The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
a d e r a l R e s e r v e MB B a n k o f A t l a n t a - 1 : In t h i s i s s u e : The Growth of Southern Cities in the Sixties Banking Notes: Real Estate Lending District Business Conditions 9 7 4 T C t h h e G r o i t i e s i n e S w t h o f S o u t h e r n i x t i e s by Brian D. Dittenhafer M e n are social anim als, and tro m ea rlie st tim es, have jo in e d to g e th e r to fo rm sm all groups. W ith in these groups, as som e p e o p le p ro v e d the m se lve s best at h u n tin g w h ile oth ers w e re best at to o l-m a k in g o r te n d in g fires, in d iv id u a ls began to d o sp e cia lize d w o rk . This p rin c ip le , ca lle d th e d iv is io n o f la b o r, a llo w e d p e o p le to band to g e th e r in sm all societies. The d e v e lo p m e n t o f se ttle d a g ri c u ltu re led d ire c tly to sm all, p e rm a n e n t s e ttle m e n ts w h e re p e o p le c o u ld p u r chase th e fe w spe cia lize d go od s and services they c o u ld n o t p ro v id e fo r th e m selves. H o w e ve r, w ith a fe w n o ta b le e xce p tio n s such as a n c ie n t Rom e, n o t u n til the g ro w th and d e v e lo p m e n t o f m o d e rn in d u s try and im p ro v e d tra n s p o rta tio n d id these se ttle m e n ts g ro w to a s ig n ific a n t size in m o d e rn term s. The appearance o f m any large to w n s is a d e v e lo p m e n t o f m o d e rn in d u s tria l so cie ty and la rg e ly th e resu lt o f e c o n o m ic s p e c ia liz a tio n and d iv is io n o f la bo r. As u rb a n iz a tio n d e pe nd s u p o n the g ro w th o f s u rro u n d in g regions, th e ra p id g ro w th o f so u th e rn citie s is b o th a re su lt and a re fle c tio n o f s o u th e rn e c o n o m ic d e v e lo p m e n t. This a rtic le exam ines the g ro w th o f so u th e rn m e tro p o lita n areas1 d u rin g th e Sixties and suggests som e o f th e e le m e n ts c o n trib u tin g to it. E co n o m ic G ro w th D u rin g the N in e te e n th C e n tu ry, the e c o n o m ic forces at w o rk in th e Southeast w e re m o s tly a g ric u ltu ra l and c o m m e rc ia l. The citie s o f th e re g io n g re w as centers o f co m m e rc e serving a rural e c o n o m y , e x p o rtin g p rim a ry p ro d u c ts and im p o r t ing m a n u fa c tu re d ones. In d u s try is an im p o rta n t fo rc e in c ity b u ild in g p ro v id in g ' T h e u r b a n a r e a s a n a l y z e d in th is s t u d y a r e t h e S t a n d a r d M e t r o p o l i t a n S ta tis tic a l A r e a s (S M S A 's ) d e f i n e d b y t h e U . S. O f f i c e o f M a n a g e m e n t a n d B u d g e t ( O M B ) a n d l o c a t e d w i t h i n t h e b o u n d a r i e s o f t h e S ix th F ed eral R eserv e D istrict. T h e re are sp e c ific c rite ria u se d by O M B to d e fin e a n SM SA , a n d th e s e c rite ria a r e s u m m a r i z e d in a n a c c o m p a n y i n g n o t e . F H o w ev er, a n S M S A c a n g e n e r a l ly b e t h o u g h t o f as i n c l u d i n g a c e n tra l c ity a n d th e s u r r o u n d i n g s u b u rb s . T h e te rm s “ u rb a n c e n t e r s ," “ c it ie s ," a n d " m e t r o p o l it a n a r e a s " a r e u s e d i n te r c h a n g e a b l y in th is a r tic le a n d in e v e r y c a s e r e f e r to t h e S ix th D is tr ic t S M S A 's d e s i g n a t e d a s o f 1 9 6 8 a n d u s e d i n t h e 1970 Census of Population. M o n th ly R e vie w , Vol. LIX, No. 4. Free subscription and additional copies available upon request to the Research Department, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, Atlanta, Georgia 30303. A P R IL 1974, M O N T H L Y R E V IE W m a n u fa c tu rin g o p e ra tio n s and the c o n c e n tra te d de m a n d fo r la b o r w h ic h acco m pa nie s such a c tiv ity . W ith o u t th is fo rce , sou thea ste rn citie s c o u ld n o t atta in th e size and im p o rta n c e ach ie ved e a rlie r by o th e r m a jo r u rb an areas. The S outheast's rap id in d u s tria liz a tio n d u rin g the past q u a rte r c e n tu ry has spu rred th e g ro w th o f its cities. The 1960 Census o f P o p u la tio n was th e firs t to reco rd c ity d w e lle rs as m o re than h a lf o f th e re g io n 's p o p u la tio n . The p o p u la tio n o f sou thea ste rn citie s increased 22 p e rc e n t d u rin g th e 1960's, s ig n ific a n tly faster than th e 1 6 -p e rc e n t n a tio n a l rate. This nu dg ed the c itie s ' share o f this re g io n 's to ta l p o p u la tio n to 53 p e rc e n t in 1970. H o w e ve r, this is s till m uch b e lo w th e 68 p e rc e n t o f the n a tio n a l p o p u la tio n in m e tro p o lita n areas. People are d ra w n w h e re e c o n o m ic o p p o rtu n ity seems greatest. O n e w o u ld e xp e ct th a t urban areas e x p e rie n c in g th e fastest p o p u la tio n gains w o u ld also sh o w the fastest e m p lo y m e n t gains. This seems to be tru e in Sixth D is tric t citie s, w h e re th e re is a very high c o rre la tio n b e tw e e n the p o p u la tio n g ro w th rate and the e m p lo y m e n t g ro w th rate d u rin g the 1960's. G eo rg ia and F lorida, the tw o D is tric t states w ith the fastest g ro w in g citie s, also e x p e ri enced the fastest m e tro p o lita n jo b g ro w th . G e o r gia's jo b g ro w th exceeded F lorida's jo b g ro w th , b u t its p o p u la tio n and in c o m e d id n o t. Retirees m o v in g in to F lo rid a w ith th e ir no n w a g e sources o f in c o m e w e re a p p a re n tly resp on sible fo r this d iffe re n c e in g ro w th . R e g io n a lly, o n ly A la ba m a's m e tro p o lita n areas g re w m u ch less than th e n a tio n a l average d u rin g th e 1960's. Its urban p o p u la tio n g re w o n ly 6.5 p e rc e n t and urb an e m p lo y m e n t, o n ly 13 pe rce n t. D u ra b le goods m a n u fa c tu rin g is m ore im p o rta n t to A la ba m a's citie s than to o th e r D is tric t c itie s ; and this sector's sluggishness d u rin g the 1960's is re fle c te d in A la ba m a's s lo w -g ro w in g urban p o p u la tio n and m a n u fa c tu rin g jo bs. Tennessee, CHART I So u th e a ste rn th e n a t i o n ’s b u t th e m e t r o p o lit a n . gro w th . a re a s gro w fa ste r th a n . is n ot e v e n ly d is t rib u t e d . 120 P e rc e n t c h a n g e SM SA p o p u la tio n , 1960-70.H H | SM SA p e rso n a l in c o m e , 1960-70. Louisiana, and M ississipp i, w h ose citie s increased th e ir p o p u la tio n s by 13, 14, and 15 p e rcen t, re sp e ctive ly, w e re ju s t u n d e r the n a tio n a l average p o p u la tio n g ro w th rate. Job expansion in these states' urb an areas was also s lig h tly b e lo w the na tio n a l average, s h o w in g a fa irly d is tin c t p a tte rn o f p o p u la tio n response to e c o n o m ic d e ve lo p m e n ts. In term s o f in co m e , the Southeast's m e tro p o lita n areas d id m a rk e d ly b e tte r than the n a tio n 's d u rin g th e 1960's. As C h a rt I shows, F lorida's and G eorgia's citie s again led D is tric t states, w ith in c o m e g ro w th o f 135 p e rc e n t each. M ississippi and Tennessee sh o w e d gains o f 111 and 105 pe rce n t, resp ective ly, to p p in g th e U. S. c itie s ' average o f 95 p e rcen t. Louisiana and A la ba m a w e re b e lo w th a t average. These aggregate g ro w th measures te ll o n ly pa rt o f the story and give very little in fo rm a tio n a b o u t January 2, 1974 B an k A n n o u n c e m e n ts January 2, 1974 C L IN T O N N A T IO N A L BAN K EXCHANGE N A T IO N A L BAN K OF M ONTGOM ERY M o n tg o m ery , Alabama Opened for business as a member. Officers: Lewis Odom, chairman; Robert R. Pope, president and chief executive officer; W illiam R. Haley, Jr., vice president and cashier. Capital, $800,000; sur plus and other funds, $1,200,000. C lin to n , M ississippi Opened for business as a member. Officers: W. E. Hannah, chairman; Malcolm L. Roseberry, president and chief executive officer; Bobby Burgess, vice president and cashier. Capital, $400,000; surplus and other funds, $600,000. January 3, 1974 THE FIRST N A T IO N A L BA N K OF A L M A Alm a, Georgia Converted to a national bank. (C o n t'd , p. 44) FE D E R A L R ESERVE B A N K O F A T LA N T A 43 gains in economic well-being. More important than a metropolitan area's increase in total income is how