8,662) Building permits, less federal contracts . . . .....$ Bank debits (thousands) . .... $ End-of-month deposits (thousandsJi. .... $ 282,800 10,236 4,551 + 84 -3 -20 + 11 + 35 + 12 $ $ $ 2,147,418 62,460 5,225# $ $ $ 1,528,651 44,684 4,370# + 40 + 40 + 20 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . . . . . . .. .. 24.0 + 3 + 10 23.9# 20.5# + 17 Building permits, less federal contracts. ........$ 62,550 +190 -76 $ 650,596 $ 698,998 -7 Bank debits (thousands) . .................$ 2,251 -9 + 38 $ 13,043 $ 9,321 + 40 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . ....$ 1,842 + 11 + 44 $ 1,601# $ 1,144# + 40 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 15.5 -16 -2 15.7# 16.5# -5 FREDERICKSBURG (pop. 4,629) Postal receipts• .. ············ ....$ Building permits, less federal contracts . ......$ Bank debits (thousands) . . . ·········· .$ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . .$ Annual rate of deposit turnover . 8,255 8,990 10,806 10,031 13.2 + 20 -70 6 + 5 9 + 37 -65 + 7 + 12 4 5 $ $ $ 44,929 574,310 63,754 9,603# 13.3# $ $ $ $ 44,194 367,540 58,652 8,748# 13.3# + 2 + 56 + 9 + 10 •• FRIONA (pop. 3,049r) Building permits, less federal contracts . Bank debits (thousands) . End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . Annual rate of deposit turnover . ....$ ...$ .... . $ 3,350 6,241 4,849 15.0 -+ + 92 2 6 6 -+ + + 83 6 2 3 $ $ $ 269,430 47,384 5,743# 15.8# $ $ $ 368,600 43,684 5,557# 15.2# -+ + + 27 4 Percent change Percent change City and item June 1966 J une 1966 from May 1966 J une 1966 from J une 1965 Jan-June 1966 Jan-June 1965 Jan-June 1966 from Jan-June 1965 GALVESTON-TEXAS CITY SMSA (Galveston; pop. 153,9931) Building permits, less federal contracts . .$ 1,243,301 + 59 - 21 $ S,125,133 $ 6,889,541 + IS Bank debits (thousands) 11­.... ........... . . ...$ 1,909,344 $ ll,656,680 $ 11,412,348 + 2 Nonfarm employment (area) . 55,000 + 54,067 54,867 1 Manufacturing employment (area) 10,260 + 2 3 10,095 10,273 2 Percent unemployed (area) . 6.3 + 29 5.2 5.7 9 GALVESTON (pop. 67,175) Retail sales .. .............. . . . Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. $ Building permits, less federal contracts. . . $ Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... ....$ End-of-month deposits (thousands) i. . . . . $ Annual rate of deposit turnover. -St 120,471 980,626 103,638 59,437 21.1 •• - 1 + 10 + 16 $ 692,51 l $ 668,748 + 154 $ 4,218,978 $ 3,!5S,S64 4 $ 639,999 $ 617,401 + 2 $ 58,464# $ 60,066# 21.7# 20.5# + 34 + + g + 4 + Texas City (pop. 32,065) Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... $ 31,701 -7 + 4 $ 179,208 $ 173,712 + 3 Building permits, less federal contracts.........$ 231,330 -32 -34 $ 3,433,0SS $ 2,587,037 + 33 Bank debits (thousands) . . .. $ 27,434 -1 $ 167,745 $ 183,405 9 + End-of-month deposits (thousandsJi. . . $ 14,325 -13 + 4 $ 15,341# $ 15,809# 3 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 2"1.4 + 3 7 21.9# 22.9# -4 GARLAND: see DALLAS SMSA GATESVILLE (pop. 4,626) Postal receipts• . . Bank debits (thousands) . End-of-month deposits (thousandsH. . ...$ . ... $ . .... $ 5,210 6,121 6,593 -26 + 13 + 3 -+ lO •• 2 $ $ $ 35,334 36,066 6,446# $ $ $ 34,911 35,453 6,424# + + 1 2•• Annual rate of deposit turnover......... . . . . 