Is it too early to roll out the next iteration of the Colorado ‘brand’? A just-released economic report from CSU’s Regional Economics Institute provides some direction.

‘Colorado: Sick and Getting Sicker. And Older’, doesn’t have quite the same ring as ‘It’s our Nature’, but since the Great Recession, Colorado’s ‘Health-care and Social Assistance’ service sector has added more jobs than any in the state. By a lot.

The Regional Economics Institute’s report quantified the trend:

‘Health care and social assistance is the state’s largest sector and has steadily added jobs over the past decade.

Since the start of the millennium the nation’s job growth has been driven largely by the expanding health care sector and Colorado is no different. In the third quarter of 2013 Health care and social assistance was the state’s largest sector in terms of employment, with more than 286,400 workers.’

And in the past five years, the sector’s taken on a life of it’s own.

‘Health care and social assistance added more than 50,200 jobs over the timeframe, more than the combined total of the next two largest growth sectors (Professional and technical services and Accommodation and food services).’

Service jobs including those in health-care also pay less than those they’re replacing. As a result household wages continue to fall from their pre-recession highs. As the reports states:

‘…although the state is adding jobs, much of the growth is concentrated in industries with average wages below the state average.’

REI’s report does shed some positive light on job growth:

‘The Great Recession was hard on Colorado, wiping out more than 146,000 jobs in 18 months. Since bottoming out in 2010, the state’s employment totals have steadily grown, and today Colorado has more jobs than ever before.’

Unemployment remains stubbornly high, though, and a recovery varies greatly from metro area to metro area. Grand Junction and Colorado Springs, for example, haven’t added jobs at the same rate northern Colorado, or the Denver Metro area have.

But Colorado’s labor force is growing and sectors that would diversify the economy and pay higher wages have huge potential here. The state continues to churn out or attract an educated, risk-taking workforce. And companies and eco-devo entities are powering a regional surge in entrepreneurship.

But how to support these sectors – including manufacturing – is a challenge. CSU’s news release promoting the report summed it up this way:

“The varied economic progress across Colorado shows the diversity of the state’s economy. Yet it also highlights the need for more geographically targeted economic development policy. What works in one region will not necessarily work elsewhere.”

We’ll explore Colorado’s regional economic realities as reported by REI, and the diverse set of economic development needs, in the coming weeks.

Much to the unending dismay of the Denver Post, Colorado voters continue to view legalization a wise alternative to prohibition. In a Quinnipiac survey, 58% now support legalizing pot, up from an already big majority, 55%, who voted in 2012 to change decades of public policy.

Despite the drum-beat of doubt from the Post and other media like 9News, there’s good reason to be optimistic. The system seems to be working as intended. Little seems to have changed in our communities as we regulate and tax a multi-million dollar industry already operating in our state. Voters deserve credit.

Business, predictably, is a vanguard. This week’s profile of Dixie Elixirs and Edibles, one of the state’s fastest growing businesses, is testament to the efficiency of the private sector. A year and half ago, the electorate said pot was mainstream. Today, less than eighteen months after the vote, makers in the marijuana space like Dixie are mainstream-corporate as well. The numbers don’t lie.

Regrettably for Dixie and others, the Feds still see it differently. It’s still against the law to bank an illegal business. On one hand it’s understandable; a lot has happened in a short period of time. But if the upside of legalization materializes, and it’s heading that way, it will become harder to make the case that voter-approved commerce should be embargoed by the federal government. Elected officials will have to make that case, as will candidates for office. Who will?

Colorado officials should be applauded for their work since the election. With teeth-clenched and eyes-rolled in some cases, they’ve nevertheless put in place a workable framework. Colorado’s sold pot for a month. Money’s been collected. The streets are still safe. It’s a considerable public policy achievement.

Stores will report sales on February 20th. Notwithstanding a huge surprise, it’s a good bet that everyone, including the most persistent skeptics of mainstreet pot, will be forced to concede that regulating a thriving black-market business not only has a considerable financial upside, but lays the groundwork to regulate use more effectively. Colorado’s first tax windfall will be a gratifying payback for voters.

Certainly there’s room to improve how mainstream pot is managed. Voters asked to reconsider the promise of legalization. Missing almost entirely from the Colorado conversation thus far is how media can be deployed with pot proceeds to educate young people as to the pitfalls of using.

Think tobacco – and Madison Avenue. With pot-use out of the shadows, our best creative talent can be harnessed to have a modern, substantive conversation with young people about what’s at stake, what can be lost with use. Business should lead the discussion. It has much to gain – see Dixie Elixirs – and much to lose, like a workforce.

Using media to educate young people and working in good faith to implement the economic will of voters seem two worthy objectives. If 2012 is a guide, voters will double-down and hold candidates accountable, including those who don’t take action to reduce the uncertainty facing pot entrepreneurs.

Colorado voters deserve a full-throated endorsement of their wishes from state and local candidates this fall.

Builders and manufacturers share space in the economy. They’re makers. They create things. It’s interesting then that circumstances are bringing them together in a meaningful collaboration.