much the average person's income increased. When comparing income gains between cities and regions, per capita figures correct for differ ences in population.2 During the 1960's, Sixth District cities made significant per capita income gains, exceeding those in the nation's cities. This helped bring per capita income in the Southeast closer to the national average. Urban areas in the District showed greater per capita income gains than the rest of the region, reflecting the growing strength of the cities in what some still consider the "rural" South. Why Cities Grow Cities grow because they meet the needs of -Even income expressed on a per capita basis does not clearly show the effect of a given income gain for a city, since it gives no indication of income distribution. As an extreme example, con sider two groups, each containing 100 people. In one group all of the income is received by one person and 99 receive none; in the other group each individual receives an equal share of income. From the standpoint of the greatest good for the greatest number, the group with evenly distributed income is better off than the group which has its income concentrated in one individual. Of course, the same is true of cities. people outside the urban area. They depend upon both rural and other urban areas for goods and services which cannot be made or grown within the metropolitan area itself. To pay for these goods, they must produce goods or services meeting the needs of people outside the city. Industries satisfying such needs are called export or basic industries, and these largely determine a city's growth. For example, a city could serve as a manu facturing center, producing goods for shipment outside the local area. Some are primarily centers for transportation services, facilitating the exchange of goods. Some perform specialized trade and administrative functions, serving people all over the world. Researchers have found that in general larger metropolitan areas serve the more specialized needs of smaller cities in much the same way the smaller cities serve surrounding towns. Thus, city size itself is an important factor in urban growth and structure. Table 1 shows the metropolitan areas of the Southeast ranked according to their 1970 population. To measure the changing functions of cities and importance of particular basic sectors to urban population, Table 1 relates number of workers in the most important basic sectors to total metropolitan population. The higher the ratio number, the more important is the activity and the more nonresidents are served by the city. Manu- January 15, 1974 THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF WINTER HAVEN Bank A n n o u n c e m e n ts W i n t e r H a v e n , F lo rid a Converted to a national bank. (Cont'd.) January 17, 1974 January 4, 1974 AMERICAN M ANDARIN BANK J a c k s o n v ille , F lo rid a Opened for business as a par-remitting nonmem ber. Officers: Frank W. Sherman, president; R. Bain Alexander, executive vice president and cashier. Capital, $600,000; surplus and other funds, $300,000. January 7, 1974 OGEECH EE VALLEY BANK PALMER BANK AND TRUST CO M PAN Y O F NAPLES, NATIONAL A SSO CIA TIO N N a p l e s , F lo rid a Opened for business as a member. Officers: Lucian L. Vestal, president; Fraser Schaufele, vice president; Bernard Engelhardt, assistant vice presi dent and cashier. Capital, $1,000,000; surplus and other funds, $500,000. January 18, 1974 PEOPLES BANK O F TU SC A LO O SA T u s c a lo o s a , M ille n , A l a b a m a G e o r g ia Opened for business as a par-remitting nonmem ber. Officers: Dobson Cay, president; Fred New ton, cashier. Capital, $250,000; surplus and other funds, $250,000. Opened for business as a par-remitting nonmem ber. Officers: Robert B. Lary, president; Kenneth E. Hatcher, vice president and cashier. Capital, $667,000; surplus and other funds, $334,000. ( C o n t 'd , p . 44 4 6 ) APRIL 1974, MONTHLY REVIEW T a b le A Population 1970 Over 500,000 (000’s) Average Employment OF GI R O W T H Per Capita Personal Income Employment Per Thousand Manufacturing % Change 1970 from 1960 S M S A ’s With 9opulation Atlanta Miami New Orleans Tampa-St. Petersburg Birmingham Fort Lauderdale— Hollywood Nashville Jacksonville P R O F IL E 1 1970 % Change 1970 from 1960 Wholesale % Change 1970 1970 from 1960 Services 1970 % Change 1970 from 1960 1,390 1,268 1,046 1,013 739 36.7 35.6 15.3 31.2 2.5 48.7 42.5 17.2 35.3 10.7 77.0 76.0 68.0 67.0 66.0 84.3 46.0 53.0 46.1 92.0 2.7 16.4 2.5 10.8 -1.1 38.2 24.3 26.2 17.9 23.8 14.7 16.3 5.6 11.2 18.4 29.5 44.1 27.4 23.1 18.1 27.7 14.2 18.6 26.9 29.3 620 541 529 85.6 16.6 16.3 94.6 24.4 19.9 74.0 81.0 69.0 25.5 99.9 43.7 32.8 15.8 3.5 8.7 26.4 28.5 11.5 14.3 4.0 31.4 21.8 25.1 29.7 13.5 14.6 — 27.5 34.7 73.5 61.4 3.5 25.5 10.9 29.0 23.4 428 400 377 349 305 285 259 253 243 239 228 206 201 34.6 8.7 3.9 53.1 7.8 23.9 17.2 16.6 19.7 9.6 48.1 14.4 3.9 41.9 17.0 3.5 49.8 17.4 30.6 19.3 21.8 22.2 17.8 64.9 14.2 7.9 55.0 70.0 71.0 73.0 83.0 53.0 69.0 109.0 73.0 104.0 70.0 90.0 77.0 50.7 97.2 53.9 44.2 169.2 56.5 53.3 115.6 54.3 75.9 77.6 70.3 44.7 49.6 15.0 3.1 196.6 -14.7 46.2 6.4 6.5 -11.7 -3 .2 75.6 16.4 22.1 22.4 20.2 17.5 11.8 21.3 19.3 25.1 12.2 9.9 10.5 9.6 16.5 25.3 -9 .7 21.7 25.0 3.5 37.4 38.8 26.1 25.8 6.4 26.5 113.3 48.6 53.3 22.4 17.2 16.7 28.4 23.9 19.3 25.1 17.4 13.6 16.3 35.1 17.4 17.9 42.7 9.5 19.3 19.8 29.9 35.0 26.1 45.0 15.2 22.6 237.5 8.1 11.9 — 18.5 23.9 75.0 74.1 10.6 17.4 20.8 20.9 34.0 188 145 135 116 112 103 94 87 0.0 0.0 13.4 6.4 31.8 39.2 -3 .1 14.5 4.5 11.8 11.1 11.4 32.8 52.0 1.3 30.1 80.0 52.0 102.0 60.0 64.0 76.0 67.0 73.0 82.5 56.4 23.8 78.4 18.2 15.5 131.6 63.6 6.4 3.9 9.2 8.1 -9 .4 -36.2 9.1 45.9 22.9 13.1 8.9 8.6 21.0 14.5 8.5 19.0 23.1 12.0 32.8 3.6 18.6 34.3 37.1 19.5 17.0 11.7 26.7 12.9 17.3 16.5 9.6 16.7 -1 1.0 0.0 39.1 0.1 -2 2.8 1.8 17.1 5.0 — 9.7 25.7 71.5 58.9 2.1 15.0 21.9 16.3 6.5 — 22.0 30.9 74.3 65.0 6.0 22.3 15.0 25.5 25.6 16.4 N.A. 66.0 102.9 -0.1 21.7 11.9 23.2 19.6 Between 500,000 and 200,000 Orlando Knoxville Mobile West Palm Beach Chattanooga Baton Rouge Jackson, Miss. Augusta Pensacola Columbus, Ga. Huntsville Macon Montgomery Average Less than 200,000 Savannah Lake Charles Biloxi-Gulfport Tuscaloosa Lafayette Tallahassee Gadsden Albany Average AVERAGE ALL 6TH D IST R IC T S M S A ’s AVERAGE ALL U.S. S M S A ’s Calculations based on data supplied by: U. S. Bureau of Census, Special Economic Reports, Employment and Population Changes — Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas and Central Cities, Series ES20(72)— 1, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1972. U. S. Census of Population, 1960 and 1970. U. S. Department of Commerce, Survey of Current Business, Volume 51, Number 5, May 1971, Table 1. L FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF ATLANTA 45 facturing, wholesale trade, and service1* employment per thousand is shown in the table, along with the change in these ratios between 1960 and 1970. The wholesale trade ratios illustrate the relation ship of smaller to larger cities as trading centers. The smallest cities had only 15 persons per thousand engaged in wholesale trade. Midsized cities had 17.4 persons per thousand, and the largest, 25.5. The ratio is greater for larger cities, such as Atlanta, because in addition to serving a local area, these perform specialized trading functions for many smaller ones. The same relationship holds for per capita service employment, which increases from 16.3 per thousand in the smallest cities to 29 in the largest. Both wholesale trade and services are population-oriented; that is, they serve people and have very limited ties to raw materials. These firms tend to locate as closely as possible to those they serve; therefore, industry structure tends to follow population structure. This relationship does not hold for manufacturing, which is more concerned with raw materials and is less populationoriented. Table 1 also reveals the relationship between a city's size and its rate of growth. Although per capita income growth rates are not significantly different, growth rates in population and employ ment do vary, with the fastest growth in the larger metropolitan areas. Variation in growth rates is wider for the smaller cities than for the larger ones, helping to explain the latter's