11.3 + 10 - 2 11.2# 11.0# + 2 GEORGETOWN (pop. 5,218) Postal receipts• ......... . .. $ 6,776 -26 + 2 $ 45,SOl $ 41,297 + 11 Building permits, less federal contracts. ....$ 49,069 + 38 -98 $ 265,274 $ 2,731,995 -90 Bank debits (thousands) . ......$ 6,097 - 9 - 3 $ 35,328 $ 32,078 + 10 End-of-month deposits (thousands) i . .. . $ 6,384 - 7 + 1 $ 6,643# $ 6,007# + 11 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 11.0 -11 -10 10.6# 10.S# - 2 GIDDINGS (pop. 2,821) Postal receipts• . . . . . . . $ 4,834 + 7 - 5 $ 26,440 $ 25,334 + 4 Building permits, less federal contracts........$ 47,980 + 706 + 71 $ 266,711 $ 100,725 +165 Bank debits (thousands) . .$ 4,563 + 14 + 22 $ 24,411 $ 20,867 + 17 End-of-month deposits (thousandsH. . .$ 4,616 - 1 + g $ 4,674# $ 4,lSS# + 12 Annual rate of deposit turnover . u .s + 13 + 10 10.4.# 9.9# + GLADEWATER (pop. 5,742) Postal receipts• .. . .............. .. .......$ S,172 -20 + 11 $ 52,172 $ 46,636 + 12 Building permits, less federal contracts. . . . . $ 50,950 + 37 -25 $ 283,050 $ 179,665 + 58 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . $ 4,928 + 13 + 18 $ 29,954 $ 26,223 + 14 End-of-month deposits (thousandsJi . .$ 5,117 + 4 + 8 $ 4,SS4# $ 4,548# + 7 Annual rate of deposit turnover.. 11.S + 6 + 8 12.2# 11.4# + 7 Nonfarm employment (area) . 32,750 1 + 5 32,833 30,933 + 6 Manufacturing employment (area) ... 8,520 + 3 + 12 8,185 7,278 + 12 Percent unemployed (area) . . ... 4.0 + 33 -25 3.6 4.3 - 16 GOLDTHWAITE (pop. 1,383) Postal receipts• ..... .. ................... . .$ 2,286 -32 2 $ 16,364 $ 14,497 + 13 Bank debits (thousands) .... .. . .. $ 4,550 -14 + $ 30,622 $ 27,230 + 12 End-of-month deposits (thousands) i . .... $ 6,455 + 1 + 5 $ 7,057# $ 6,751# + 5 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 8.5 - 17 6 10.2# 9.5# + 7 For an explanation of symbols, please seep. 214. AUGUST 1966 Percent change Percent change City and item June 1966 June 1966 from May 1966 June 1966 from June 1965 Jan-June 1966 Jan-June 1965 Jan-June 1966 from Jan-June 1965 GRAHAM (pop. 8,505) Postal receipts• ....$ 10,183 •• $ 60,659 $ 55,897 + Building permits, Jess federal contracts.........$ 317,650 +533 $ 473,378 $ 286,707 + 65 Bank debits (thousands) . . .. $ 11,879 1 + 17 $ 66,346 $ 58,679 + 18 End-of-month deposits (thousands) i . . .. $ 12,070 - 22 + 8 $ 11,381# $ 10,068# + 18 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 10.4 - 9 -l1 11.9# 11.7# + 2 GRANBURY (pop. 2,227) Postal receipts• .. $ 3,563 8 + 24 $ 22,806 $ 22,039 + 1 Bank debits (thousands) ...... ........... .. .... $ 1,854 + + 10 $ 11,115 $ 10,302 + 8 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t. .. $ 2,439 1 + 12 $ 2,442# $ 2,228# + 10 Annual rate of deposit turnover... 9.1 + 6 - 3 9.1# 9.2# -­ 1 GRAND PRAIRIE: see DALLAS SMSA GRAPEVINE: see FORT WORTH SMSA GREENVILLE (pop. 22,134r) Retail sales - st + 1 + 1 + Postal receipts• .. $ Building permits, less federal contracts . . . $ Bank debits (thousands) . "\ . . .. $ F.nd-of-month deposits (thousands) i . . .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover . Nonfarm placements ....... . ... . . . . . . . ... . . 