Developers are increasingly motivated to build new mixed-use projects with light industry a key component. City planners favor the mix. Industry brings jobs and tax revenue. It pays for itself and more.

The industry of choice is increasingly maker and manufacturing businesses. Despite a lingering stereotype, today’s manufacturing surge looks different, more appealing. It’s advanced, clean, tech-driven, green and growing in lifestyle sectors that communities want to highlight – not hide.

It’s a fortuitous alignment. The result may be the development of a new generation of mixed-use, industry-and-family friendly spaces that literally reshape our city landscapes. Colorado’s award of a national digital manufacturing hub will only help.

McWhinney, a prominent real-estate company, developer and builder, sees the convergence of interests and is an advocate.

“For so many years our development pattern has been that industrial is dirty, and needs to put in the backyard, so to speak”, says Taber Sweet, McWhinney’s director of development. “I could show you the spaces we’re contemplating today – light, energy efficient, simple construction techniques. In the past when people say ‘mixed-use’, industrial was the piece that got left out – but going forward I think it’s the piece that gets integrated.

“If you go up to (Denver’s) River North, on Brighton Boulevard , you have The Source (eateries, office) next to these great craftsman and artisans, welders or carbon fiber guys; and that’s what makes River North really tick now…It’s interesting to see how that use (industry) is being integrated.”

The integration also makes financial sense, says Trae Rigby, chief development officer at McWhinney. “As an integrated real estate/development company, we’re trying to be ‘evergreen’ – profitable in all cycles. These types of projects can accomplish that for us, where we own everything long-term, where we tend to ‘asset-manage’ our own buildings so that when things slow down, and we don’t build anything in the next 3 or 4 years, income will come in from a variety of sources and give us a lot of flexibility.”

Colorado’s at the epicenter of the trend, says Sweet. “There’s no mystery why we’re (McWhinney) here. Colorado is incredibly well positioned nationally from a geographical standpoint – we’re central, with transportation infrastructure. And Denver has this incredible industrial core based on a rich history of energy and mineral rights.

“But I think more than anything, we have such a highly educated populace that Colorado is really the next big logical spot for incubation”, says Sweet. “And for us, I believe we’re talking about a product that’s a blend of office, R&D, lab, advanced manufacturing, and light industrial. It’s a great opportunity for the state.”

Other developer/builders see similar opportunity in light industry and manufacturing. Shawn Sullivan, vice president for business development at The Neenan Company, is focused on the craft-brewing segment. “Most successful brewers quickly outgrow their space”, Sullivan says. “As they get a foothold in the market, they make more beer, and to do that they need more equipment and a larger facility.”

Sullivan works with brewers to build new space, but he’s also a cheerleader for the sector. “We’re helping brewers understand how much space they’ll need and when – and how to manage that growth financially. But we’re excited about what’s happening here, with craft brewing and other parts of the maker and manufacturing economy. We view this as a partnership with industry.”

It’s a collaborative approach playing out to mutual benefit for all involved – foremost the communities prescient enough to drive the public-private partnerships required for the large, integrated developments that Sweet and Rigby are enthused about.

Colorado only stands to gain in the regional competition for a new and modern industrial base.

Reconciling the competing narratives around higher education can be a challenge. Reports of financial trouble and sweeping change are offset by news of the broad and profound economic impact of America’s institutions of higher learning.

Insolvent or impactful, universities and colleges are accountable to business, their customers, and as well-served as US industry has been there’s worry today that graduates aren’t adequately trained to meet the needs of employers. Pick your report – I’ve referenced McKinsey’s in the past – but there’s general agreement a skills-gap is prevalent; that graduates increasingly lack the skills business requires.

John Miller, COO of Englewood-based HOL, a provider of cloud-based, STEM solutions and learning tools, sums up the alignment conundrum. “Industry believes that students graduates today have about 50% of the skills necessary to succeed. Universities say its 70% – what they both agree on is there’s a gap.”

Miller’s firm has developed a “solution set within the distance learning environment” intended to help universities become better at addressing the missing that the 30-50% of graduates, depending on the number, are lacking. For HOL, this means developing tools that enhance science-based online learning.

“The way students learn today if very different than it used to be”, Miller says. “They want to be able to get information when they want in a format they want it – a laptop, an iPad, or whatever they choose to use.

HOL is essentially making distance learning more hands on than it would be otherwise. “We provide the physical hands-on lab tools, for example, to execute any kinds of experimentation to support the learning objectives of a course at a school”, Miller says. “For (distance) chemistry students, as an example, we provide a box with the beakers, the fetal pig to dissect, and other things to give them the same learning experience they’d get at the lab of a university, but in the environment of their choosing.”

Miller works with both universities and industry to develop sector-specific solutions. “We’re trying to bring business and higher-education together to close the gap of what industry needs. The commodity that industry buys, are graduates. Education still doesn’t really get that, that they’re developing a commodity for a market. I’m bringing the two together so they better understand what the needs are so they can create a better solution.”

