THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED PORT CAMERON ON THE
LAKE CHARLES MSA, THE STATE OF LOUISIANA AND THE NATION
BY
Loren C. Scott & Associates, Inc.
743 Woodview court
Baton Rouge, LA 70810
225-751-1707
www.Lorencscottassociates.com
April 2015
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Port Cameron is a proposed new port to be located on about 1,250 acres on the Calcasieu
Ship Channel in Cameron parish just below the City of Lake Charles. The Port would be
surrounded on three sides by water. Over the 4-year initial construction cycle, the port and its
tenants are estimated to spend nearly $5.4 billion to build out the port site. The purpose of this
report is to estimate the impact of this port on the Lake Charles MSA, the State of Louisiana, and
the nation. Our findings can be summarized as follows:

The impact on the Lake Charles MSA:
o Over the 4-year construction cycle, construction spending at the proposed port
will create:
 Almost $9.5 billion in new sales at firms in the MSA;
 Nearly $3 billion in new household earnings for MSA residents;
 An average of 16,262 jobs a year; and
 $103.5 million in new sales taxes for Calcasieu Parish.
o The port is expected to be fully leased up by Year 5. Once that occurs,
operational activity at the port will create:
 Over $2.5 billion in sales at firms in the MSA;
 $469.2 million in new household earnings in the MSA;
 8,057 new jobs in the MSA, and;
 $16.4 million in new sales tax collections in Calcasieu Parish.

The impact of the proposed new port on the Louisiana economy would be:
o Over the 4-year construction cycle, construction spending at the proposed port
will create:
 $11.2 billion in new sales at firms in the state;
 $3.8 billion in new household earnings for state residents;
 An average of 21,249 jobs a year, and;
 $267.5 million in new taxes for the state treasury.
o The port is expected to be fully leased up by Year 5. Once that occurs,
operational activity at the port will create:
 Over $2.8 billion in sales at firms in the state;
 $542.2 million in new household earnings in the state;
 9,930 new jobs in the state, and;
 $38 million in new tax collections for the state treasury.

The impact of the new port on the national economy was based on how much the
existence of Port Cameron could absorb activities from Port Fourchon should that port
be out of operation due to some unforeseen event such as a terrorist or direct hit by a
hurricane. Sensitivity analysis was used to estimate the impact on the nation if Port
Cameron could absorb either 10% or 20% of the business lost at Port Fourchon. The
impacts on the national economy were:
o Absorbing 10% of Port Fourchon’s business would save the national economy:
 $1,122.7 million in sales at firms in the country;
 $315.6 million in household earnings for U.S. residents, and;
ii
 6,550 jobs in the country.
o Absorbing 20% of Port Fourchon’s business would save the national economy:
 $2,245.3 million in sales at firms in the country;
 $631.2 million in household earnings for U.S. residents, and;
 13,100 jobs in the country.

We have calculated the impact on the State budget if the State grants a $40 million tax
credit over the first 25 years of activity at the port. It is estimated that over this period,
(1) there are only three years in which there is a net drain on the State budget, (2) from a
cumulative standpoint, there are no years in which the budget fails to come out ahead,
and (3) the present value of the net gain to the State budget is $367.4 million---56%
more than the State pays out in tax credits. Local governments in the State will also
gain about two-thirds of a billion dollars in their coffers.

