1. Hilton Jacksonville Riverfront Hotel Jacksonville, FL July 17 – 20, 2005 2005 Community & Economic Development Conference American Public Power Association

2. Corporate PUBLISHED DECEMBER 2004 19 th Annual 1 st Annual To read the full corporate survey go to: www.AreaDevelopment.com/FrameCorpSurvey.html Consultants & Survey SITE AND FACILITY PLANNING AREA DEVELOPMENT

3. Corporate 19 th Annual Survey Results

4.  Corporate Titles200420032002 Chairman, President, Partner, CEO or Owner35%30%28% V.P., Treasurer, Secretary, or Other Corporate Officer 30%42%39% Real Estate Mgr./Dir.; Facility Mgr./Dir.; Development Mgr./Dir.; V.P. Real Estate 23%19%25% Corporate Manager12%9%8%  Corporate respondent’s level of involvement in company’s location decision: 2004*20032002 Final decision50%38%45% Preliminary decision31% 18% Information Gathering38%30%31% *Percentage is more than 100% due to multiple answers to question. RESPONDENT DEMOGRAPHICS

5. 2004 Manufacturing74% Warehousing/Distribution10% Financial Services1% Information Technology3% Professional Services6% Other6% CURRENT OPERATIONS OF RESPONDENT COMPANIES

6. Number of domestic facilities currently operated: 200420032002 125% 24% 215%22%13% 311% 48%4% 8% 5 OR MORE41%38%44% Number of foreign facilities currently operated worldwide: 200420032002 124%22%25% 211%12% 36%15%4% 4 2% 5 OR MORE56%49%57% FACILITY LOCATIONS

7. 2004200320022001 Increased number of facilities by 3 or more 10%3%14%13% Increased number of facilities by 2 or fewer 19%13%15%17% Number of facilities not changed55%67%56%52% Decreased number of facilities by 3 or more 6%11%7%8% Decreased number of facilities by 2 or fewer 11%6%8%10% ANNUAL FACILITIES ACTIVITY

8. SITE SELECTION FACTORS RANKING2004200320022001 1Labor costs96.489.789.991.5 2Highway accessibility90.288.986.687.9 3Availability of skilled labor89.189.090.991.6 4State and local incentives87.592.788.081.4 5Energy availability and costs85.880.880.986.4 6Corporate tax rate84.485.184.679.0 7Occupancy or construction costs83.686.382.482.3 8Tax exemptions83.386.288.282.7 9Availability of telecommunications services82.377.976.183.3 10TEnvironmental regulations80.772.976.778.8 10TAvailability of high-speed Internet access80.7N/A *All figures are the combined total percentages of the “very important” and “important” rating responses. COMBINED RATINGS* OF 2004 FACTORS Four Year Comparison

9. SITE SELECTION FACTORS RANKING2004200320022001 11Cost of land76.677.374.077.3 12Availability of land75.778.175.279.7 13Low union profile75.571.669.478.0 14Proximity to major markets72.780.083.780.2 15Right-to-work state69.560.858.067.6 16Raw materials availability64.955.856.064.6 17Availability of long-term financing63.057.560.048.7 18Proximity to suppliers62.458.561.867.1 19Availability of unskilled labor59.455.855.159.5 20Accessibility to major airport53.853.154.055.4 *All figures are the combined total percentages of the “very important” and “important” rating responses. CONTINUED – Four Year Comparison COMBINED RATINGS* OF 2004 FACTORS

10. 2004200320022001 1 year25%13%18%20% 2 years17%15%16%15% 3 years12%9%13%10% 4 years plus6%5% No plans40%58%48%51% GROWTH PROSPECTS Table 1  Companies expecting to open new facilities within:

11. 2004200320022001 141%49%41%44% 228%25%22%20% 310%9%16%13% 46% 3%4% 5 or more15%11%18%  Of companies with plans, number of new facilities they will open within the next five years: GROWTH PROSPECTS Table 2

12. 200420032002200120001999 New England7% 8% 7%5% Middle Atlantic12%8%10%7%10%9% South Atlantic11%8%4%10% 11% Mid-South10%12%10%9% 11% South10%9%11% 13%12% Midwest10%13% 16%14%18% Plains5%8%6%7%8%6% Mountain6%5%6% 3%4% Southwest10%11% 12% 10% West14% 15%11%12%11% P.R. / U.S. V.I.5% 4%3% (Percent of total projects) DOMESTIC LOCATION TRENDS 6 YEAR COMPARISON

13. 200420032002200120001999 Mexico14%10%20%21%22%28% Caribbean3%NR2% 4%2% Canada10%7%13%7%9%13% South America7%5%4%12%7%9% Western Europe10%20%15%16%18% Eastern Europe12%7%13%12%11%3% Middle East4%NR4%2%4%3% Africa1%2%3%2% Asia27%44%21% 16% Australia8%2%4%5%2% N/A (Percent of total projects) GLOBAL LOCATION TRENDS 6 YEAR COMPARISON

14. 200420032002 YES64%66%68% NO36%34%32% 200420032002 More important in your decision than other factors 28%15%22% Less important than other factors29%38%34% Equally important42%47%44% AVAILABLE BUILDING FACTOR  Are available buildings at the area under consideration a factor in your location decision?  When choosing a location, would an available building be:

15. INTERNET USAGE 20042003200220012000 Regularly75%72%62%53%61% Occasionally23%25%35%42%35% Never2%3% 5%4%  How often do you use the Internet to obtain business information?