economic advantages. Every metropolitan area in the two largest size groups experienced population and employment increases during the 1960's. By contrast, of the eight smallest cities, two had no population growth and one, an absolute decline. The size and diver sification of the large urban areas provide a better chance of some growing sectors offsetting declining ones. Thus, larger cities have some protection against population and employment declines and may, in fact, be nearly assured of continuous growth.4 A good example of the advantages of size and diversification is Birmingham, Alabama, the slowestgrowing large urban area in the District during the 1960's. Manufacturing— extremely important to the city's economy— stagnated, shown by the 1-percent decline in per capita manufacturing jobs. At the same time, however, per capita employment in B an k A n n o u n c e m e n ts ( C o n t 'd .) January 22, 1974 MARINE BANK O F KISSIMMEE K i s s i m m e e , F lo rid a Opened for business as a member. Officers: William L. Hackett, president; Carolyn H. Lane, vice president and cashier; Jack R. Hunt, III, as sistant vice president. Capital, $500,000; surplus and other funds, $400,000. January 22, 1974 PALMER BANK O F GULF GATE S a r a s o ta , F lo rid a Opened for business as a member. Officers: William C. Coleman, chairman; B. Tucker White, president; C. Reed Rollins, executive vice presi dent; S. Kere Lewis, assistant vice president and cashier. Capital, $500,000; surplus and other funds, $300,000. January 24, 1974 THE NATIONAL BANK O F CAPE C O R A L Cape C o r a l, F lo rid a Opened for business as a member. Officers: D. L. Miller, chairman; Roger B. Taylor, president; R. Hurdis Thomson, II, vice president and cashier; Gary L. Duke, vice president. Capital, $1,009,000; surplus and other funds, $1,009,000. January 24, 1974 FIRST CITIZENS BANK AND TRUST COM PAN Y O F POPLARVILLE Poplarville, Mississippi Opened for business as a member. Officers: Herbert Thigpen, chief executive officer; Ms. Patsy Davis, assistant cashier. Capital, $300,000; surplus and other funds, $450,000. January 24, 1974 PANAMA CITY NATIONAL BANK P a n a m a C ity , F lo rid a Opened for business as a member. Officers: John L. C. Laslie, president; Jim Smallwood, ex ecutive vice president and cashier. Capital, $300,000; surplus and other funds, $450,000. January 28, 1974 PROGRESSIVE BANK AND TRUST COM PAN Y H o u m a , Services are defined to include activities which supply largely nonlocal needs, primarily recreational, personal, and miscellaneous business services. ‘For a good summary of this point, see Wilbur R. Thompson, A Preface to Urban Economics, John Hopkins Press, Baltimore, 1965, p. 19 ff. 46 L o u is ia n a Opened for business as a par-remitting nonmernber. Officers: Huey P. Morris, president; Robert Allen Hale, assistant vice president; Charles ). Taylor, cashier. Capital, $500,000; surplus and other funds $500,000. ( C o n t 'd , p . 5 0 ) APRIL 1974, MONTHLY REVIEW wholesale trade and services increased rapidly, compensating for the manufacturing decline. Thus, diversification allowed Birmingham to grow despite a decline in its most important sector. All cities perform some trade and service func tions for surrounding areas. Using employment per thousand, we find that southeastern cities support more important wholesales trade sectors than those in the average U. S. urban area. This sector's rate of growth has been faster than in the U. S., indicat ing the rising importance of some major south eastern cities as regional distribution centers. Atlanta's reputation as such a center is established, but less well known is the importance of wholesale trade and distribution to other major cities such as Jacksonville, Nashville, Miami, and Birmingham. These metropolitan areas combine a thriving whole sale trade sector with a generally higher-thannational growth rate. Centers such as Atlanta and Jacksonville, with the highest wholesale trade employment ratios, compare favorably in this respect with national distribution centers like New York and Chicago. This indicates that these regional centers perform specialized wholesale trade func tions for a large, widespread population. Services are extremely important to several south eastern cities, particularly some in Florida. But despite the region's attraction for tourists, the District's metropolitan population is only slightly more dependent on service jobs than their national counterparts. As with wholesale trade, urbaniza tion led to faster-growing specialized business services than in the nation's cities. Among the ten largest cities in the District, Orlando and Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood ranked one and two in growth of services. However, two areas not normally associated with tourism, Birmingham and Atlanta, ranked third and fourth, respectively. Atlanta has long been recognized as a regional business center, but the trend in specialized services again seems to indicate the emergence of new centers. As the South has become more urbanized, its demand for more specialized services has increased. Such demand can support more specialized local services previously supplied from outside the region. Generally speaking, Sixth District metropolitan areas do not rely heavily on manufacturing jobs, although these have been expanding significantly faster than in the nation. Of the ten largest cities, only Nashville, Knoxville, and Birmingham had manufacturing sectors matching the U. S. urban CHART II S o u th e aste rn m etropolitan area s show th an national growth in b asic secto rs. M a n u fa c tu r in g W h o le sa le T ra d e fa ster S e r v ic e s N o te: A ll fig u re s re p r e s e n t c h a n g e s in S M S A p e r c a p ita e m p lo y m e n t fro m 1 96 0 - 7 0. average. Perhaps because it a small base, manufacturing the urban South during the stark contrast to a fractional decline in cities nationwide. was starting from such grew by 6 percent in sixties. This stands in manufacturing Future G r o w t h Southeastern cities' growth in the Sixties is a reflection of the region's overall economic develop ment. Growing demands for trade and specialized services, which spurred expansion during the past decade, are still present, creating new jobs and allowing continued growth during the Seventies. In fact/some metropolitan areas such as Jackson ville have developed faster during the early Seventies than the Sixties, proving the continued vigor of the Southeast's urban areas. As we have pointed out, people move to cities where economic opportunity seems greatest, so job and population gains will continue to be closely related. Southern cities expanded during the Sixties because they provided the service and trade functions demanded by the region and nation. They will continue to grow and prosper so long as they meet the changing needs of the regional and national economies. ■ The U. S. Office of Management and Budget, a part of the Executive Office of the President, has defined 268 standard metropolitan statistical areas in the United States and Puerto Rico. As of February 1974, 39 of these were located in the states contained within the Sixth District. Since January 1968, there have been 30 changes in the definitions of SMSA's in these states, reflecting the overall economic growth of southeastern cities highlighted by the accompanying article. These changes are listed in the following table. FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF ATLANTA CHANGING SMSA’S rhe concept of the standard metropolitan statistical area was developed to provide all Federal statistical agencies with the. same definitions for use in the study of metropolitan characteristics. Prior to 1949, four different sets of definitions were in use forvarious Federal statistical series, and it was impossible to relate statistics in different fields of analysis because each series covered a slightly different geographic area. The standard definitions, first issued in 1949 as "stan dard metropolitan areas," made possible generation of comparable statistics by state and local governments and private statistical agencies in addition to Federal agencies. In 1959, the term was changed to "Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas" (SMSA's) to describe more accurately the objective