The impact of the proposed new port on the Cameron Parish economy would be:
o Over the 4-year construction cycle, construction spending at the proposed port
will create:
 Nearly $6.5 billion in new sales at firms in the parish;
 Nearly $1.6 billion in new household earnings for parish residents---an
amount that will increase household earnings in the parish by 180%;
 An average of 8,143 jobs a year---effectively an increase in parish
employment of 233%.
o The port is expected to be fully leased up by Year 5. Once that occurs,
operational activity at the port will create:
 Nearly $2 billion in sales at firms in the parish;
 $276.2 million in new household earnings in the parish---effectively
doubling income for parish residents; and
 3,860 new jobs in the parish--- effectively doubling employment in the
parish. These jobs will pay a wage rate that is more than 36% higher than
the average private sector wage in the Lake Charles MSA.
Port Cameron will obviously be a major game changer for the Cameron Parish economy.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. Introduction ......................................................................................................................1
Outline of Report .........................................................................................................1
II. Methodology ......................................................................................................................2
The Multiplier Effect ...................................................................................................2
The Input-Output Table ..............................................................................................3
III. Impact of the Lake Charles MSA .....................................................................................3
Impact on the Lake Charles MSA – Construction ...................................................3
Impact by Industry on the Lake Charles MSA – Construction ..............................6
Impact on the Lake Charles MSA – Operations .......................................................7
The substitution approach ....................................................................................8
Economic Impacts of Operations .........................................................................9
Impact by Industry on the Lake Charles MSA – Operations ................................11
IV. Economic Impact on the State of Louisiana ..................................................................12
Impact on the State – Construction ..........................................................................12
Impact on the State – Operations .............................................................................14
V. Economic Impact on the National Economy .................................................................15
How Important is Port Fourchon to the Nation ......................................................16
Impact of Interruption of Port Fourchon Activities ...............................................16
Impact of Port Cameron on the National Economy ...............................................19
VI. Impact on the State Budget…………………………………………………………….20
VII. Summary & Conclusions...........................................................................................23
Addendum: Impact on Cameron Parish……………………………………………….....26
iv
I.
Introduction
In this report we examine the economic impact of a proposed new port in Louisiana--Port Cameron.1 Port Cameron will be a deep water port located initially on about 500 acres,
then expanding to 1,250 acres in Cameron Parish. Cameron Parish is a coastal parish on the
southwestern corner of Louisiana just below the City of Lake Charles.
The Port will be located
on the Calcasieu Ship Channel about three miles inland from the Gulf of Mexico. In the event of
a hurricane, there is a safe harbor located only 30 miles away in Lake Charles, and the Port will
be only 19 miles away from the Intracoastal Canal. There is a maintained dredged shipping lane
from the jetties to 25 miles into the Gulf of Mexico, and the Port will be only a one hour drive
from Interstate 10.
Another positive characteristic of this Port is that it is surrounded on three sides by
waterways. To the west is the Calcasieu ship Channel. To the south is the Calcasieu Pass, and
on the north is East Fork of the channel. Approximately 4.5 million cubic yards of material will
be dredged to create channels to access the property.
Outline of Report
The purpose of this report is to evaluate the impact of this proposed new port on three
geographic areas. In Section II we will discuss the methodology used to estimate these impacts.
Section III will address the impacts of the port on the Lake Charles MSA. In this section we will
address both the impact of constructing and operating the port. Section IV will expand the
geographic area of impact to the State of Louisiana, and Section V will expand the area even
further to the nation as a whole. In Section VI we examine implications of the State providing
1
A Public/Private Partnership with West Cameron Port Harbor and Terminal District
1
tax credits to aid in development of the port. Finally, Section VII will contain a summary and
conclusions.
II.
Methodology
It is a well-established principle that business activities have both direct and indirect
(multiplier) impacts on the economy. The direct impact of a particular industry on income and
employment can be measured by the construction spending at the port site and the expenditures
or revenues of the clients of the port once it is operational.
The Multiplier Effect
However, these direct impacts alone would significantly understate the role of the port on
the economy. The reason is that port clients also buy from, and sell to, many other firms in the
economy. Too, employees at the port spend money at grocery stores, car dealerships, movie
theaters, etc., which creates new earnings in those establishments, which are then spent, etc., etc.
Thus, any change in the activity of a particular firm indirectly affects these other
companies and their employees, which in turn affects firms that buy from and sell to these firms
and employees, etc. For example, when a decision is made by a firm that creates a new job, a
chain-reaction is started which works its way throughout the economy. This chain-reaction
(multiplier effect) causes even more jobs to be created.
Think of the Louisiana economy as a
large economic pond. Into that pond a new rock is dropped called Port Cameron. However,
when that rock hits the pond it sends ripples all the way out to the edge of the pond. It is these
ripples that we refer to as the "multiplier effect".
The Input-Output Table
2
The major difficulty lies in attempting to quantify these multiplier impacts. Fortunately, a
technique has been developed for precisely this purpose---an input-output (I/O) table. An I/O
table is a matrix of numbers that describes the interactions between all industries in a
geographical area. The I/O table provides a complete picture of the flows of products and
services in an economy for a given year, illustrating the relationship between producers and
consumers and the interdependencies of industries in a region.
I/O tables for the Lake Charles MSA, the State of Louisiana, and the U.S. have been
constructed by the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), U.S. Department of Commerce. The
BEA is the government agency responsible for measuring the nation’s gross domestic product
each quarter. This model is referred to as the RIMS II model, and is similar to IMPLAN or the
REMI models. Essentially, data on construction expenditures at the Port and projected revenues
of Port clients are plugged into the RIMS II model to estimate separately three impacts of the
Port on the three geographic areas: (1) new sales for firms; (2) new household earnings; and
finally; (3) new jobs.
III.
Impact of the Lake Charles MSA
In this section we address the impact of the proposed new port on the Lake Charles MSA.
This MSA is comprised of Calcasieu and Cameron Parishes. We evaluate the impact of both
constructing and operating the port.
Impact on the Lake Charles MSA – Construction
Officials with Port Cameron have proposed constructing this port over a 4-year, two
phase period. This spending is shown in the second column of Table 1. In addition officials with
3
the proposed port have estimated how much tenants at the port will spend to upgrade their site.
The schedule and amount of this tenant spending each year is shown the third column of Table 1.
Table 1
Port Cameron Construction Expenditures
Year
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year4
Port Construction
Tenant Construction
$756,261,095
790,398,716
1,134,391,643
1,185,598,074
$322,052,379
277,947,621
483,078,568
416,921,432
Total
$3,866,649,528
$1,500,000,000
Total Construction Spending
$1,078,313,474
$1,068,346,337
$1,617,470,211
$1,602,519,506
$5,366,649,528
Note that investors are planning to spend almost $3.9 billion on port infrastructure over
the 4-year period. More will be spent in Years 3 and 4 because the port will be developing 750
acres in Phase II as opposed to 500 acres in Phase I. Tenant spending is expected to reach $1.5
billion, following the same pattern as port spending with higher expenditures in Years 3 and 4. .
This means a total of almost $5.4 billion is expected to be spent by both parties over the 4year period in building out the port.
The numbers in Table 1 were injected into the BEA’s I/O table from the Lake Charles
MSA to determine the multiplier effect of the $5.4 billion in construction in spending. The
results by year are shown in Table 2.
Table 2
Impacts of Port Cameron Construction Expenditures
on the Lake Charles MSA
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Total
$1,906.8
$1,889.2