16. USING CONSULTANTS 20042003200220012000 Yes50%48%47%40%48% No50%51%53%60%52%  Does your company use outside consultants when site selecting?

17. 1 st Annual Consultants Survey Results

18. General Manufacturing63% Warehousing/Distribution17% Computers & Peripheral Products5% Electrical Equipment & Components5% Information Technology5% Financial Services/Insurance7% Other8% CLIENT OPERATIONS Consultants Survey Response Types of companies for which you have recently worked on a location or expansion project.

19. LOCATION PROJECTS Consultants Survey Response Number of companies employing consultants for their location projects over the past year has: Increased41% Decreased14% Remained the same45%

20. LOCATION PROJECTS Consultants Survey Response Of the clients who ask you to do a location search: Most have already gathered preliminary data32% Most have already narrowed down the geographic area in which they wish to locate 58% Most have already chosen several “finalist”communities3% Expect consultant to narrow the location search for them22%

21. EMPLOYMENT NUMBERS Consultants Survey Response In terms of their employment numbers, those companies utilizing consultants are: Small (20 – 99 employees)19% Mid –Size (100 – 499 employees)37% Large (500 – 999 employees)46% Very Large (1,000 or more employees)22%

22. NEW FACILITIES Side by Side Comparison of Survey Responses Clients who expect to open new facilities plan to do so within: Corporate Responses Consultants Responses 1 year41%40% 2 years28%40% 3 years20%15% 4 years or more11%5%

23. NEW FACILITIES Side by Side Comparison of Survey Responses The number of facilities these companies plan to open is usually: Corporate Responses Consultants Responses One41%64% Two28%26% Three10%4% Four6%N/A Five or more15%6%

24. NEW FACILITIES Consultants Survey Response Most companies are choosing to establish new facilities: In close proximity to existing ones14% Within the same general geographic region39% In varied regions of the country46%

25. The foreign location projects you have worked on were slated for which of the following regions? (as a percent of total projects) Corporate Responses Consultants Responses Canada10%23% Caribbean3% Mexico14%25% Central AmericaN/A2% South America7%3% Western Europe10%16% Eastern Europe12%7% Middle East4%2% Africa1%2% Asia27%18% FOREIGN LOCATION PROJECTS Side by Side Comparison of Survey Responses

26. Rank each of the following cost factors as to its importance to your clients: Consultants Responses Labor1 Energy2 Transportation3 Compliance with government regulations4 Workers’ compensation5 Healthcare6 Housing7 COST FACTORS Consultants Survey Response

27. What is the relative importance of incentives to clients when making location decision? Have always been of great importance36% Are more important now than in the past58% Are less important now than in the past6% INCENTIVES FACTORS Consultants Survey Response

28. Which types of incentives are most important/valuable to your clients? Tax credits37% Tax exemptions61% Grants34% Loans12% Loan Guarantees10% Bonds7% Other10% INCENTIVES FACTORS Consultants Survey Response

29. AVAILABLE BUILING FACTORS Side by Side Comparison of Survey Responses When choosing a location, would an immediately available building be: Corporate Responses Consultants Responses More important to your client’s decision than other factors 28%29% Less important than other factors 29%27% Equally important42%45%

30. “It is pleasant to see that state and local incentives declined in importance. Executives recognize that incentives should not be the primary driver for site selection decisions. [Incentives] cannot overcome a fundamental mismatch between a company’s needs and the characteristics of a state and community; they can only be a marginal improvement to an already sound locational fit.” By Lynn M. Bruce, Chairperson, Business Facility Planning Consultants, LLC (BFPC) Norcross, GA CONSULTANT’S ANALYSIS

31. “Area Development’s Corporate Survey mirrors the mix of Austin’s location strategy consulting projects, and therefore provides insights into the future of our business. In this year’s survey there is confirmation of recent trends in Austin’s location selection projects. We see companies implementing a wider range of location strategies including expansion of existing facilities, development of new facilities, consolidation of operations, and outsourcing. Projects today are often an amalgam that involves some aspect of all these strategy alternatives.” By Don Schjeldahl, Vice President and Director, Facilities Location Group, The Austin Company Cleveland, OH CONSULTANT’S ANALYSIS

32. “Reasons cited for increasing the number of facilities and for the decline in the number of facilities are not mutually exclusive. 1) We see companies in a rapid growth mode, that consolidate operations in order to gain efficiencies system wide. 2) Conversely, there are companies, threatened with loss of business, that are forced to increase their number of facilities in order to meet more demanding service expectations. This is particularly true for suppliers to mass-market retailers.” By Don Schjeldahl, Vice President and Director, Facilities Location Group, The Austin Company Cleveland, OH CONSULTANT’S ANALYSIS

33. “In the past, incentives were never a deal breaker, but that trend is reversing for the larger projects that tend to create significant new jobs and have larger capital investments. As the U.S. work force continues to shift to a service- based economy, many states are revamping their incentive programs to attract service-related projects. While the capital investments for the service projects ten to be lower, they oftentimes create significant new jobs with higher wages than the traditional manufacturing jobs.” By Dean J. Uminski, Partner, Crowe Chizek and Company, LLC South Bend, IN CONSULTANT’S ANALYSIS

34. 400 Post Avenue, Westbury, NY 11590 USA 800-735-2732 Fax: 516-338-0100 AREA DEVELOPMENT SITE AND FACILITY PLANNING Area Development and FastFacility thank you for your invitation and attention to this presentation. To read the full corporate survey go to: www.AreaDevelopment.com/FrameCorpSurvey.html