31,206 774,575 19,714 15,796 15.1 154 8 + 6 + 4 -24 + 8 +423 + 6 + $ $ $ $ 191,297 2,832,739 119,403 15,747# 15.2# 967 $ $ $ $ 169,894 1,818,421 l09,202 14,583# 15.l# 678 + 18 + 56 + + + 1 + 48 HARLINGEN: see BROWNSVILLE-HARLINGEN-SAN BENITO SMSA HENDERSON (pop. 9,666) Postal receipts• ... , ... .. . .... .. ...............$ 12,851 - 7 + 16 $ 78,233 $ 74,856 + 5 Building permits, less federal contracts . . $ 54,750 + 72 +104 $ 303,742 $ 528,040 -42 Bank debits (thousands) . . ... $ 8,619 -10 +H $ 55,259 $ 49,644 + 11 End-of-month deposits (thousands) i . .... $ 20,060 - 1 + 5 $ 19,906# $ 18,684# + 7 Annual rate of deposit turnover.... 5.1 - 11 + 4 5.6# 5.3# + HEREFORD (pop. 9,584r) Postal receipts• ... ........ . .......... . ....$ 14,172 - 9 + 17 $ 87,988 $ 74,456 + 18 Building permits, less federal contracts . .. .. $ 153,100 -26 -47 $ l,l89,800 $ 3,254,010 -63 Bank debits (thousands) .. . ....$ 22,191 + + 18 End-of-month deposits (thousands) i . .. $ 14,446 + 1 + 4 Annual rate of deposit turnover........... . 18.6 + 8 + 15 HOUSTON SMSA (Harris; pop. 1,613,9571) Building permits, less federal contracts.. . .. $ 29,415,86l -35 + 3 $214,574,317 $173,825,140 + 23 Bank debits (thousands) 11 -Nonfarm e1nployment (area) ......... . . . ....$ 63,821,948 676,700 + 7 •• + 16 + 3 $862,776,110 671,150 $320,063,060 650,617 + 18 + 8 Manufacturing employment (area) .. . 124,600 + 8 + 4 121,575 117,867 + 4 Percent unemployed (area) . . ..... . . . . . 3.3 + 32 -18 2.6 3.4 - 24 Angleton (pop. 9,131) Postal receipts• . ........... . ... . Building permits, less federal contracts . Bank debits (thousands) ... End-of-month deposits (thousands) i . Annual rate of deposit turnover... . . ...$ .. $ .. . $ .. $ 9,587 51,875 10,929 10,487 12.4 + 1 +no -11 -2 + 22 -70 + + 4 1 $ $ $ $ 56,8l7 348,025 75,166 11,729# 12.6# $ $ 53,789 894,514 + - 6 61 Percent change Percent change City and item J une 1966 June 1966 from May 1966 June 1966 from J une 1965 Jan-June 196G Jan-June 1965 Jan-J une 1966 from J an-June 1965 Bellaire (pop. 21,182r) Postal receipts• . . . . . .$ Building permits, less federal contracts . . ....$ Bank debits (thousands) . . ..... ..... $ End-of-mont h deposits (thousands) t . . ....$ Annual rate of deposit turnover. 54,931 7,250 27,553 15,193 21.3 --+ + 1 57 8 4 14 + -+ + + 28 93 19 13 $ $ $ 313,521 725,329 155,493 16,015# 19.3# s $ 261,822 557,726 130,169 13,601# 19.1 # + + + + + 20 30 19 18 1 Clute (pop. 4,501) Postal receipts• ... ....$ 3,539 2 + 59 $ 20,990 $ 15,325 + 87 Building permits, less federal Bank debits (thousands) . .. . contracts . $ . .$ 81,240 2,193 + + 92 2 $ $ 242,777 12,418 $ $ 183,032 12,406 + 82 •• End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . .... $ 1.682 ¢.>); 1 $ 1,656# $ l ,719# 4 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 15.7 + 3 3 15.1# 14.5# + 4 Conroe (pop. 9,192) Postal receipts* ..... $ 19,086 -13 + 28 123, 169 96,601 + 28 Building permits, less federal contracts . $ 143,000 +297 + 85 576,300 968,257 - 40 Bank debits (thousands) . .... $ 16,771 + + 9 96,538 90,568 + 7 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . ... . $ 13,136 + 10 18,376# 11,884# + 13 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 15.2 + 6 3 14.4# 15.3# - 6 Dayton (pop. 3,367) Postal receipts• ············· ........... ....