for area definitions. The areas are defined and their titles established by the Office of Management and Budget with the advice of the Federal Committee on Standard Metro politan Statistical Areas, which is composed of representatives of the major statistical agencies of the Federal Govern ment. The Office of Management and Budget revised its criteria for defining an SMSA in November 1971. Some of the changes listed in the table are the result of these new criteria. Basically, the criteria state that each SMSA must include a central city which has a population of 50,000 or greater or a city with a population of at least 25,000 which, together with the population of contiguous places that have a density of at least 1,000 persons per square mile, constitute a single community with a combined population of at least 50,000. A contiguous county will be included in an SMSA if at least 45 percent of resident workers are in the nonagricultural labor force and at least 30 percent of the employed resident workers have jobs in the central county. The definition of each SMSA in the states of the Sixth Federal Reserve District as of February 1974 and the boundary changes made since 1968 in each area are given in the accompanying table. SMSA CHANGES, JANUARY 1968 TO FEBRUARY 1974 ALABAMA Anniston (New area, Nov. 1973) Birmingham Florence (New area, Nov. 1971) Gadsden Huntsville Limestone and Madison Counties—Marshall County (added June 1973) Mobile Baldwin and Mobile Counties Montgomery Elmore and Montgomery Counties—Autauga County (added June 1973) Calhoun County Jefferson, Shelby, and Walker Counties—St. Clair County (added June 1973) Lauderdale and Colbert Counties Etowah County Macon Tuscaloosa Tuscaloosa County Bartow-Lakeland-Winter Haven (New area, Nov. 1971) Polk County Daytona Beach (New area, Nov. 1971) Volusia County Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood Broward County Fort Myers (New area, Nov. 1971) Lee County Gainesville (New area, Feb. 1971) Alachua County Jacksonville Duval County—Baker, Clay, Nassau, and St. Johns Counties (added June 1973) Brevard County Melbourne-TitusvilleCocoa (New area, Nov. 1971) Miami Orlando Orange and Seminole Counties—Osceola County (added June 1973) Pensacola Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties Sarasota (New area, Nov. 1971) Sarasota County Tallahassee Leon County—Wakulla County (added June 1973) Tampa-St. Petersburg Hillsborough and Pinellas Counties— Pasco County (added June 1973) West Palm Beach-Boca Raton Palm Beach County Alexandria (New area, Nov. 1971) Baton Rouge Lafayette Dougherty County— Lee County (added June 1973) Atlanta Clayton, Cobb, DeKalb, Fulton, and Gwinnett Counties— Butts, Cherokee, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Henry, Newton, Paulding, Rockdale, and Walton Counties (added June 1973) Biloxi-Gulfport Augusta, Georgia - South Carolina Richmond County, Georgia, and Aiken County, South 48 Chattahoochee County, Georgia, and Russell County, Alabama (Muscogee County, Georgia, deleted Feb. 1974); consolidated government of Columbus, Georgia (added February 1974) APRIL 1974, MONTHLY REVIEW Rapides Parish—Grant Parish (added June 1973) East Baton Rouge Parish— Ascension, Livingston, and West Baton Rouge Parishes (added June 1973) Lake Charles Calcasieu Parish New Orleans Jefferson, Orleans, St. Bernard, and St. Tammany Parishes Monroe* Ouachita Parish Shreveport* Bossier and Caddo Parishes —Webster Parish (added June 1973) Lafayette Parish Harrison County—Hancock and Stone Counties (added June 1973) Jackson Hinds and Rankin Counties TENNESSEE Chattanooga, Tennessee Georgia Carolina—Columbia County, Georgia (added June 1973) Columbus, Georgia Alabama Chatham County—Bryan and Effingham Counties (added June 1973) MISSISSIPPI GEORGIA Albany Savannah LOUISIANA FLORIDA Dade County Bibb and Houston Counties—Jones and Twiggs Counties (added June 1973) Knoxville Hamilton County, Tenn., and Walker County, Ga.— Marion and Sequatchie Counties, Tennessee, and Catoosa and Dade Counties, Georgia (added June 1973) Anderson, Blount, and Knox Counties—Union County (added June 1973) Kingsport-Bristol, Tennessee - Virginia (New area, June 1973) Sullivan and Hawkins Counties, Tennessee, and Scott and Washington Counties and Bristol City, Virginia Nashville-Davidson Davidson, Sumner, and Wilson Counties—Cheat ham, Dickson, Robertson, Rutherford, and Williamson Counties (added June 1973) Memphis, Tennessee Arkansas* Shelby County, Tennessee, and Crittenden County, Arkansas "Not in Sixth District FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF ATLANTA 49 February 22, 1974 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF THOMASVILLE— THOMAS COUNTY Thom asville, Georgia Bank A nnouncem ents Opened for business as a member. Officers: King S. Cone, chairman; Harry N. Park, president; Juanita Carney, cashier and secretary; L. Ken Beck, commercial and security officer. Capital, $650,000; surplus and other funds, $650,000. (Cont'd.) February 26, 1974 COUNTRYSIDE COMMUNITY BANK February 1, 1974 ISLAMORADA BANK Islamorada, Florida Opened for business as a par-remitting nonmember. Officers: William Kenneth Meeks, senior president; Mrs. Lourdes Otis, vice president and cashier. Capital, $300,000; surplus and other funds, $450,000. D u nedin , Florida Opened for business as a par-remitting nonmember. Officers: Richard C. Johnson, chairman and president; Charles H. Block, vice chairman; Howard A. Mayo, executive vice president; George S. Posch, cashier. Capital, $500,000; surplus and other funds, $500,000. M arch 1, 1974 February 7, 1974 FIRST STATE BANK Maynardville, Tennessee Opened for business as a par-remitting nonmember. Officers: Ralph H. Monroe, president; Edward L. Sharp, cashier. Capital, $320,000; surplus and other funds, $280,000. EASTERN SHORE NATIONAL BANK D aphne, Alabama Opened for business as a member. Officers: William E. Bush, president and chief executive officer; C. R. Weinacker, vice president and cashier; Mrs. Helen B. Baroco, administrative assistant. Capital, $400,000; surplus and other funds; $600,000. M arch 1, 1974 February 12,1974 PALMER BANK OF BRADENTON, N. A. Bradenton, Florida Opened for business as a member. Officers: Lu Vestal, chairman and president; Warren G. Simonds, executive vice president; Jerry D. Victor, vice president. Capital, $500,000; surplus and other funds, $500,000. THE EXCHANGE NATIONAL BANK OF LARGO Largo, Florida Opened for business as a member. Officers: H. E. Long, chairman and president; J. M. Wisner, vice president; Judith K. Sovich, cashier. Capital, $500,000; surplus and other funds, $500,000. M arch 1, 1974 MARINE STATE BANK February 13,1974 Tallahassee, Florida MERRITT SQUARE BANK Opened for business as a par-remitting nonmember. Officers: George S. Taff, president; Harold D. Stone, executive vice president; Randall E. Lanier, assistant vice president and cashier. Capital, $300,000; surplus and other funds, $450,000. Merritt Island, Florida Opened for business as a par-remitting nonmember. February 18,1974 M arch 5, 1974 FIDELITY NATIONAL BANK THE AMERICAS BANK Decatur, Georgia M iam i, Florida Opened for business as a member. Officers: Clarke E. Harrison, chairman; W. Warren Woolsey, president; Alfred E. Sheppard, vice president; Carl A. Carlson, Jr., cashier. Capital, $1,250,000; surplus and other funds, $1,250*000. Opened for business as a par-remitting nonmember. Officers: D. Robert Lewis, president; Jose E. Alonso, senior vice president and controller; Onelio Cejas, cashier. Capital, $600,000; surplus and other funds, $600,000. M arch 7, 1974 February 20, 1974 COMMERCE UNION BANK AMERICAN GUARANTY OF TALLAHASSEE Chattanooga, Tennessee Tallahassee, Florida Opened for business as a member. Officers: Von D. Oehmig, chairman; Dan W. Hopkins, president and chief executive officer; Robert E. Garrett, vice president; Gary G. Meyer, vice president; L. Steve Weddle, assistant vice president. Capital, $2,000,000; surplus and other funds, $3,000,000. Opened for business as a par-remitting nonmember. Officers: A. Bruce Gillander, president; B. E. McDaniel, executive vice president; F. C. Nixon, vice president and cashier. Capital, $750,000; surplus and other funds, $500,250. 