$2,860.2
$2,833.7
$9,489.8
Household Earnings
$594.0
$588.6
$891.1
$882.8
$2,956.5
Temporary Jobs
13,313
13,048
19,540
19,146
16,262*
$30.9
$103.5
Business Sales
Indirect Sales Taxes
$20.8
$20.6
$31.2
* Annual Average. All numbers except jobs numbers are in millions of dollars
4
Several points are noteworthy from Table 2. First, the impact numbers by year follow the
same pattern as the spending data in Table 1. Secondly, note that the impact numbers are
sizeable, to say the least. In the year of highest construction spending at the port---Year 3--almost $2.9 billion in new sales are projected to be created at firms in the MSA. Over the entire
4-year construction period a total of nearly $9.5 billion in new sales will be generated at
firms in the MSA.
Naturally, a part of those new sales in line one of Table 2 will end up as new earnings for
workers in the firms. Line two of Table 2 provides the I/O table estimate of these new earnings.
In the peak construction Year 3, residents of the MSA will find their incomes boosted by $891
million dollars. Over the 4-year construction cycle, an estimated $3 billion in new household
earnings will be produced for the citizens of the MSA.
Decision makers are obviously keenly interested in the impact of all that construction
spending on employment in the MSA. These job projections are shown in the third row of Table
2. In the peak Year 3, 19,540 jobs will be supported in the MSA by construction spending at the
port site. On the average over the 4-year construction cycle construction spending will
support 16,262 jobs a year. By way of reference, this figure is approximately equal to total
employment in the entire construction sector (16,500) in the MSA.2
Finally, we are able to use some of the data in Table 2 to estimate how much local sales
taxes in the MSA will rise due to construction spending at the port. This sales tax bump will
only occur in Calcasieu parish because Cameron Parish does not levy a local sales tax.
(Cameron Parish is the only parish in the state that does not levy a local sales tax.) Using past
personal income and sales tax data for Calcasieu Parish, we were able to determine that for every
new dollar of personal income created in the parish the local government collects 3.5 cents in
2
“Louisiana Workforce at a Glance”, Louisiana Workforce Commission, March 31, 2015, p.15.
5
additional sales tax collections. Using this ratio, we derived the local sales tax data in the last
line of Table 2. For example in the peak construction Year 3, the I/O table estimates that
construction spending will create $891.1 million in new household earnings. Multiplying $891.1
million by 3.5% provides our estimate of new local sales tax collections of $31,200,000. Over
the entire 4-year construction cycle we estimate that local sales taxes in Calcasieu Parish
will jump by $103.5 million.
It is important for the reader to understand that the benefits to the MSA detailed in Table
2 are temporary. They provide very healthy, positive jolts to the MSA economy, but they are
associated with the construction spending at the port and will vanish when construction is
completed. That is not the case with the operations impacts at the port which we address later.
Impact by Industry on the Lake Charles MSA – Construction
Data in Table 2 illustrate the aggregate impacts of proposed construction spending at the
port on the MSA economy. An interesting question is “Which sectors of the MSA economy will
be the big winners from this flood of new construction activity?” The BEA I/O table can be used
to determine how the aggregate numbers in Table 2 are spread across the various industrial
sectors in the Lake Charles MSA. The results for construction Year 4 are shown in Table 3.
It is probably no surprise to the readers to discover that firms in the construction sector
are the biggest winners. In Year 4, sales in the firms are expected to rise by nearly $1.6 billion,
household earnings of construction workers should jump by $550.8 million, and 10,948 jobs will
be created for construction workers. From a jobs standpoint, the retail trade sector comes in
second with 1,735 new jobs, followed by health care and social assistance (1,203 jobs) and
professional/scientific/technical (961 jobs). There are 13 other areas of the MSA’s economy that
will see employment jump by 100+ jobs in Year 4 due to construction spending at the port.
6
Table 3
Impacts of Port Cameron Construction Expenditures
on the Lake Charles MSA by Industry, Year 4
Business Sales
Household
Earnings
Temporary
Jobs
$1,612.9
$550.8
10,948
Manufacturing
$234.4
$38.6
544
Retail Trade
$153.4
$49.0
1,735
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing
$147.6
$11.1
636
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
$128.4
$60.3
961
Health Care and Social Assistance
$121.3
$55.3
1,203
Wholesale Trade
$65.4
$16.7
257
Transportation and Warehousing
$62.3
$17.3
311
Finance and Insurance
$52.6
$9.8
254
Other Services
$50.6
$19.9
490
Information
$44.9
$7.7
139
Food Services and Drinking Places
$40.7
$12.5
643
Utilities
$30.9
$5.0
54
Administrative and Waste Management Services
$28.0
$11.1
387
Mining
$17.5
$2.6
42
Accommodation
$15.7
$4.0
119
Educational Services
$9.6
$4.6
150
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
$7.4
$2.4
105
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, and Hunting
$6.6
$1.9
72
Management Of Companies and Enterprises
$3.5
$1.6
23
Households
$0.0
$0.8
72
$2,833.7
$882.8
19,146
Industry
Construction
Total
Note: Sales & earnings in millions of dollars.
Impact on the Lake Charles MSA – Operations
Estimating the impact of future operations at the port on the Lake Charles MSA is far
trickier than for proposed construction spending. Engineers and design specialists can determine
with reasonable accuracy what is will cost to transform a barren piece of land into an operable
port. The more difficult questions are (1) what clients will use the facilities at the port, (2) what
will their annual revenues be, (3) when will these clients start leasing land at the port, and (4)
how long will it take the port to be fully leased up?
7
It will be easy to determine the economic impact of operations at the port sometime in the
future. It would just be a matter of collecting data on revenues of the clients in the previous year
and working those data through the I/O table. But what if no historical data are available? What
if the port is starting from scratch---as is the case with Port Cameron---and one is attempting to
estimate the impact of operations activity coming in the future?
The substitution approach. Fortunately, there is a way of estimating these operations
data that is much better than a wild guess. That is to use a technique in forecasting called the
substitution approach. Is there another entity very similar to Port Cameron that is already
operational? If so data from activity at that entity can be used as a proxy for what is expected to
happen at Port Cameron in the future.
Fortunately, such an entity does exist that can be used as a reasonable substitute for
projected activities at Port Cameron---Port Fourchon in Terrebonne Parish. Port Fourchon is the
primary port used for servicing the offshore exploration industry in the Gulf of Mexico. Indeed,
about 90-95% of the offshore activity in the Gulf is serviced out of Port Fourchon. The client
base at Port Fourchon is precisely the same kind of client base that officials with Port Cameron
want to attract to their site in Cameron Parish.
Luckily, our firm conducted an impact study for Port Fourchon in October 2014.3 In that
study we collected data from clients located at the port on their annual revenues. In this study
we use information from those surveys as a proxy for what is possible for potential clients at Port
Cameron. We did have to adjust the Port Fourchon data for the fact that Port Cameron will start
out as a smaller port. We used comparative acreage between the proposed Port Cameron and the
bulkhead numbers at Port Fourchon in 2014 to make this adjustment. Port Fourchon operated on
“The Economic Impacts of Port Fourchon: An Update”, Loren C. Scott & Associates, Inc., for the Port Fourchon
Commission, October 2014.
3
8
about 1,200 acres in 2014, so the proposed Port Cameron would have about 42% of that acreage
at the end of Year 2 (Phase I) and 104% of that acreage at the end of Year 4 (Phase II).
There was one final, and critical, decision that had to be made before generating the
operations benefits. That has to do with the pace at which Port Cameron would become fully
leased and operating at capacity---or the “absorption rate” at the property. Port Cameron owners
generated the absorption rate for our team. Their plan is to begin leasing space at the port in
Phase I in Year 1 and be fully leased out by Year 3. Specifically, they anticipate the absorption
rate to be: 11.2% in Year 1, 62.7% in Year 2, and 100% by Year 3. For Phase II they estimate a
similar absorption rate---11.2% in Year 3, 62.7% in Year 4, and 100% by Year 5.
Economic Impacts of Operations. Using the methodology described above we were
able to estimate the impact on the Lake Charles MSA of operations at the port. These impacts
are detailed in Table 4.
Table 4
Impacts of Port Cameron Operations
on the Lake Charles MSA
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Total
Business Sales
$104.6
$597.3
$1,016.6
$1,569.1
$2,549.8
$5,837.4
Household Earnings
$19.2
$109.9
$187.0
$288.7
$469.2
$1,074.1
345
1,946
3,292
5,002
8,037
3,724*
Indirect Sales Taxes
$0.7
$3.8
$6.5
*Annual Average. All figures except jobs are in millions of dollars
$10.1
$16.4
$37.6
Permanent Jobs
These impacts are quite impressive. Note that by the time property is fully absorbed at
the port in Year 5, firms in the Lake Charles MSA will see their sales boosted by over $2.5
billion.
Unlike the impacts of construction spending---which are temporary---these sales