$ 3,138 -18 + 14 $ 20,198 $ 17,892 + 13 Building permits, less federal cont racts . ........$ 49,050 +228 - 40 $ 199,925 $ 414,634 - 52 Bank debits (thousands) . ......... . ......$ 4,464 + 23 $ 27,866 $ 22,531 + 24 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . .. $ 3,473 + 17 $ 3,557# $ 3,698# - 4 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 15.l + 15.6# 12.1 # + 29 Deer Park (pop. 4,865) Postal receipts• . . . . . .......s 7,653 - 21 - 15 $ 52,084 $ 43,152 + 21 Building permits, less federal contracts . .. $ 219,090 + 7 - 50 $ 2,290,856 $ 1,867,997 + 67 Bank debits (thousands) . End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . .. $ . .. $ 4,818 2,776 + 9 - 2 •• $ 36,623 2,683# $ $ 31,603 2,699# + - 16 1 Annual rate of deposit turnover. ······· ·· ·· · 20.9 11 - 6 25.9# 23.4# + 11 HOUSTON (pop. 938,219) Retail sales ..... .. ... . . ... .. .. ...... .. ... 5 + + 8 + 6 Apparel stores . . . . . . . . . .. 17 7 + 10 + 10 Automotive stores + 2 + 5 + 12 + 8 Drug stores 8 3 + 13 + 8 Eating and drinking places . .... .. ... , .. 3 4 + 6 + Food stores .. . . . . . . . . . . . 3 + 3 + 12 + 2 Furniture and household appliance stores . 1 12 + + 24 General merchandise stores . Liquor stores -10. + 2 3 + + 5 + + 9 9 Lumber, building material, and hardware stores . - 7 + 29 + 10 + 1 Postal receipts• ... ........ . . s 2, 552,079 - 7 + 13 $ 15,485,367 $ 13,868,383 + 12 Building permits, less federal contracts . ... .$ 23.615,728 - 39 - 7 $176,829,970 $146,097,600 + 21 Bank debits (thousands) . End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . .$ 4,959,211 . ... $ 1,658,822 + .. + 17 •• $ 28,103,324 $ 1.683,071# $ 24,754,428 $ 1,631,038# + + 14 s Annual rate of deposit turnover . 35.9 + 8 + 14 33.1# 30.2# + 10 Humble (pop. 1,711) Postal receipts• .... $ 4,282 -5 + 11 27,646 $ 24,092 + 15 Building permits, less federal contracts. ........$ 21,375 -94 421.290 $ 189,200 +123 Bank debits (thousands) . .. .$ 4,073 -3 + 25,218 $ 23,370 + 8 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t. . .. $ 3,539 -2 3,680# $ 3,666# .. Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . . . . . . ... 13.7 •• + 13.6# 12.8# + 6 For an explanation of symbols, please see p. 211. AUGUST 1966 Percent change Percent change City and item June 1966 June 1966 from May 1966 June 1966 from June 1965 Jan-June 1966 Jan-June 1965 Jan-June 1966 from Jan-June 1965 Katy (pop. 1,569) Building permits, less federal contracts . .$ Bank debits (thousands) . . . . ..........$ 52,000 4,259 + 62 -21 + 79 300,200 18,896 $ $ 689,966 14,928 -56 + 27 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . Annual rnte of deposit turnover. .....$ 2,650 18.7 -6 + 58 + 8 + 65 2,708# 13.8# $ 2,906# 10.2# -7 + 35 La Porte (pop. 7,250r) Building permits, less federal contracts . . .. $ Bank debits (thousands) . . ...$ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . ....$ Annual rate of deposit turnover............ . 54,000 4,370 3,358 15.5 + + 6 2 -46 + 13 + 36 -19 26,899 3,318# 16.1# $ $ 24,317 2,598# 18.3# + 11 + 28 -12 Liberty (pop. 6,127) Postal receipts• .