50 for FRASER Digitized AMtlL 1974, MONTHLY REVIEW March 18, 1974 LIBERTY BANK O F BRENTW OOD B re n tw o o d , T e n n e sse e B an k A n n o u n ce m e n ts Opened as a par-remitting nonmember. Officers: Richard E. Rudesi 11, chairman and president; Fred Elledge, Jr., vice chairman; W illiam B. Bradley, secretary of the board; Thomas B. Smith, executive vice president; Miss Mary Sneed Jones, vice president; David M. Resha, cashier. Capital, $400,000; surplus and other funds, $600,000. (C on t'd .) March 20, 1974 March 11,1974 CITIZENS NATIONAL BANK OF LIMESTONE CO U N TY A th e n s, Alabama Opened for business as a member. Officers: W. R. House, chairman; Steve Meagher, president; Jerry West, cashier. Capital, $240,000; surplus and other funds, $360,000. SOUTHERN NATIONAL BANK OF BROW ARD CO U N TY P om pan o Beach, Florida Opened for business as a member. Officers: Harry C. Fischer, chairman; Benjamin G. Johnson, president; W. A. Fisher, vice president; Mrs. Jean P. Sempey, cashier. Capital, $1,000,000; surplus and other funds, $500,000. March 21, 1974 PALMER BANK O F FORT MYERS, N. A. Fort M y e rs, Florida March 12, 1974 Opened for business as a par-remitting nonmember. Opened for business as a member. Officers: Lucian L. Vestal, chairman; Patrick T. Hickey, president; Jeneve L. Adams, assistant vice president and cashier; H. Kent Little, assistant vice president. Capital, $1,000,000; surplus and other funds, $500,000. March 14,1974 CO M BA N K/LO N G W O O D COBB BANK AND TRUST COM PANY Sm yrna, Georgia March 26,1974 FIRST NATIONAL BANK O F SUNRISE S u n rise, Florida Opened for business as a member. Officers: George W. English, chairman; John R. Morris, president; William M. Adams, cashier; Mrs. Geri Rehard, assistant cashier. Capital, $500,000; surplus and other funds, $500,000. FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF ATLANTA L o n g w o o d , Florida Opened for business as a par-remitting nonmember. Officers: E. G. Banks, chairman; J. P. Toole, president; Robert W. Farrell, vice president and cashier; M. Douglas Isbell, assistant vice president; Kenneth W. Powers, assistant cashier. Capital, $500,000; surplus and other funds, $425,000. 51 BANKING STA T IST IC S Billion $ DEPOSITS** CREDIT* - - 40 40 Total Loans & Investments 36 -- 36 - 24 -■ 14 V - 8 - 4 /V _ U.S. Gov’t. Securities 20 -■ 1 0 Time - 10 - 6 Savings I I I I I II I I II J J I I I I I I I I I I DJ J 1973 I I I II I I I DJ J 1974 I I I I I I I I I II J J I I I I I I I I I I II DJ 1973 1975 J I II I II DJ 1974 J 1975 ‘ Fig ures are fo r the last W ed n esd a y o f each m onth LATEST MONTH PLOTTED: FEBRUARY ‘ D a ily average fig u res S I XTH D I S T R I C T B A N K I N G N D T E 5 Real Estate Lending Active M EM BER BANK REA L EST A T E LOANS December 1973 Amount (millions $) . . 5,536.4 + 24.7 ALABAMA .................... Anniston-Gadsden . . B i r m i n g h a m ............. Dothan .................... Mobile .................... M o n t g o m e r y ............. . . . . . . . . . . . . 613.4 55.3 220.9 44.6 115.0 128.0 + 8.1 + 31.9 .6 + 14.4 + 36.8 - 12.3 J a c k s o n v ille ............. Miami .................... O r la n d o .................... Pensacola ................. Tampa-St. Petersburg . . . . . . . . . . . 198.8 1,117.7 245.6 55.2 663.7 + + + + + 21.5 34.9 26.6 29.7 22.1 M I S S I S S I P P I * ............. . . Jackson .................... . . Hattiesburg-Laurel-Meridian1 Natchez .................... 293.9 212.2 39.6 20.9 + + + + 24.3 25.5 13.0 26.0 D IST R IC T .................... % Change Year Ago ’Changes partly reflect structural changes. Note: Call Report data are for trade and banking areas which aries of some areas do not coincide with state lines. ‘ Represents that portion of the state in the Sixth District. 52 Amount (m illions $) G E O R G I A ........................ A t l a n t a ................. A u g u s t a ........................ Colum bus1 ................. Macon . . ................. Savannah .................... South G e o r g i a ............. . % Change Year Ago 1,096.6 569.9 51.1 56.9 32.2 386.3 26.1 + + + + + + + 26.3 27.0 37.2 32.9 29.5 23.7 23.2 L O U I S I A N A * .................... Alexandria-Lake Charles . Baton Rouge ................. Lafayette-Iberia-Houma New O r le a n s ................. 673.0 49.6 122.8 56.3 451.1 + + + + + 20.5 26.5 21.3 28.2 19.3 TEN N ESSEE* ................. C h a t t a n o o g a ................. K n o x v i l l e .................... N a s h v i l l e .................... Tri-Cities1 .................... 578.5 169.5 117.0 299.6 30.4 + 33.0 + 58.3 + 37.1 + 28.4 16.4 include several counties surrounding central cities. Bound- APRIL 1974, MONTHLY REVIEW Real estate loans at District member banks registered strong increases during the past year, as did all types of bank lending. Real estate loans, though, shot up 25 percent during 1973, an even sharper increase than the vigorous 18-percent growth in business loans, the type of lending traditionally most closely associated with commercial banks. Real estate loans are those secured by mortgages on real property, and they are classified according to type of collateral property. About 45 percent of District member bank real estate loans are secured by one-to-four family residential properties, and another 45 percent by nonfarm, non-residential properties. Mortgages on multifamily and farm properties account for only small proportions of total real estate loans. A close look at the December 31, 1973, Call Re port reveals that for the District as a whole, the increase in real estate loans was broadly based among all types of properties. Although there had been significant growth in banks' real estate loan portfolios, the composition at the close of 1973 differed little from the previous year's mix. Mort gages on nonfarm, nonresidential and one-to-four family residential properties still predominated. Last year's growth in real estate lending, moreover, was not surprising, as construction contracts in the District during 1973 surpassed even the previous year's high volume by 15 percent. Commercial banks are looked to as a principal source of construction funds. Previous surveys have indicated that about 19 percent of this District's member bank real estate loans are used for con struction purposes. The rest of their real estate funds provide permanent financing for homes and buildings; or they may support other business or personal uses. Also, banks often advance contrac tors funds which are not secured directly by mort gages on projects under construction. These con struction loans are classified as business loans. Real estate loan figures thus do not include this type of bank construction lending. The accompanying table shows that sixteen trade and banking areas had real estate loan growth in 1973 in excess of the District average. AnnistonGadsden, Mobile, Miami, Augusta, Columbus, Chat tanooga, and Knoxville all posted gains in excess of 30 percent. Propelling these areas above the District average were nonfarm, nonresidential property loans with a 25-percent increase and one-to-four family dwelling loans which provided a spectacular 45percent increase. Individual trade and banking areas reported increases as high as 129 percent in the one-to-four family residential category. Thus, contrasting with the broad District picture, real estate loans in the portfolios of above-average growth areas showed widely divergent rates of in crease. Real estate loans secured by farm properties FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF ATLANTA Type of Real Estate Loans Farm Multi-Family 1 - 4 Families Nonfarm □ Non-Residential 1972 1973 N o te : D a ta s h o w n a r e fo r D is t r ic t m e m b e r b a n k s a n d a r e b a s e d o n D e c e m b e r 31 C a ll R e p o rt d a ta . Selected Loan Growth at 32 Large Banks C u m u la t iv e C h a n g e fro m D e c e m b e r 1971 -1 2 0 0 Business Loans i i i i i i i i i t i I i i 1972 1973 1974 and multifamily residential structures, however, re mained generally sluggish, with respective annual growth rates of 12 and 16 percent. The exceptional increase in one-to-four family residential loans in the sixteen trade and banking areas with above-average growth totaled $477 mil lion. This amount represents about 43 percent of the entire District's increase in real estate loans dur ing 1973, a very active period for bank real estate lending. Charles D. Salley 53 Sixth District Statistics Seasonally Adjusted ( A ll d a t a a r e In d e x e s , u n l e s s i n d i c a t e d o t h e r w is e . ) L a t e s t M onth O ne M onth Ago Tw o M o nth s Ago S IX T H D IS T R IC T O ne Year Ago L a t e s t M o nth O ne M o nth Ago Tw o M o nth s Ago O ne Year Ago U n e m p lo y m e n t R a te (P e rc e n t o f W o rk F o rc e ) . . . Avg. W e e k ly H rs. in M fg. (H r s .) . IN C O M E A N D S P E N D IN G ......................... Ja n . - ......................... J a n . ......................... Ja n . . . . . Ja n . (M il. $) In s t a lm e n t C re d it a t B a n k s N ew L o a n s ................................ ......................... F e b . R e p a y m e n ts ............................... ......................... Feb . M a n u fa c tu rin g P a y ro lls F a rm C a sh R e c e ip ts . . */1 173 228 252 218 689 667 172 190 217 190 7 22 r 6 75 r 170 185 216 185 664 612 152 168 189 166 716 587 . . Fe b . M em b er B a n k L o a n s ................................ M e m b e r B a n k D e p o s i t s ......................... B a n k D e b i t s * * ................................................... Feb. Feb. Feb . N A. 4 1 .4 N.A. 4 1.5 N .A. 4 1.0 245 242 195 231 235 194 230 N .A. 4 1.5 F IN A N C E A N D B A N K IN G 201 238 200 180 194 F l o r id a IN C O M E E M P L O Y M E N T A N D P R O D U C T IO N N o n fa rm E m p l o y m e n t ...................................... M a n u fa c tu rin g .................................................. N o n d u ra b le G o o d s ...................................... F o o d ..................................................................... T e x t i l e s ......................................................... A p p a re l ......................................................... Paper ............................................................... P r in tin g and P u b lis h in g . . . C h e m i c a l s .................................................. D u ra b le G o o d s ............................................ L b r ., Wood P ro d s ., F u rn . & F ix . . S to n e , C la y , an d G la s s . . . . P r im a ry M e t a l s ...................................... F a b ric a te d M e t a l s ................................ M a c h i n e r y .................................................. T ra n sp o rta tio n E q u ip m e n t . . N o n m a n u fa c t u r in g ............................................ C o n s t r u c t i o n ............................................ T ra n sp o rta tio n ...................................... T r a d e ............................................................... F in ., in s ., an d re al e s t ........................ S e r v i c e s ......................................................... F e d e ra l G o v e r n m e n t ......................... S ta te an d L o c a l G o v e rn m e n t F a rm E m p lo y m e n t .................................................. U n e m p lo y m e n t R a te (P e rc e n t o f W o rk F o r c e ) ......................... In su re d U n e m p lo ym e n t (P e rc e n t of C o v. E m p . ) ................................ A vg . W e e k ly H rs. in M fg. (H rs .) . . . C o n s tru c tio n C o n t r a c t s * ................................ R e s i d e n t i a l ............................................................... All o t h e r ..................................................................... C otton C o n s u m p t io n * * ...................................... P e tro le u m P r o d u c t i o n * * ................................ M a n u fa c tu rin g P r o d u c t i o n ......................... N o n d u ra b le G o o d s ............................................ Food ............................................................... T e x t i l e s ......................................................... A p p a re l ......................................................... P a p e r ............................................................... P r in t in g an d P u b lis h in g . . . C h e m i c a l s .................................................. D u ra b le G o o d s ................................................... L u m b e r a n d W o o d ................................ F u rn itu r e a n d F ix t u r e s . . . . S to n e , C la y , a n d G la s s . . . . P r im a ry M e t a l s ...................................... F a b ric a te d M e t a l s ................................ N o n e le c tric a l M a c h in e ry . . . E le c t r ic a l M a c h in e ry . . . . T ra n sp o rta tio n E q u ip m e n t . . Feb. Feb . Feb . Feb . Feb . Fe b . Fe b . Feb . Feb . Feb . Feb . Fe b . Fe b . Fe b . Feb . Feb . Feb . Fe b . Feb . Feb . Feb . Feb . Feb . Feb. Feb. Feb . Ja n . Feb. Feb . Fe b . Mar. Nov. Nov. Nov. Nov. Nov. Nov. Nov. Nov. Nov. Nov. Nov. Nov. Nov. Nov. Nov. N o /. Nov. 132 .8 119.1 116.1 106.7 112.7 115.2 112.7 129.4 107.7 132.8 119.7 116.6 106.8 113.6 116.7 112.9 130.0 108.5 123.5 113.6 133.7 113.5 133.5 159.0 132.0 1 19 .9 116.6 104.9 113.9 117.3 112.8 88.1 137.2 156.1 126.3 134.0 146.9 147.7 103.5 134.0 9 0.7 130.4 109.1 124.1 112.5 132.0 114.0 133.5 160.2 114.5 136.3 153.6 126.2 136.0 147.3 148.6 102.5 133.5 8 7.9 N.A. N.A. N.A. 122.8 112.4 132.9 114.9 134.0 157.2 110.7 137.6 156.2 127.3 137.8 147.7 148.0 103 .8 134.6 2.1 41.1 224 261 187 103 306.1 2 46 .5 190.6 3 0 0 .6 2 9 0 .5 2 27 .5 156.3 3 2 3 .8 3 77 .4 111.0 1.9 4 0.9 208 210 205 100 1.8 127.7 116.8 114.4 104.0 112.5 114.9 112.4 125.7 105.4 119.8 111.6 126.3 111.9 126.3 146.1 114.1 131.6 143.4 122.2 133.6 140.1 140.9 101.2 129.3 9 2.3 N.A. 1.8 4 1.6 255 258 252 3 9.6 250 294 207 108 3 04 .2 2 4 4 .4 188 .6 2 9 7 .8 2 9 0 .0 2 24 .9 156 .4 3 1 5 .4 375.1 116 2 81 .7 2 35 .4 184 .2 2 7 7 .8 275.1 188.3 2 0 9 .9 2 73 .3 3 01 .7 4 84 .4 9 2 8 .8 4 48 .2 3 07 .4 2 44 .9 188.7 2 9 8 .0 2 8 9 .4 2 24 .8 155.4 3 19 .6 382.1 2 01 .9 190.7 2 11 .5 2 7 1 .4 2 98 .2 502 .2 9 1 7 .9 4 7 1 .8 2 69 2 5 3 .8 266 2 5 4 .0 257 2 4 2 .8 217 2 03 .0 209 179.5 270 206 178.7 263r 200 176.7 250 187 162.9 214 173 225 160 195 202.6 201.8 191.4 2 06 .9 257 .8 2 9 3 .4 498 .5 920 .0 4 56 .7 222.1 159.3 304 .3 3 37 .2 197.8 188 .4 190.3 2 18 .5 2 82 .3 4 3 3 .0 7 63 .8 4 3 4 .8 F IN A N C E A N D B A N K IN G L o a n s* A ll M e m b er B a n k s ...................................................F e b . L a rg e B a n k s ................................................................Fe b . D e p o sits* A ll M e m b er B a n k s ............................................Fe b . L a rg e B a n k s .........................................................F e b . B a n k D e b its * / * * ..........................................................Fe b . A LA B A M A 176 284 175 197 EM P LO YM EN T N o n fa rm E m p l o y m e n t ......................................Fe b . M a n u f a c t u r i n g .................................................. Fe b . N o n m a n u fa c tu rin g ......................................Fe b . C o n s t r u c t i o n .................................................. Fe b . F a rm E m p lo y m e n t .................................................. Fe n 54 179 163 180 160 179 182 158 135 151.2 129.7 155 .4 214 .0 9 4.8 144.3 123.2 1 48 .4 195 .4 9 3.3 EM P LO YM EN T N o n fa rm E m p l o y m e n t ......................................Fe b . M a n u fa c tu rin g ...................................................F e b . N o n m a n u f a c t u r in g ............................................ Fe b . C o n s t r u c t i o n .................................................. Fe b . F a rm E m p lo y m e n t .................................................. ......F e b . U n e m p lo y m e n t R a te (P e rc e n t of W ork F o r c e ) ......................... A vg. W e e k ly H rs. in Mfg. (H rs ,) . . . F e b . 1 51 .4 128.1 155.9 2 14 .7 9 1 .9 150 .6 1 28 .6 154 .8 2 1 2 .2 9 4 .9 N .A. 4 0 .9 N .A. 4 0 .9 N.A. 4 0 .8 N.A. 4 1 .9 303 2 40 312 296 237 284r 290 228 288 248 213 247 164 256 165 246 165 194 153 171 F IN A N C E A N D B A N K IN G M em b er B a n k L o a n s ............................................ .......Fe b . M em b er B a n k D e p o s i t s .............................................F e b . B a n k D e b i t s * * ................................................................Fe b . G EO R G IA IN C O M E M a n u fa c tu rin g P a y ro lls ...................................... F e b . F a rm C a sh R e c e i p t s ............................................Ja n . EM P LO YM EN T N o n farm E m p l o y m e n t ............................................F e b . M a n u fa c tu rin g .................................................. ...... F e b . ............................................ F e b . N o n m a n u fa c tu rin g C o n s t r u c t i o n ......................................................... F e b . F a rm E m p lo y m e n t ..................................................F e b . U n e m p lo y m e n t R a te (P e rc e n t o f W o rk F o r c e ) .......................... Avg. W e e k ly H rs. in M fg. (H rs .) . . . F e b . 130 .5 1 12 .9 138.7 152.1 1 01 .9 1 30 .9 113 .6 138 .8 153 .0 9 6 .4 129.7 114.2 136.8 152.1 9 1.1 1 26 .4 N .A . 4 0.8 N .A. 4 1 .0 N.A. 4 0.9 N.A. 4 0.2 265 182 3 02 271 181 319r 251 179 2 75 r 210 158 203 158 185 149 204 143 151 112.1 133.0 144 .4 9 4.7 F IN A N C E A N D B A N K IN G M em b er B a n k L o a n s ............................................ F e b . M em b er B a n k D e p o s i t s ...................................... F e b . B a n k D e b i t s * * .........................................................F e b . 170 226 LO U IS IA N A IN C O M E M a n u fa c tu rin g P a y ro lls ................................F e b . ......................................J a n . F a rm C a sh R e c e p ts EM P LO YM EN T N o n farm E m p l o y m e n t ......................................Fe b . M a n u fa c tu rin g .........................................................F e b . N o n m a n u f a c t u r in g ............................................ ...... F e b . C o n s t r u c t i o n ............................................ .............F e b . F a rm E m p lo y m e n t .........................................................F e b . U n e m p lo y m e n t R a te (P e rc e n t of W o rk F o r c e ) ......................... Avg. W e e k ly H rs. in M fg. (H rs .) . . . F e b . 118.7 107 .9 121 .0 9 7.4 6 4.0 119.5 108.2 120.6 9 7.7 7 8.2 116.5 105.8 118 .7 9 2.6 8 1.9 115.9 105 .9 1 17 .9 9 4.4 8 7.1 N .A . 4 0 .8 N .A. 4 1 .0 N.A. 4 1.0 N.A. 4 2.1 2 44 186 205 237 184 197 231 176 196 191 167 175 187 350 191 2 46 192 174 182 260 130.4 132.0 129.6 136 .9 79.5 125.6 130.4 123.5 141.4 F IN A N C E A N D B A N K IN G M em b er B a n k L o a n s * Feb. M em b er B a n k D e p o s i t s * ...................................... F e b . B a n k D e b i t s * / * * ............................................................... F e b . M IS S IS S IP P I IN C O M E M a n u fa c tu rin g P a y r o l l s ......................................F e b . F a rm C a s h R e c e i p t s ............................................Ja n . M a n u fa c tu rin g P a y ro lls ......................................F e b . F a rm C a sh R e c e ip ts ............................................J a n . IN C O M E M a n u fa c tu rin g P a y r o l l s ................................Fe b . F a rm C a sh R e c e i p t s ............................................ Ja n . EM P LO YM EN T 121.2 118.0 122.6 131 .0 8 9 .2 1 20.9 117.8 122.4 131.4 86.7 120.4 117.7 121.6 132.3 8 2 .0 117.1 114.6 118.2 119.1 8 0.6 N o n fa rm E m p l o y m e n t .............................................Fe b . M a n u f a c t u r i n g .................................................. F e b . N o n m a n u f a c t u r in g ............................................ F e b . C o n s t r u c t i o n ...................................................F e b . F a rm E m p lo y m e n t ...................................................F e b . 129 .9 131.5 129 .2 144,7 7 6 .4 130.5 131 .8 129 .8 146 .6 8 3.3 APRIL 1974, MONTHLY REVIEW O ne M o nth Ago L a t e s t M onth One Year Ago Tw o M o nths Ago L a t e s t M o nth O ne M onth Ago Tw o M o n th s Ago O ne Year Ago EMPLOYMENT U n e m p lo y m e n t R a te (P e rc e n t o f W o rk F o rc e ) . . Avg . W e e k ly H rs. in M fg. (H rs .) N.A. 39.6 N.A. 4 0.2 N.A. 4 0.4 N.A. 4 0 .9 266 219 226 265 213 238 261 209 213 214 182 199 179 193 178 149 177 156 156 N o n fa rm E m p l o y m e n t ......................................Fe b . M a n u fa c tu rin g .................................................. F e b . N o n m a n u fa c t u r in g ...................................................F e b . C o n s t r u c t i o n .................................................. Feb . F a rm E m p lo y m e n t .................................................. .......Fe b . U n e m p lo y m e n t R a te (P e rc e n t o f W o rk F o r c e ) ......................... A vg. W e e k ly H rs. in M fg. (H rs .) . . . Ja n . F IN A N C E A N D B A N K IN G M e m b e r B a n k L o a n s* M em b er B a n k D e p o sits* B a n k D e b its * / * * . . . . Feb . Feb . Feb . 129.6 119.8 135.1 149 .8 9 2.3 129 .6 120.9 1 3 4 .4 151 .0 93.1 1 28 .6 121 .5 132 .6 142.3 9 0.1 123.6 117.7 126 .8 124 .9 9 7.5 N .A . 4 1 .2 N .A. 4 1.1 N.A. 4 0 .8 N.A. 3 9.5 257 201 240 250 198 234r F IN A N C E A N D B A N K IN G M a n u fa c tu rin g P a y r o l l s ......................................Ja n . F a rm C a sh R e c e i p t s ............................................Ja n . 202 * F o r S ix th D is t ric t a re a o n ly ; o th e r to ta ls fo r e n tir e s ix s t a t e s M em b er B a n k L o a n s * ......................................Fe b . M em b er B a n k D e p o s i t s * ............................... .......Fe b . B a n k D e b i t s * / * * .........................................................Fe b . * * D a ily a v e ra g e b a s is f P r e lim in a r y d a ta r-R e v ise d 245 1 92 223 210 181 180 N .A . N ot a v a ila b le Note: In d e xes for bank d eb its, con struction co n tra cts, cotton con su m ption , em ploym ent, farm c a s h re ce ip ts, loan s, petroleum production, and payro lls: 1967 = 100. All other in d e xes: 1957-59 = 100. S o urce s: M a n u fa c tu rin g p ro d u ctio n e s tim a te d by th is B a n k ; n o n fa rm , m fg. a n d non m fg . e m p ., m fg. p a y r o lls a n d h o u rs, an d u n e m p ., U .S . D ep t, of L a b o r a n d c o o p e ra tin g s t a t e a g e n c ie s ; c o tto n c o n su m p tio n , U .S . B u re a u o f C e n s u s ; c o n s tru c tio n c o n t ra c t s , F . W. Dodge D iv., M cG ra w -H ill In fo rm a tio n S y s te m s C o .; p e tro l, p ro d ., U .S . B u re a u of M in e s; fa rm c a s h re c e ip ts an d fa rm e m p ., U .S .D .A . O th e r in d e x e s b a sed on d a ta c o lle c te d b y th is B a n k . A ll in d e x e s c a lc u la t e d by th is B a n k . 'D a ta b e n c h m a rk e d to Ju n e 1971 R ep o rt of C o n d itio n . A ll e m p lo y m e n t d a ta h a ve been a d ju ste d to new b e n c h m a rk s . Debits to Demand Deposit Accounts Insured Commercial Banks in the Sixth District ( In T h ou san d s of D o lla r s ) P e r c e n t C h an g e P e r c e n t C h an g e F e b ru a ry 1974 fro m J a n u a ry 1974 F e b ru a ry 1973 Ja n . 1974 Feb . 1973 Year to d a te m o s. 1974 fro m 1973 2 S T A N D A R D M ET R O P O L IT A N S T A T IS T IC A L A R E A S * * B irm in g h a m . . . G a d sd e n . . . . H u n ts v ille ......................... M o bile M o ntg o m ery . . . T u s c a lo o s a . . . . Dothan S e lm a 3 ,8 5 5 ,0 6 4 9 2,38 3 2 8 2 ,9 3 6 1 ,0 27 ,8 30 5 9 9 ,4 3 5 2 1 6 ,4 8 6 4 ,2 2 7 ,1 0 0 1 01,757 3 5 8 ,9 0 0 1 ,1 63 ,7 37 6 8 6 ,3 3 6 2 6 3 ,3 79 3 ,1 5 5 ,1 1 4 8 5,17 5 2 5 6 ,5 2 6 8 4 1 ,1 3 6 5 0 3 ,3 9 4 164 ,2 26 -21 -12 7 78 ,8 50 3 54 ,8 03 8 9 7 ,4 8 6 4 4 1 ,1 65 6 5 4 ,0 76 3 0 3 ,2 42 1 ,9 15 ,7 72 4 1 0 ,3 51 2 5 5 ,3 1 2 5 ,0 6 7 ,0 0 0 2 ,2 9 8 ,2 2 6 4 6 1 ,3 51 2 9 0 ,0 11 4 ,7 0 5 ,9 5 5 1,6 64 ,1 52 3 3 2 ,7 4 6 2 0 9 ,3 25 3 ,1 7 5 ,2 9 2 4 0 4 ,4 0 2 7 ,1 1 5 ,2 2 6 1 ,5 4 6 ,4 5 9 392 ,7 01 5 4 7 ,6 87 1 ,1 34 ,8 12 3 ,9 50 ,3 71 1 ,2 14 ,2 87 4 8 3 ,5 3 9 7 ,8 5 8 ,0 7 7 1 ,7 24 ,7 07 4 5 8 ,4 2 0 6 4 2 ,9 5 7 8 5 3 ,1 5 9 4 ,6 5 0 ,1 0 2 i;4 6 0 ,1 0 0 3 3 4 ,1 9 2 5 ,5 0 5 ,9 2 0 1 ,3 94 ,8 07 3 3 0 ,6 2 9 3 9 6 ,2 0 9 7 8 4 ,5 9 4 3 ,4 3 7 ,5 0 9 1 ,0 34 ,8 11 A l b a n y ......................... A t l a n t a ......................... A u g u sta . . . . C o lu m b u s . . . . M aco n ......................... Savannah . . . . 