benefits are permanent and will continue to be enjoyed by firms in the MSA as long as the Port
remains fully operational. According to the I/O table, over the first 5 years of operation, firms
in the MSA will find their sales up over $5.8 billion due to tenant operations at Port Cameron.
9
These increased sales will result in an increase in household earnings for residents of the
MSA. Note on the second line in Table 4 that once the port is fully leased in Year 5, residents of
the MSA will have found their household incomes have risen by $469.2 million---an increase
that should basically grow with inflation as long as the port remains fully leased up. As a
reference point, combined earnings of all workers in the MSA’s refining and oil/gas extraction
sectors in 2013 were $449.2 million.4
Line three of Table 4 provides I/O table estimates of a key metric---how many new jobs
are supported in the MSA once the facility is fully leased. In Year 5, 8,037 new jobs will have
been created in the MSA because of operations at the port. As a reference point, in February
2015, there were 8,500 jobs in the MSA in the professional/business services (lawyers,
accountants, engineers, architects, computer systems designers, and consultants) sector.5
Operating this new port is akin to having an entire new professional/business services sector
dropped into the MSA’s economy.
If one divides the projected new household income in Year 5 ($469.2 million) by the
projected new jobs in that year (8,037) the result is an average annual wage per job of $58,380.
By comparison, the average annual wage of workers in the private sector in the Lake Charles
MSA in February 2015 was $46,084---21% lower.6 This is an indication that the jobs created as
a result of the presence of this new port would be relatively high-quality jobs.
Finally, Table 4 contains our estimate of the increase in local sales tax collections due to
operations at the port. Over the first five years as lease activity at the port rises to its peak, local
governments are projected to collect $37.6 million in new, additional sales taxes. A reminder
to the reader (from our earlier discussion of the tax impacts of construction spending) that at the
4
www.bea.gov. Data for 2013 are the latest available.
“Louisiana Workforce at a Glance”, Louisiana Workforce Commission, March 31, 2015, p.15.
6
Ibid., p. 13.
5
10
present those sales tax benefits would occur exclusively in Calcasieu Parish, since Cameron
Parish does not levy a sales tax.
Impact by Industry on the Lake Charles MSA – Operations
One hint as to why the jobs created by the operational activity at the port are relatively
high-paying is seen in Table 5. In this table we present I/O table estimates of the breakdown by
industry of the Year 5 impacts, after the facility is fully leased.
Table 5
Impacts of Port Cameron Operations
on the Lake Charles MSA by Industry, Year 5
Business Sales
Household
Earnings
Temporary
Jobs
$1,398.9
$230.0
2,790
Mining
$439.2
$63.7
1,049
Manufacturing
$215.4
$33.0
407
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing
$90.0
$6.9
383
Health Care and Social Assistance
$64.3
$29.2
630
Retail Trade
$59.2
$19.0
662
Other Services
$38.7
$15.2
370
Wholesale Trade
$35.2
$9.0
137
Finance and Insurance
$32.1
$6.7
200
Administrative and Waste Management Services
$31.5
$10.4
301
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
$31.1
$14.5
230
Construction
$24.6
$8.4
165
Information
$23.6
$4.3
78
Utilities
$22.2
$3.5
39
Food Services and Drinking Places
$20.9
$6.4
326
Accommodation
$7.7
$2.0
57
Management Of Companies and Enterprises
$5.8
$2.7
37
Educational Services
$5.1
$2.5
79
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
$3.8
$1.2
53
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, and Hunting
$0.5
$0.2
5
Households
$0.0
$0.5
38
$2,549.8
$469.2
8,037
Industry
Transportation and Warehousing
Total
Note: Sales and earnings in millions of dollars.
By far the largest beneficiary of the existence of the new port is the
transportation/warehousing sector with almost $1.4 billion in new business sales, $230 million in
11
new household earnings, and 2,790 new jobs. Note that the implied annual wage in this sector is
$82,437 ($230 million divided by 2,790) which is very high compared to the average annual
wage ($46,084) for workers in the private sector in the Lake Charles MSA. The “mining” sector
came in #2 in Table 5 with $439.2 million in new business sales, $63.7 million in new household
earnings, and 1,049 new jobs. “Mining” is a term labor officials use to cover workers in oil and
gas extraction and service firms to oil and gas extraction, which is a group most highly likely to
use this new port to service the offshore exploration industry.
Workers in several other
industries are big job gainers due the new port, including: health care/social assistance (+630
jobs); retail trade (+662 jobs); and manufacturing (+497 jobs).
IV.
Economic Impact on the State of Louisiana
In this section we examine the economic impact of the proposed new Port of Cameron on
the economy of the entire state. Because the “pond” is geographically bigger than the Lake
Charles MSA, all of the impact numbers in this section will be larger as compared to the MSA.
Impact on the State– Construction
Recall from our earlier description of the proposed construction numbers back in Table 1
that investors are planning to spend nearly $3.9 million on port infrastructure, and tenants are
projected to spend $1.5 billion over a 4-year period. The combined construction spending will
be larger in Years 3 and 4 because more acreage will be developed in Phase II.
Table 6 contains the I/O table estimates of the impact of this spending on the economy of
the entire state. Not unexpectedly, the pattern of benefits illustrated in Table 6 follow the same
pattern as the expected construction expenditures.
12
Table 6
Impacts of Port Cameron Construction Expenditures
on Louisiana
Business Sales
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Total
$2,256.8
$2,235.9
$3,385.2
$3,353.9
$11,231.9
Household Earnings
$767.8
$760.7
$1,151.6
$1,141.0
$3,821.1
Temporary Jobs
17,396
17,050
25,533
25,019
21,249*
Indirect Taxes
$53.8
$53.3
$80.6
*Annual Average. All number except jobs are in millions of dollars
$79.9
$267.5
Clearly, businesses in the state will be happy to see this new investment coming to the
state. Firms in the state will enjoy a boost in sales of over $11.2 billion over the 4-year
construction cycle. In the peak Year 3 of construction annual sales will top out at almost $3.4
billion. Readers can get a sense of how this largess will be spread across different sectors in the
state economy by reviewing the allocation pattern for the Lake Charles MSA described back in
Table 3.
This large jump in sales will result in a harvest of new earnings for workers in those
firms. Over the 4-year construction cycle, state citizens will find their pocketbooks enhanced by
over $3.8 billion. The Year 3 income gains alone will be over $1.1 billion.
Louisiana workers will earn these extra dollars because there will be more jobs for them.
The numbers of new jobs created in the state due to construction of the port will be 25,533 jobs
in the peak Year 3. That number is over seven times total employment in Cameron Parish
(3,500) jobs in February 2015.7 Over the full 4-year construction cycle, an average of 21,249
jobs a year will be generated by the construction spending on Port Cameron.
The last line in Table 6 provides our estimates of the taxes flowing to the state treasury
that will be collected as a result of the construction of the port. Officials with the Louisiana
Legislative Fiscal Office estimate that for every new dollar of income created in Louisiana, the
7
Ibid., p. 17.
13
state collects 7 cents in new revenues in the form of income taxes, sales taxes, gasoline taxes,
tobacco taxes, etc. Thus, in the peak Year 3 of construction the $1.1 million in new household
earnings will generate $80.6 million in new taxes for the state. As a reference point, in FY13, the
total beer and liquor tax collected by the state was $57.3 million.8
Over the 4-year
construction cycle almost $134 million will be injected into the state treasury.
Impact on the State– Operations
Our estimates of future revenues for firms operating at the port, derived using the
“substitution approach” described earlier, were plugged into the BEA’s state I/O table to produce
estimates of the impact of operational activities on the Louisiana economy. The results are
shown in Table 7. As was the case for the MSA back in Table 4, these benefits start out small in
Year 1 of leasing---when only 11.2% of the facility is being used---and build to a peak in Year 5
when owners expect the facility to be fully leased up, before starting to grow with inflation in
Year 6.
As was the case for the MSA, the operations effects are quite impressive. By the time
the facility is fully leased up in Year 5, business firms in the state will have seen their sales
increased by about $2.8 billion, citizens of the state will experience a projected $542.2
million jump in their household earnings, and there will be 9,930 people employed in the
state that would not have been employed absent Port Cameron. In addition, the state will
be collecting an extra $38 million for its treasury.
8
2012-2013 Annual Report, Louisiana Department of Revenue, p. 8.
14
Table 7
Impacts of Port Cameron Operations
on Louisiana
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Total
Business Sales
$116.6
$665.7
$1,133.9
$1,748.9
$2,842.0
$6,507.1
Household Earnings
$22.2
$127.0
$216.5
$333.7
$542.2
$1,241.6
426
2,404
4,066
6,179
9,930
4,601*
Indirect Taxes
$1.6
$8.9
$15.2
*Annual Average. All numbers except jobs are in millions of dollars
$23.4
$38.0
$86.9
Permanent Jobs
Some reference points may help put the size of some of these numbers in perspective:

9,930 jobs: This figure is almost equivalent to total employment (9,837) in Plaquemines
Parish.9 Another way of stating this is the addition of Port Cameron to the state’s
economy is like adding another Plaquemines Parish to the state’s economy.

$542.2.4 million in household earnings: In 2013, workers in the state’s forestry,
logging, fishing, and agricultural services sector earned $553.8 million.10
By virtually any measure, these results are quite impressive.
V.
Economic Impact on the National Economy
In the last two sections we examined the impact of the proposed new Port Cameron on
the Lake Charles MSA and the Louisiana economies. The final issue to address is the impact on
the national economy.
How might the presence of this new port be a special benefit to the nation? Earlier, it
was pointed out that Port Cameron would be expected to service the same sort of clients as Port
Fourchon; that is, primarily the offshore exploration industry. A major benefit for the nation is
that Port Cameron could pick up some of the slack if services at the vital Port Fourchon
were temporarily interrupted.
9
Ibid., p. 12
www.bea.gov. Data for 2013 are the latest detailed data available.
10
15
How Important Is Port Fourchon to the Nation
Just how important the services provided by Port Fourchon are to the nation begins with
the data in Table 8. Data column one of this table show how much oil and natural gas are were
produced in the federal waters of the Gulf of Mexico in 2012. Officials at Port Fourchon
indicate that that port services at least 90-95% of this offshore production activity. Thus, column
two of Table 8 provides an estimate of how much offshore oil and gas production is serviced by
Port Fourchon. Finally the last column shows the value in 2012 of the offshore oil and gas
serviced by Port Fourchon. As seen, almost $46 billion worth of petroleum products were
serviced by Port Fourchon in 2012.
Table 8
Value of 2012 Oil and Gas Production Serviced by Port Fourchon
2012
2012 Serviced by Port
Product
Production
Fourchon
Value ($millions)
Oil (barrels)
463,782,000
417,403,800
$42,132.4
Natural Gas (mcf)
1,537,801,000
1,384,020,900
$3,681.5
Source: www.eia.gov. Value based on $100.94 per barrel and $2.66 per mcf.
Impact of Interruption of Port Fourchon Activities
What if the services of Port Fourchon were interrupted, perhaps by a terrorist attack or a
hit from a hurricane? Our recent study of the economic impact of Port Fourchon addressed this
very issue.11
An estimate was made of a temporary loss of the port’s services for three weeks. That
section of the report made use of an even earlier study by Dr. James Richardson and Dr. Loren
“The Economic Impacts of Port Fourchon: An Update”, Loren C. Scott & Associates, Inc., for the Port Fourchon
Commission, October 2014.
11
16
Scott that postulated a similar problem.12 Richardson and Scott focused on losses in access to
Louisiana’s oil and natural gas production. They evaluated two scenarios, a three week and a
five week disruption in supplies. The Port Fourchon study focused on the three week scenario.
With regard to crude oil, the Richardson and Scott study focused only on the largest
economic cost---rising gasoline prices. They argued that a three week disruption to Louisiana’s
pipeline system would raise gasoline prices by 21.6 cents per gallon nationwide. Over a threeweek period, this translated into a $1.74 billion cost to consumers.
When consumers spend more on gasoline, they tend to cut spending elsewhere to balance
the budget, causing the shock to gasoline prices to echo throughout the US economy.
Richardson and Scott used the US Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) input-output tables to
compute the total impact of this disruption in access to Louisiana crude to various parts of the
US economy.
Richardson and Scott also considered a similar exercise based on a three-week disruption
in supplies of natural gas from Louisiana. Overall, they projected the disruption would lead to
an 11.4 percent increase in the price of natural gas. They estimated that the total increased cost
to residential, commercial, industrial, and electric power generation users would be
approximately $740 million, with over 70percent of the increased cost occurring in the Eastern
US. Again, the impact ripples throughout the economy.
Shortly after that study was completed, an unfortunate event occurred which formed a
case study to test the Richardson-Scott forecasts---Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. The impacts of
oil and natural gas interruptions caused by these storms was roughly consistent with the
“The Economic Impact of Coastal Erosion in Louisiana on State, Regional, and National Economies”, February
2004.
12
17
Richardson-Scott forecasts, except the impacts on gasoline and natural gas prices were greater--75 cents for gasoline rather than 21.6 cents and natural gas prices jumped more than 11.4%.
Using the hurricane induced price jumps, it was possible in the Port Fourchon study to
more accurately estimate the impact on the national economy of a three-week interruption of
services from the port. The results are shown in Table 9.
Table 9
The Estimated Total Impact of a Three-Week Louisiana Oil and Natural Gas
Disruption on Sales, Earnings, and Employment in the Continental U.S.
Lost
Lost
Lost Sales
Earnings
Employment
Item
(Millions $)
(Millions $)
Lost Oil Impacts
$8,828.6
$2,482.0
51,510
Lost Natural Gas Impacts
$2,398.1
$674.2
13,992
Total Impacts
$11,226.7
$3,156.2
65,502
These estimates demonstrate just how vital this port is to the nation’s economy. Just a
three-week cessation of port activities would cause a loss of over $11.2 billion in sales at U.S.
businesses. Almost four-fifths of this loss would be due to the interruption of oil production
($8.8 billion) and about one-fifth would be due to the loss of natural gas ($2.4 billion).
Of course a loss in business sales translates into a loss of earnings by U.S. citizens.
According to the middle row of Table 9, households in the U.S. would find their incomes falling
by nearly $3.2 billion, with again the split being again about four-fifths due to oil disruption and
one-fifth due to natural gas shortages. Finally, Table 9 shows the job impact of the loss of Port
Fourchon activities. A total of 65,502 jobs would vanish, about 51,510 due to oil disruption and
13,992 due to the loss of natural gas. Note again that these should be considered conservative
estimates of the sales, earnings and job losses. If it takes longer than three weeks to restore the
18
port’s operations or to shift their activities to other ports the numbers in Table 9 would rise
proportionately.
Impact of Port Cameron on the National Economy
One of the key benefits to the national economy of the proposed Port Cameron is that the
new port could mitigate some of the deleterious effects on the national economy from an
interruption of services at Port Fourchon. Suppose a terrorist attack, for example, shut down Port
Fourchon for three weeks. Clients that presently use Port Fourchon could shift some of their
activity over to Port Cameron and continue to operate.
An important phrase in that last sentence is “some of their”. How much activity could