$ 8,061 -13 + 2 $ 61,449 $ 46,766 + 10 Building permits, less federal contracts . . .$ 138,220 + 126 +107 $ 479,517 $ 421,908 + 14 Bank debits (thousands) . . . .. . $ 10,685 + 2 + 20 $ 66,427 $ 56,187 + 18 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . . .. $ 10,008 2 + 18 $ 10,437# $ 9,411# + 11 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 12.7 + 3 + 12.6# 11.8# + 7 Pasadena (pop. 58,737) Retail sales Automotive stores ••t + 18 + 2 •• Postal receipts* Building permits, less federal contracts . Bank debits (thousands) . End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . Annual rate of deposit turnover . .. $ . .. $ . .. $ ....$ 62,080 1,433,337 68,002 34,058 23.7 -9 -53 + 1 2 •• + 22 + 46 + 13 + 9 •• $ 359,735 $ 14,382,596 $ 423,785 $ 33,444# 25.4# $ $ $ $ 319,729 8,886,050 378,937 31,694# 23.8# + 13 + 62 + 12 + 6 + 7 Richmond (pop. 3,668) Postal receipts• . . . . .... . . . ....... ... . . .. . .. . $ Building permits, less federal contracts...... .. .$ Bank debits (thousands) . . .. $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . .$ Annual rate of deposit turnover . 3,445 86,395 5,324 8,378 7.8 -25 + 16 -17 + 5 -12 -9 -I + 12 + 6 + 11 $ $ $ $ 24,954 969,703. 40,762 8,926# 8.9# $ $ $ $ 25,659 618,547 34,019 8,425# 7.9# -3 + 87 + 20 + 6 + 13 Rosenberg (pop. 9,698) Postal receipts• .. $ 11,897 + 9 + 31 $ 62,637 $ 56,986" + 10 Building permits, less federal contracts. ...$ 156,027 + 18 + 3 $ l,349,725 $ 832,437 + 62 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t. '.$ 9,987 + 2 + 7 $ 10,266# $ 9,560# + 7 South Houston (pop. 7,253) Postal receipts• . . . . ...$ Building permits, less federal contracts. .$ Bank debits (thousands) . . ..........$ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . . . $ Annual rate of deposit turnover . . .. . . . . . . . . 8,812 178,100 8,943 5,841 18.2 . -12 +345 + 2 1 + 2 + 14 +136 + 13 + 4 + 8 $ $ $ $ 57,66_9­970~80 61,682 5,800# 17.9# $ $ $ $ 51,348 452,261 44,987 6,536# 16.3# + 12 +115 + 15 + + 10 Tomball (pop. 2,025r) Building permits, less federal contracts . . . $ Bank debits (thousands) . . . . ...... ...... .. ... $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t. . ... $ Annual rate of deposit turnover. 49,343 6,330 9,387 10.0 -50 -18 + 62 -37 + 67 -12 + 68 -86 $ $ $ 278,244 46,206 8,102# 12.2# $ $ $ 134,601 44,695 6,002# 14.9# +107 + 3 + 85 -18 HUMBLE: see HOUSTON SMSA HUNTSVILLE (pop. 11,999) P ostal receipts• . .... ... . . ... . . . . Building permits, less federal contracts . Bank debits (thousands) . End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . Annual rate of deposit turnover.. . . .. $ . . . $ .. $ ' .. $ 16,628 59,995 12,039 10,759 13.4 + 16 + 85 3 + 48 + 64 + 31 + + 18 $ $ $ $ 96,538 543,084 66,532 11,207# 11.9# 88,422 363,610 53,411 9,797# 11.0# + 9 + 49 + 25 + 14 + 8 Percent change Percent cha nge City and item June 1966 June 1966 from May 1966 June 1966 from June 1965 J an-June 1966 Jan-June 1965 J an-June 1966 from Jan-June 1965 IOWA PARK: see WICHITA FALLS SMSA IRVING: see DALLAS SMSA JACKSONVILLE (pop. 10,509r) Postal receipts• .. $ 20,027 -29 + 14 142,372 121,474 + 17 Building permits, less federal contracts. ....