Miller says the upside for universities is twofold – revenue for starters. Much of the cost for the solutions HOL develops is underwritten by industry. “Many institutions believe that they are physically at risk – they’re desperate for funding. Government can’t underwrite this, it has to be from the entity that is consuming the product.”

A higher placement-percentage may be the big payoff. “There is one job for every eight graduates that is non-STEM”, Miller says. “There are three jobs for one STEM-graduate.”

For its part higher education seems torn between protecting a legacy of institutional success and methodology, and the reengineering that Miller and others advocate involving a more systemic embrace of distance-learning. Given HOL’s national reach, I ask Miller if the McKinsey report and others are motivating higher-ed to embrace change. “They’re attempting to”, he says, “but those attempts in large part have not gone extremely well.”

A leadership faction at Colorado State University might disagree. In 2007 the university launched the CSU-Global Campus, a fully online university that in 2011 became the first of its kind to be awarded independent accreditation from the Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools. But CSU’s not alone. Harvard and MIT teamed-up on a nonprofit initiative in 2012 called edX, significant in part given the brick-and-mortar stature and the high value of a traditional degree from those schools. MOOCs – massive open online courses – are the rage in higher-ed.

Yet to Miller’s point, are these efforts translating into the type of high-quality education that industry expects? Lou Swanson, vice president of engagement in CSU’s Office of Engagement, believes they can. “If you do this right, it can be as good – if not better – than what students get in class on campus. It comes down to the person delivering the class.”

Swanson’s enthusiasm may also reflect the confidence that CSU’s leadership has in the institution’s ability to adapt to a changing higher-ed landscape.

Industry will benefit if that’s the case.

Colorado’s economic development landscape is an alphabet-soup mix of acronyms and trade names. Entities that touch the maker and manufacturing sector alone include OEDIT, CAMA, CAMT, CACI, WCMA, CWIDB, CBSA, CCIA, WTC, CBDA and others I’m sure I’ve left out, not to mention city and community chambers and EDC’s.

Collectively, it’s an amazing collection of smart people, very good at what they do. It’s also becoming a startlingly large bureaucracy. Economic development is big business. It’s a competitive game that takes money to make money.

The upside of today’s system is that member companies or affiliates get quality support in the regional and national chase for influence, dollars, and incentives. The downside is that business is getting squeezed. Companies are being asked to do and spend more, with multiple groups, and expect less in return. And the high stakes at play between developers can work to lessen collaboration with sectors. Which kind of defeats the whole purpose.

It can be refreshing when entities find ways to partner to advance everyone’s interest. For manufacturers, one idea percolating in southern Colorado has the long-term goal of doing just that.

SCBP – the Southern Colorado Business Partnership – is partnering with CAMT – the Colorado Association for Manufacturing and Technology, to reprise an idea that’s been visited and revisited with varying degrees of, well, futility.

The idea is simple enough: encourage manufacturers, their partners and providers, to participate in building a database of key information that’s searchable, easy to use, and highly targeted to others within the maker and manufacturer ecosystem. The end game is to build a more highly connected community. A single community.

The challenge in the past has been to convince companies that a tool like this might lead to business, and as a result, convince them to invest the time to enter data and use the platform.

CAMT CEO Tom Bugnitz believes this time may be different. “Companies are starting to realize there is a lot they don’t know about their potential partners”, he says, “who they are, what they do, how they can help their business. Competition is much stronger now, and with the information tools available, companies are looking for anything that helps them compete. Manufacturers have evolved so that they are now ready and willing to use data to improve their competitiveness, and they see this tool as one piece of the information puzzle for doing that.”

In the companies we’ve profiled, there does seem to be a high interest to be better connected. Macro-trends are favoring domestic production, and companies here increasingly look to local and regional sources to meet growing demand for talent and expertise, money and materials.

CAMT’s Bugnitz sees supply-chain as the big win. “The key idea is Colorado manufacturers finding Colorado suppliers. Companies know each other now through existing personal knowledge and informal networking. This activity will increase everyone’s awareness of what’s being made in Colorado, allow companies to quickly identify potential new suppliers and new customers, and keep more business in Colorado.

“Over time this effort will create a more and more detailed view of the Colorado manufacturing network”, he adds, “allowing manufacturers to streamline their supply chains for faster product delivery, product development, and cheaper costs.”

If CAMT, SCBP and the coalition being formed to develop the tool can persuade southern Colorado manufacturers to participate, an even bigger ‘win’ for the community would be a statewide implementation of the as-of-yet unnamed database tool. CAMT, one of 61 MEPs (manufacturing extension partnerships) across the country, already plays in a bigger sandbox. Bugnitz has eyes for a tool that would serve the statewide community of manufacturers.

With so many entities vying for the support of makers and manufacturers, each offering a suite of services and assistance, CAMT and SCBP’s challenge of capturing the attention and interest of otherwise busy companies, seems daunting. There’s also the challenge of demonstrating ease-of-use: technology solutions often bring with them a perception that loads of time is needed to learn a new platform.

But the payoff for participating companies may be worth the effort. Connecting the statewide community with a single, open, and comprehensive resource would be a major accomplishment.

One the entire alphabet might readily support.