realistically be shifted from Port Fourchon to Port Cameron? Port Cameron will be limited in
how much activity it could accept simply because of capacity issues. In an emergency situation
Port Cameron could adapt and accept more business temporarily, but there still remains a
limitation imposed by the presence of existing clients at the Port Cameron.
We are aware of no nice, neat model for estimating with precision exactly how much
activity Port Cameron could accept from Port Fourchon in an emergency situation. In light of
the absence of such a model we present a sensitivity analysis that intuitively employs a range of
possibilities that seem plausible and reasonable.
That sensitivity analysis is shown in Tables 10 and 11. In these tables it is assumed that
between ten and twenty percent of Port Fourchon’s activity could be transferred to Port Cameron
in an emergency situation.
19
Table 10
Impact on National Economy of a Three-Week Disruption of Port Fourchon
With 10% of Port Fourchon Activity Moved to Port Cameron
Category
Lost Sales
Lost Earnings
Lost Jobs
Dollar amounts in millions
Gasoline
Disruption
$882.9
$248.2
5,151
Natural Gas
Disruption
$239.8
$67.4
1,399
Total Port
Impact
$1,122.7
$315.6
6,550
Table 11
Impact on National Economy of a Three-Week Disruption of Port Fourchon
With 20% of Port Fourchon Activity Moved to Port Cameron
Category
Lost Sales
Lost Earnings
Lost Jobs
Dollar amounts in millions
Gasoline
Disruption
$1,765.7
$496.4
10,302
Natural Gas
Disruption
$479.6
$134.8
2,798
Total Port
Impact
$2,245.3
$631.2
13,100
Note that even though the amount of business that Port Cameron might absorb from Port
Fourchon during the emergency situation is a fairly small percentage, the impacts on the national
economy are not insignificant. In the case of a 10% shift, the savings to the country would be
$1,122.7 million in business sales, $315.6 million in household earnings for the nation’s
citizens, and 6,550 jobs. In the case of a 20% shift, the savings to the country would be
$2,245.3 million in business sales, $631.2 million in household earnings for the nation’s
citizens, and 13,100 jobs. Few would consider these to be trivial savings.
VI.
Impact on the State Budget
It should be apparent to the reader that constructing this port is a substantial financial
undertaking.
As indicated back in Table 1, the developers (separate from the tenants) of this
project plan to spend almost $3.9 billion over a period of four years to develop the necessary
20
infrastructure at the site. Since the State will benefit from the development of the port (see
Section IV), investors will be asking the State for incentives to aid in this development activity.
At this juncture, investors plan to ask the State for a tax credit of $40 million a year for a
period of 20 years to help develop Port Cameron. Table 12 summarizes the net impact on the
State budget if this tax credit is awarded to the investors and the development plan progresses as
described in this report.
Data in the second column of Table 12 show the taxes the State should collect from the 4year construction program. These numbers were lifted from the last row of Table 6.
Data in the third column of Table 12 show the taxes the State will collect from on-going
operations at the port. The first five years of data in this column come from the last line in Table
7. For years six through 25, taxes from operations were allowed to increase at a modest 2%
inflation rate. Columns two and three in Table 12 represent an infusion of funds into the State
treasury.
Data in the third column of Table 12 indicates the $40 million in tax credits for the first
20 years. The numbers in this column represents an outflow of funds from the State Budget.
Column 4 details the net impact on the State treasury in each year, and column six shows the
cumulative impact on the State budget.
Note that only in years five through seven does the State experience a net negative from
awarding the tax credit. According to the cumulative column---column six---there is no year in
which the State budget suffers a shortfall from awarding the $40 million tax credit.
At the
bottom of Table 12 we have generated the absolute impact over the 25-year period and the net
present value over that same time period. From a net present value standpoint the State
budget comes out ahead by $367.4 million over this 25-year period---a 56% gain over the
21
tax credits awarded.13 A cursory glance down the cumulative column shows there is no year in
which the state budget does not come out ahead.
Table 12
Total State Taxes Generated by Port Cameron
Construction and Operations and the State Tax Credit Requested
(Millions of Dollars)
Year
Construction
Operations
Tax
Credits
Total
Cumulative
Local
Taxes
Year 1
$53.7
$1.6
$40.0
$15.3
$15.3
$35.6
Year 2
$53.2
$8.9
$40.0
$22.1
$37.3
$39.9
Year 3
$80.6
$15.2
$40.0
$55.8
$93.1
$61.6
Year 4
$79.9
$23.4
$40.0
$63.3
$156.4
$66.4
Year 5
$0.0
$38.0
$40.0
-$2.0
$154.3
$24.4
Year 6
$0.0
$38.7
$40.0
-$1.3
$153.0
$24.9
Year 7
$0.0
$39.5
$40.0
-$0.5
$152.5
$25.4
Year 8
$0.0
$40.3
$40.0
$0.3
$152.8
$25.9
Year 9
$0.0
$41.1
$40.0
$1.1
$153.9
$26.4
Year 10
$0.0
$41.9
$40.0
$1.9
$155.8
$26.9
Year 11
$0.0
$42.7
$40.0
$2.7
$158.5
$27.5
Year 12
$0.0
$43.6
$40.0
$3.6
$162.1
$28.0
Year 13
$0.0
$44.5
$40.0
$4.5
$166.6
$28.6
Year 14
$0.0
$45.4
$40.0
$5.4
$172.0
$29.2
Year 15
$0.0
$46.3
$40.0
$6.3
$178.2
$29.7
Year 16
$0.0
$47.2
$40.0
$7.2
$185.4
$30.3
Year 17
$0.0
$48.1
$40.0
$8.1
$193.6
$30.9
Year 18
$0.0
$49.1
$40.0
$9.1
$202.7
$31.6
Year 19
$0.0
$50.1
$40.0
$10.1
$212.7
$32.2
Year 20
$0.0
$51.1
$40.0
$11.1
$223.8
$32.8
Year 21
$0.0
$52.1
$0.0
$52.1
$275.9
$33.5
Year 22
$0.0
$53.1
$0.0
$53.1
$329.1
$34.2
Year 23
$0.0
$54.2
$0.0
$54.2
$383.3
$34.8
Year 24
$0.0
$55.3
$0.0
$55.3
$438.6
$35.5
Year 25
$0.0
$56.4
$0.0
$56.4
$495.0
$36.3
Total
$267.4
$1,027.6
$800.0
$495.0
-
$832.5
NPV
$253.5
$767.9
$654.1
$367.4
-
$656.7
The first six columns of Table 12 focus on the impact of this project on the State budget.
In the final column of this table we show how local governments across the State will come out
13
($253.5+$767.9)/$654.1=1.56
22
financially. Dr. James Richardson of LSU’s Public Administration Institute has estimated that
for every new dollar generated within the State, local governments collect 4.5 cents in sales
taxes, property taxes, and other fees. Given our estimates of new household earning generated in
the state from constructing (see the second row of Table 6) and operating (see the second row of
Table 7) the Port, the impact on local government budgets is shown in the last column of Table
12. It is estimated that the present value of collections by local governments in the State would
be $656.7 million---almost two-thirds of a billion dollars.
VII.
Summary & Conclusions
Port Cameron is a proposed new port to be located on about 1,250 acres on the Calcasieu
Ship Channel in Cameron parish just below the City of Lake Charles. The Port would be
surrounded on three sides by water. Over the 4-year initial construction cycle, the port and its
tenants are estimated to spend nearly $5.4 billion to build out the port site. The purpose of this
report is to estimate the impact of this port on the Lake Charles MSA, the State of Louisiana, and
the nation. Our findings can be summarized as follows:

The impact on the Lake Charles MSA:
o Over the 4-year construction cycle, construction spending at the proposed port
will create:

Almost $9.5 billion in new sales at firms in the MSA;

Nearly $3 billion in new household earnings for MSA residents;

An average of 16,262 jobs a year; and

$103.5 million in new sales taxes for Calcasieu Parish.
23
o The port is expected to be fully leased up by Year 5. Once that occurs,
operational activity at the port will create:


Over $2.5 billion in sales at firms in the MSA;

$469.2 million in new household earnings in the MSA;

8,057 new jobs in the MSA, and;

$16.4 million in new sales tax collections in Calcasieu Parish.
The impact of the proposed new port on the Louisiana economy would be:
o Over the 4-year construction cycle, construction spending at the proposed port
will create:

$11.2 billion in new sales at firms in the state;

$3.8 billion in new household earnings for state residents;

An average of 21,249 jobs a year, and;

$267.5 million in new taxes for the state treasury.
o The port is expected to be fully leased up by Year 5. Once that occurs,
operational activity at the port will create:


Over $2.8 billion in sales at firms in the state;

$542.2 million in new household earnings in the state;

9,930 new jobs in the state, and;

$38 million in new tax collections for the state treasury.
The impact of the new port on the national economy was based on how much the
existence of Port Cameron could absorb activities from Port Fourchon should that port
be out of operation due to some unforeseen event such as a terrorist or direct hit by a
hurricane. Sensitivity analysis was used to estimate the impact on the nation if Port
24
Cameron could absorb either 10% or 20% of the business lost at Port Fourchon. The
impacts on the national economy were:
o Absorbing 10% of Port Fourchon’s business would save the national economy:

$1,122.7 million in sales at firms in the country;

$315.6 million in household earnings for U.S. residents, and;

6,550 jobs in the country.
o Absorbing 20% of Port Fourchon’s business would save the national economy:


$2,245.3 million in sales at firms in the country;