$ 38,500 -44 -93 $ 353,900 $ 1,013,350 -65 Bank debits (thousands) . ...........$ 14.584 4 + 6 $ 91,860 s 83,176 + 10 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t. ....$ 12,362 + 6 + 10 12,032# $ 10,760# + 12 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 14.6 6 -5 u;.2# 15.4# -1 JASPER (pop. 5,120r) Postal receipts• ... .... ........$ 12,285 + 28 + 39 61,559 s 52,422 + 17 Building permits, less federal contracts. ....... . $ 35,500 -75 +246 847,615 s 283,572 +199 Bank debits (thousands) . .. .. $ 11,699 + 3 + 15 68,411 65,242 + End-of-month deposits (thousands) i. .. $ 8,338 + 3 •• 8,257# s 8,344# Annual rate of deposit turnover. 17.1 + 2 + 19 16.6# 15.7# + 6 JUSTIN: see DALLAS SMSA KATY: see HOUSTON SMSA KINGSLAND (pop. 150) Postal receipts• .. ..... .... ....$ 1,821 + 47 + 17 $ 7,543 s 8,138 -7 Bank debits (thousands) . .. .. . . $ 1,929 -27 + 76 $ 14,806 $ 6,665 +122 End-of-month deposits (thousands) i. .. $ 1.067 + 11 + 45 s 1.012# s 716# + 41 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 22.8 -25 + 23 29.5# 18.6# + 59 KILGORE (pop. 10,092) Postal receipts• ............... .. $ 14,903 -4 + 7 $ 95,022 87,004 + 9 Building permits, less federal contracts . . . $ 212,987 + 63 -63 $ l,188,255 $ 1,682,528 -29 Bank debits (thousands) . .$ 13,757 + 21 $ 81,567 s 74,391 + 10 End-of-month deposits (thousands) i. . $ 13,409 + 4 + $ 13,623# s 13,083# + 4 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 12.5 6 + 19 12.0# 11.4# + Nonfarm employment (area) . 32,750 + 32,833 30,933 + Manufacturing employment (area) . 8,520 + 3 + 12 8,185 7,278 + 12 Percent unemployed (area) . . ......... . 4.0 + 33 -25 3.6 4.3 -16 KILLEEN (pop. 23,377) Postal receipts• .......... .... . ......$ 41,815 -1 + 10 $ 258,124 s 271,888 Building permits, Jess federal contracts. ....$ 154,771 50 -91 $ 3,427,407 s 5,840,034 -41 Bank debits (thousands) . .......... . ...... . $ 19,274 + l3 $ 111,808 s 127,333 -12 End-of-month deposits (thousands) i . .. . . . . . . . . $ 12,830 + I 2 $ 13,086# 14,142# 7 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 18.2 + 3 7 17.0# 17.7# -4 KINGSVILLE (pop. 25,297) Postal receipts• ..... ........ $ 21,481 + 3 + 46 125,231 $ 104,602 + 20 Building permits, less federal contracts. ....... . $ 254,360 + 53 + 57 $ 1,360,989 s l,6]0,4 16 -15 Bank debits (thousands) . ......$ 14,176 + 13 + 8 $ 83,236 $ 74,875 + 11 End-of-month deposits (thousands) i . ......$ 16,463 -6 + 8 16,967# s 15,693# + 8 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 10.0 + 14 9.8# 9.6# + 2 For an explanation of symbols, please see p, 214. AUGUST 1966 Percent change Percent change City and item June 1966 June 1966 from May 1966 June 1%6 from June 1965 .Jan-June 1966 Jan-June 1965 Jan-June 1966 from Jan-June 1965 KIRBYVILLE (pop. 2,021r) Postal receipts• . . . .. . .. . ... . . . ..... . ...... $ 4,090 6 + 6 $ 24,780 24,210 + 2 Bank debits (thousands) . . ...... ..... . .$ 3,320 + 2 + 35 $ 16,410 $ 15,883 + s End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . ....$ 4,372 + + 26 $ 4,295# $ 3,638# + 21 Annual rate of deposit turnover............ . 9.3 + 2 + 13 7.7# 8.9# -18 LA FERIA: see BROWNSVILLE-HARLINGEN-SAN BENITO SMSA LA MARQUE: see GALVESTON-TEXAS CITY SMSA LAMESA (pop. 12,438) Postal receipts• ... .