1 79,405 1 6,6 2 1 ,4 0 4 5 4 6 ,6 66 4 0 9 ,8 2 6 6 4 8 ,9 7 9 5 08,151 2 1 7 ,1 7 5 2 0 ,1 3 5 ,8 3 7 6 2 3 ,0 8 8 486 ,3 31 6 8 5 ,4 7 7 6 01 ,4 96 1 60,260 1 1 ,7 9 2 ,6 2 4 4 0 9 ,8 1 6 338 ,6 71 4 2 6 ,7 5 5 4 4 4 ,6 4 8 A le x a n d ria . . . . B a to n R o u ge . . L a fa y e tte . . . . L a k e C h a rle s N ew O rle a n s 24 9 ,3 5 8 1 ,2 8 8 ,0 5 9 2 6 3 ,9 91 2 2 7 ,0 5 0 4 ,3 2 4 ,0 5 1 2 9 6 ,1 43 1 ,4 35 ,6 27 3 2 2 ,2 33 2 8 6 ,4 83 4 ,9 7 2 ,6 7 7 2 2 4 ,9 23 9 6 9 ,6 63 2 2 6 ,6 63 2 0 6 ,3 9 9 3 ,7 6 2 ,3 7 3 . B a rto w -La k e la n d W in te r H aven D ayto n a B e a c h F t. La u d e rd a le H o llyw o od . . . F t. M yers . . . . G a in e s v ille . . . J a c k s o n v ille . . . . M elbourneT itu s v ille - C o c o a M iam i ......................... O r l a n d o ......................... P e n s a c o la . . . . S a ra so ta . . . . T a lla h a s s e e . . . . T a m p a -S t. P ete . W . P a lm B e a c h . . . B ilo x i- G u lfp o rt . . Ja c k s o n ......................... C h atta n o o g a . . . K n o x v ille . . . . N a s h v ille . . . . . . . . . - 9 9 22 + 22 8 +6 10 + 14 22 + 18 + + + + + 19 + 32 + 16 +37 -20 -1 3 + 19 + 17 + 17 + 15 -17 + 15 + 14 -13 —18 -11 + 23 + 2 6 -12 +22 + 2 5 + 8 + 60 +42 -16 + 21 + 12 - 9 + 29 +22 -10 + 11 + 15 -14 + 3 + 6 -15 + 32 -1 5 -1 7 + 38 + 45 + 15 + 17 + 32 + 23 + 15 + 17 -1 7 + + 41 + 33 t + 52 -+- 14 + 45 + 32 + 18 + 44 + 12 12 + 10 -12 5 -21 -1 6 ... -1 6 —16 -10 -1 8 -21 - 13 11 + + 33 + 16 + + 15 10 + 18 + 26 +20 10 + 16 - 2 21 3 ,5 5 9 1 ,4 11 ,0 26 2 5 2 ,0 4 0 1 ,6 4 7 ,8 6 3 1 95 ,6 18 1 ,1 84 ,8 43 —15 -1 4 f 9 + 19 + 13 + 25 1 ,2 92 ,2 65 1 ,3 63 ,0 17 3 ,5 3 4 ,2 3 4 1 ,5 1 4 ,0 8 0 r 1 ,4 7 2 ,2 0 2 3 ,8 9 8 ,4 0 5 1 ,0 21 ,2 45 7 3 9 ,8 8 9 2 ,7 1 2 ,2 0 1 —15 - 7 - 9 + 27 + 84 + 30 + 29 + 74 + 24 9 5,92 8 111,022 9 3 ,7 6 9 -1 4 + TH ER CEN TERS A n n isto n F e b ru a ry 1974 fro m 2 + 3 . . . . . . . . B ra d e n to n M onroe C o u n ty . O c a l a ......................... S t. A u g u stin e S t. P e te rs b u rg . Tam pa . . . . F e b ru a ry 1973 Ja n u a ry 1974 1 70 ,7 09 7 8 ,0 6 4 2 02 ,1 32 1 12,233 1 23 ,6 36 6 6,56 7 -1 6 -3 0 +38 + 17 + 37 + 26 192 ,2 73 123.301 191,212 4 7 ,1 6 3 9 3 1 ,2 87 1 ,8 45 ,0 71 2 2 1 ,7 99 1 25,855 230 ,6 21 5 7,29 6 1 ,1 3 3 ,0 8 4 2 ,1 63 ,7 31 164,703 7 2 ,1 5 9 1 57,673 2 9 ,0 6 9 8 6 6 ,9 83 1 ,5 7 6 ,0 6 0 -1 3 -1 7 -1 8 -18 -15 + 17 + 71 + 13 + 65 +23 + 63 + 7 + 19 136,233 8 1,18 3 172 ,8 86 15,701 1 0 9 ,9 24 5 7 ,1 2 4 3 3,51 0 45,23 1 115,693 7 9 ,4 0 0 1 58,273 1 10 ,9 74 197 ,9 1 3 r 2 4,20 9 165 ,0 94 8 6,72 7 4 5,57 5 6 0,22 0 148,757 9 8,67 2 13,459 9 ,9 2 5 8 2 ,4 7 5 5 5,35 9 19,061 3 2,95 8 2 0,46 4 14,229 9 1,20 7 7 6,89 4 3 0,25 7 4 8 ,9 8 4 13,255 10,36 9 7 3,22 2 4 9 ,0 5 6 2 0,40 2 3 0 ,3 7 5 . . 1 11,252 6 9,04 2 1 1 1 ,8 26 5 1,16 9 133,211 83,351 1 28,857 5 5,53 0 1 09,472 8 1 ,5 6 2 1 02,458 4 5,33 7 1 76,287 7 5,57 6 4 2 ,6 9 0 149 ,6 65 . . 101,011 5 8,24 9 1 57,074 6 4,93 4 33,45 1 B ris to l . . . . Jo h n so n C ity K in g sp o rt . . . 103 ,8 62 1 4 2 ,6 54 2 4 5 ,3 4 6 1 13,365 180 ,1 44 2 9 3 ,2 7 8 1 19,470 136 ,7 16 2 1 4 ,1 85 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A b b e v ille . . B u n k ie . . . . Ham m ond . . N ew Ib e ria . P la q u e m in e . T h ib o d a u x . . H a ttie sb u rg . L a u re l . . . . M e rid ia n . . N a tch e z . . P a sca g o u la M o ss P o in t V ic k s b u rg . . Y azo o C ity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 8 ,0 5 2 ,9 9 2 8 8 ,5 3 1 ,8 67 r 6 1 ,3 5 5 ,3 9 7 A la b am a . . . F lo rid a . . . . G eo rg ia . . . . L o u is ia n a . . M is s is s ip p i . . Ten n essee . . 8 ,6 6 6 ,4 5 0 2 7 ,5 1 5 ,1 4 6 2 2 ,3 5 6 ,1 9 0 . 7 ,6 0 1 ,0 0 0 . 2 ,9 7 4 ,6 6 5 . 8 ,9 3 9 ,5 4 1 9 ,6 8 2 ,4 6 6 7 ,0 5 4 ,7 5 4 3 0 ,1 8 2 ,7 8 4 r 2 1 ,7 8 3 ,8 1 0 2 6 ,4 7 8 ,5 0 7 r 1 6,7 1 9 ,2 0 5 6 ,4 5 4 ,8 1 3 8 ,7 4 2 ,9 6 9 3 ,4 4 3 ,7 6 2 2 ,6 2 1 ,3 7 3 6 ,7 2 1 ,4 4 2 1 0 ,0 0 1 ,3 7 9 r s t r ic t To ta l 1 1 . 2 Feb . 1973 2 F e b ru a ry 1974 143,043 9 1,09 6 177,815 19,702 139 ,8 15 6 3,77 1 4 3 ,3 7 8 4 9 ,6 1 6 127 ,9 08 9 4,92 3 A th e n s . B ru n s w ic k D alto n . E lb e rto n G a in e s v ille G riffin . L a G ra n g e N ew n a n . Rom e . V a ld o sta Jan . 1974 Year to d a te m o s. 1 97 4 fro m 1973 +21 + 62 + 7 + 17 -10 + 5 + 12 -18 -10 + 3 1 8 -1 9 -15 + 25 + 27 + + 17 + + 19 +25 -2 5 -27 + 16 + 28 + 23 + 29 -13 + 4 + 15 -1 5 + 9 + 18 + 27 +24 -21 +20 +22 - 5 + 29 + 2 6 + 10 + 7 -1 8 -1 4 + 11 + 7 - 4 +20 + 6 -3 4 + 2 + 10 - 4 -3 0 + 6 -10 + 13 +20 +13 -2 8 + 13 - 7 + 2 -3 7 -3 3 + 9 + 11 -1 6 + 2 + 9 -17 0 -15 -1 3 + 9 + 8 - 8 + 13 + 7 + 18 + 12 + 3 8 -21 - -1 6 -12 -10 - 9 -1 6 -1 3 -1 4 -11 + 23 +26 +33 + 18 + 13 + 33 +21 +21 + 34 + 6 + 18 +29 1D is t r ic t p o rtio n o n ly r-R e v ise d F ig u re s fo r so m e a re a s d iffe r s lig h tly fro m p re lim in a ry fig u re s p u b lis h e d in " B a n k D e b its a n d D e p o sit T u rn o v e r " b y B o a rd o f G o v e rn o rs o f th e F e d e ra l R e s e rv e S y s te m . • •C o n fo rm s to S M S A d e fin itio n s a s o f D e c e m b e r 3 1 , 1972. FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF ATLANTA 55 District Business Conditions _ I I I I 1972 L 1973 l I I I I I 1974 _ Farm Cash Receipts l I I I II I I I I I 1972 I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I 1973 I I I I I II 1974 *Seas. adj. figure; not an index **Data have been partially revised to new benchmarks and are not comparable with earlier months. Latest plotting: February, except mfg. production, Nov.; farm cash receipts, Jan.; and unemployment rate, Dec. The Southeastern economy showed some indications of improvement. Loan growth at commercial banks continued in February, and construction activity stabilized. Announcements of plans for expanded farm production were accompanied by falling prices. Consumer spending and borrowing continued sluggish, however. Labor markets remained soft, with little change in nonfarm jobs. Manufacturing employment con tinued to slip. Loan growth in February continued the january upturn, although at a moderated pace. Deposit growth, however, fell back from the strong January increase. Borrowing from the Federal Reserve in creased, reversing the declining trend of previous months. Total investments rose, as banks continued shifting their holdings from U. S. to state and local securities. The value of construction contracts leveled off after two months of sharp descent. Nonresidential contract values continued to fall. Although mort gage markets firmed, residential contracts rose sufficiently to offset the drop in the nonresidential sector. Preliminary data show that prices of both crops and livestock declined in March. Increased livestock marketings have overtaken demand for meats; the downturn in crop prices accompanied the an nounced plans for substantially expanded crop plantings in 1974. Cotton acreage will be one-fourth higher in District states, and Mississippi farmers plan a one-third increase to reach the largest planted acreage since 1954. Regional increases of 10 percent or more are also planned for tobacco and rice. Alabama and Georgia farmers plan substantial ex pansions of nearly all crops, including soybeans, even though national soybean acreage is expected to decline. Growth in consumer instalment credit slowed further in February. Outstandings in both the auto and nonauto consumer goods categories declined, but home improvement and personal loans grew at a normal pace. Spending indicators continue sluggish, with unit auto sales off sharply from yearago high levels and department store sales up only slightly after inflation is taken into account. ’V* . Labor markets continued to display weakness, particularly in the manufacturing sector. Manu facturing activity slowed again. Both manufacturing jobs and weekly hours worked decreased, while payrolls changed little. Nonfarm employment changed very little in February, while the rate of insured unemployment rose. All District states ex cept Mississippi recorded higher insured unemploy ment rates. Service and trade employment has ap parently stabilized after recording earlier losses related to gasoline shortages. NOTE: Data on which statements are based have been adjusted whenever possible to eliminate seasonal influences. 56 APRIL 1974, MONTHLY REVIEW
@FedFRASER