$631.2 million in household earnings for U.S. residents, and;

13,100 jobs in the country.
We have calculated the impact on the State budget if the State grants a $40 million tax
credit over the first 25 years of activity at the port. It is estimated that over this period,
(1) there are only three years in which there is a net drain on the State budget, (2) from a
cumulative standpoint, there are no years in which the budget fails to come out ahead,
and (3) the present value of the net gain to the State budget is $367.4 million---56%
more than the State paid out in tax credits. Local governments in the State will also
gain about two-thirds of a billion dollars in their coffers.
25
ADDENDUM
THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED PORT CAMERON
ON CAMERON PARISH
In this addendum we examine the economic impact of the proposed Port Cameron on the
economy of the parish in which it will be located---Cameron Parish. In the sections below we
present the I/O table results of both constructing and operating the port on this parish.
Impact on Cameron Parish– Construction
Recall from the main text of this report that officials with Port Cameron have proposed
constructing this port over a 4-year period. The schedule and amount of spending by both the
port and port tenants each year was shown back in Table 1.
Table 1 data show that investors and port tenants are planning to spend nearly $5.4 billion
on port infrastructure over the 4-year period. This amount will be larger in Year 3 and Year 4
when larger acreage is developed in Phase II.
The numbers in Table 1 were injected into the BEA’s I/O table for Cameron Parish to
determine the multiplier effect of the construction spending. The results by year are shown in
Table A-1.
Table A-1
Impacts of Port Cameron Construction Expenditures
on Cameron Parish
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Total
$1,300.8
$1,288.7
$1,951.2
$1,933.1
$6,473.8
Household Earnings
$316.8
$313.9
$475.2
$470.8
$1,576.7
Temporary Jobs
6,667
6,534
9,785
9,588
8,143*
Business Sales
*Annual average. Sales and earnings in millions
Note that the impact numbers show a sizeable impact on this parish. In the year of
greatest construction spending---Year 3---nearly $2 billion in new sales are projected to be
26
created at firms in the parish. Over the 4-year construction period a total of almost $6.5
billion in new sales will be generated at firms in the parish. This is obviously a huge infusion
of cash into the Parish economy.
A part of those new sales in line one of Table A-1 will end up as new earnings for
workers in the firms enjoying the sales boosts. Line two of Table A-1 provides the I/O table
estimate of these new earnings. In construction Year 3, residents of the parish will find their
incomes increased by $475.2 million dollars. Total personal income in Cameron Parish in 2013
(latest data available) was $263.5 million.14 That means construction activity at the port in
Year 3 will increase parish-wide income by 180%! Over the 4-year construction cycle, an
estimated $1.6 billion in new household earnings will be produced for the citizens of the parish.
Decision makers are obviously keenly interested in the impact of all that construction
spending on employment in the parish. These job projections are shown in the third row of
Table A-1. In peak Year 3, 9,785 jobs will be supported in the parish by construction spending
at the port site. On the average over the 4-year construction cycle construction spending will
support 8,143 jobs a year. In February 2015 there were 3,500 people employed in Cameron
Parish.15 That means that on the average, construction activity at the port will increase
parish-wide employment by almost 233%.
It is important to note that all the benefits in Table A-1 for the parish are temporary.
They will vanish as soon as the construction is completed. However, the operation of the port
will then begin, and the benefits to the parish from operating the port will be permanent. It is to
the measurement of those benefits that we now turn.
14
15
www.bea.gov.
“Louisiana Workforce at a Glance,” Louisiana Workforce Commission, March 31, 2015, p.17.
27
Impact on Cameron Parish– Operations
Using the methodology described in the main text of the report we were able to estimate
the impact on Cameron Parish of operations at the port. These impacts are detailed in Table A-2.
Table A-2
Impacts of Port Cameron Operations
on Cameron Parish
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Total
Business Sales
$81.4
$464.9
$794.6
$1,221.4
$1,984.8
$4,547.2
Household Earnings
$11.3
$64.7
$110.4
$169.9
$276.2
$632.5
165
935
1,594
2,402
3,860
1,791*
Permanent Jobs
*Annual average. Sales and income figures in millions of dollars.
Parish officials might be startled by the magnitude of these impact numbers. Clearly,
Port Cameron would be an economy-changing factor for the parish. By the time property is fully
absorbed at the port in Year 5, firms in the parish will see their sales boosted by nearly $2
billion.
Unlike the impacts of construction spending---which are temporary---these sales
benefits are permanent and will continue to be enjoyed by firms in the parish as long as the Port
remains fully operational. According to the I/O table, over the first 5 years of operation, firms
in the parish will find their sales up over $4.5 billion due to the presence of Port Cameron.
These increased sales will result in an increase in household earnings for residents of the
parish. Note on the second line in Table A-2 that once the port is fully leased in Year 5,
residents of the parish will have found their household incomes have risen by $276.2 million--an increase that should remain as long as the port remains fully leased up (and actually grow
with inflation). Again as a reference point, total personal income in Cameron Parish in 2013
(latest data available) was $263.5 million.16 This means by the time the port is fully
operational, personal income in the parish will have more than doubled!
16
www.bea.gov.
28
Line three of Table A-2 provides I/O table estimates of a key metric---how many new
jobs are supported in the parish once the facility is fully leased. By Year 5, 3,860 new jobs will
have been created in the parish because of the existence of the port. As a reference point, in
February 2015, there were 3,500 people employed in the entire parish.17 That means the once
the port is fully operational, employment in the parish will have more than doubled.
If one divides the projected new household income in Year 5 ($276.2 million) by the
projected new jobs in that year (3,860) the result is an average annual wage per job of $71,554.
By comparison, the average annual wage of workers in the private sector in the Lake Charles
MSA in February 2015 was $46,084---36% lower.18 This is an indication that the jobs created as
a result of the presence of this new port would be relatively high-quality jobs.
The implication of the data in Tables A-1 and A-2 for the parish is that if the owners of
this port are able to meet their objectives and timelines as stated in the main text of this report,
Port Cameron will be a major game-changer for Cameron parish. The parish will be flush with
new jobs, new population, and new incomes. With this largess will also come challenges for
parish officials, in terms of providing the necessary infrastructure to support a much larger parish
economy.
17
Louisiana Workforce at a Glance, Louisiana Workforce Commission, March 31, 2015, p. 17.
18
Ibid. p.18. Private wage data are not available at the Cameron Parish level.
29