$ 10,144 -37 + 2 $ 74,857 74,270 + I Building permits, less federal contracts . . .$ 109,300 + 23 + 69 $ 364,342 $ 488,671 -25 Bank debits (thousands) . .. $ 12,253 -16 - 4 109,678 $ 98,084 + 12 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . ...... $ 15,426 - 3 + 10 18,000# $ 15,840# + 14 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 9.4 9 12 11.8# 11.9# Nonfarm placements 136 + 45 + 26 536 532 + I LAMPASAS (pop. 5,670r) Postal receipts• . .................... . ... . ..... $ 6,614 + 9 + 29 $ 36,850 $ 34,767 + 6 Building permits, less federal contracts . ........$ 402,658 +466 $ 687,733 $ 346,550 + 98 Bank debits (thousands) . . . ..... . .. $ 8,227 -14 3 $ 49,148 $ 45,259 + 9 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . Annual rate of deposit turnover . ....$ 7,644 13.1 + -15 + 6 8 $ 7,188# 13.7# $ 6,645# 13.7# + •• LA PORTE: see HOUSTON SMSA LAREDO SMSA (Webb; pop. 71,7381 ) Building permits, less federal contracts . . . . . .$ Bank debits (thousands) 1 ... ... $ Nonfarm employment (area) ................. . 359,617 532,308 21,600 +162 -l •• + 60 + I + $ $ 1,465,412 3,242,868 21,567 $ $ 1,624,795 2,936,484 20,142 -10 + 10 + 7 Manufacturing employment (area) . 1,270 + l 1,280 1,345 - 5 Percent unemployed (area) . . ............ . 9.6 + 17 17 10.3 12.2 -16 LAREDO (pop. 60,678) Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ Building permits, less federal contracts . . . . .. $ Bank debits (thousands) . . ........... . ....$ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ...........$ Annual rate of deposit turnover. Nonfarm placements 47,534 359,617 43,826 28,899 17.9 514 -12 +162 8 -3 8 -14 + + 60 + + 6 + $ $ $ $ 286,526 1,465,412 277,145 29,441 # 18.8# 3,088 $ $ $ 263,296 l,624,795 252.516 27,866# 18.0# 2,963 + 9 -10 + 10 + + 4 + 4 LEVELLAND (pop. 12,117r) Postal receipts• . . ...... $ Building permits, less federal contracts. . .. .$ Bank debits (thousands) . . .. $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . ...$ Annual rate of deposit turnover . 8,214 196,797 12,855 9,795 14.9 -25 + 14 -7 II -I -20 + 82 + 4 + 3 $ $ $ 58;095 873,783 119,513 11,948# 18.5# $ $ $ 62,576 767,020 114,594 12,080# 17.5# -6 + 14 + + LIBERTY: see HOUSTON SMSA LLANO (pop. 2,656) Postal receipts• ... .$ 3,834 + 3 •• $ 21,471 $ 18,357 + 17 Building permits, less federal contracts . .... $ 4,700 6 -16 $ 242,401 $ 54,420 +345 Bank debits (thousands) .. $ 4,053 6 -16 $ 21,449 $ 21,629 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. ...... .. .$ 4,329 + 2 + 6 4,346# $ 4,167# + Annual rate of deposit turnover. 11.4 3 -20 9.8# 10.4# Percent change Percent change June 1966 June 1966 Jan-June 1966 J une from from Jan-June Jan-June from City and item 1966 May 1966 June 1~65 1966 1965 Jan-June 1965 LOCKHAl{T (po1>. 6,084) Postal receipts• .... $ 6,433 + 19 + 53 $ 32,690 $ 30,153 + 8 Buil p. 214. AUGUST 1966 Percent change Percent change City and item June 1966 June 1966 from May 1966 June 1966 from June 1965 J a n-June 1966 Jan'-June 1965 J an-June 1966 from Jan-June 1965 Donna (pop. 7,522) Postal receipts• . ........... .. . . . ...... $ 4,054 - 10 + $ 26,500 23,670 + 12 Building permits, less federal contracts . .... $ 600 - 94 -99 $ 141,955 $ 98,325 + 44 Bank debits (thousands) . ... . $ 2,582 8 - 9 $ 16,661 $ 14,731 + 13 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 3,798 + 13 $ 4,072# 3,544# + 15 End-of-month deposits (thousands) i .. . ....... .$ R.O - 21 8.2# 8.3# - 1 Edinburg (pop. 18,706) Postal receipts• .... $ 13,779 - 3 + 91,401 $ 81,442 + 12 Building permits, less federal contracts. .$ 180,100 + 71 + 57 l,033,225 $ 873,165 + 18 Bank debits (thousands) . . ...$ 18,261 + 8 + 26 $ 110,120 $ 96,924 + 14 End-of-month deposits (thousandsli . . .. . $ 10,509 3 + 13 $ 11,794 # 10,290# + lfi Annual rate of deposit turnover . 20.6 + 16 + 9 18.8# 18.9# - 1 Nonfarm placements 305 + 16 - 3 1,617 1.302 + 24 Elsa (pop. 3,847) Building permits, less federal contracts...... .. . $ 740 - 33 -80 $ 10,043 579,716 -98 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 2,426 + 8 + 2 $ 14,272 s 15,539 - 8 End-of-month deposits (thousands) i . . . $ Annual rate of deposit turnover ......... • . . . 1,483 19.7 +. 1 + 9 + 22 -15 $ 1,535# 18.5# $ l ,329# 23.1# + 16 -20 McALLEN (pop. 35,411r) Retail sales . .... ... . ... . . .......... . Automotive stores - St ••t 2. 2 + 18 + 12. + 16 + 13 Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . $ 37,246 8 + 2. 237,245 $ 220,316 + 8 Building permits, less federal contracts . . ...$ Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . . ............$ End-of-month deposits (thousands) i . . .. $ 461,450 37,836 29,480 -+ 41 •• 9 + 73 + 17 + 27 $ $ $ 3,155,930 241,617 26,973# $ $ $ 2,905,487 215,614 22,747 # + + 12 + 19 Annual rate of deposit turnover....... ..... . 16.1 6 5 18.2# 18.9# - 4 Nonfarm placements 751 + + 46 4,207 2,191 + 92 Mercedes (pop. 10,943) Postal receipts• ... Building permits, less federal . ......... . . . ... $ contracts. .$ 6,099 8,000 -- 12 86 + 12 -47 $ $ 38,180 160,410 $ $ 36,514 131,714 + 5 + 22 Bank debits (thousands) . .$ 6,812 + 5 + 3 $ 38,764 $ 37,796 + 3 End-of-month deposits (thousands) i . .$ 4,163 + 10 $ 4,309# $ 3,825# + 13 Annual rate of deposit turnover. . 19.6 + 4 18.0# 19.7# - 9 Mission (pop. 14,081) Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...$ 9,186 - 4 + 12 $ 58,881 $ 54,718 + 8 Building permits, less federal contracts. . $ 91,580 +225 -18 $ 283,823 $ 314,446 -10 Bank debits (thousands) . . ....................$ 11,312 6 - 4 $ 75,064 $ 70,281 + 7 End-of-month deposits (thousands) i . ..........$ 8,689 2 + 5 $ 9,280# $ 8,354# + 11 Annual rate c >-3 (fl c >-3 ..... ::0 z .z 1;J ~ ,(;) c ~ (fl l"J (fl -:i 00~ -:i l:l I-' ~ >-3 ::i: l"J c z ..... ;a ::0 (fl ..... ~ 0 "!1 ~ ~ (fl l:d c::: ~ trl > c::: 0 l'rj l:d c::: Ul ..... z trl Ul Ul ~ trl Ul trl > ~ (i ::i:: NEW PUBLICATION INTERNATIONAL POPULATION CENSUS IlIBLIOGRAPHY: North America. By the Population Research Center, Department of Sociology, The University of Texas. $3.00 THE LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY OF TEXAS: Economic Resources and Growth Prospects to 198~-1984. By Robert B. Wil­liamson. $3.00 BUREAU OF BUSINESS RESEARCH THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AUSTIN, TEXAS 78712 (Texas residents add 2% sales tax)