APA National Conference Monday, May 8 10:30 a.m. -11:45 a.m. Room: Hall 1E09 (JCC) Dr. Linda Tomaselli, GIS Research and Development Consultants (GISRDC) Ms. Vasudha Pinnamaraju, Executive Director, McLean County Regional Planning Commission (MCRPC), Illinois
Agenda Overview of Spatial Fiscal Impact and comparison to other methods Concepts Process Results and how to present them Costs and Benefits Q and A
Fiscal Impact Analysis Definition: A projection of the direct, current, public costs and revenues associated with residential or nonresidential growth to the local jurisdiction in which this growth is taking place. Corollary: We know what the costs and revenues are for existing development. Do we really know, or are we just guessing?
Your experience with Fiscal Impact Analysis How many of you have been asked to estimate fiscal impact? Are you familiar with these books? Handbook published in 1978 Practitioners Guide published in 1985 Per Capita - residential Service Standard residential Case Study - residential Comparable City - residential Employment Anticipation C/I Proportional Valuation C/I
Shortcomings of non-spatial methods Residential or commercial/industrial land use, but not both They treat these types of land use as homogeneous blocks of development; they are not They totally ignore tax exempt uses Per capita most widely used; assumes all residential costs are related to population. However, consider the following costs: Public Safety Road maintenance
The Spatial Fiscal Impact Analysis Method Key premise: Revenues and expenditures are spatial, and also unique to city It comprehensively deals with all land uses It is not a black box method; it is open and transparent; local data credible The results are useful - to understand the fiscal patterns that exist (the corollary we know the costs) - to project the impact of future development (fiscal impact) - to identify areas in need of redevelopment - to build a robust planning database It uses Geographic Information Systems to process big data Assessor s parcel database is an organizing spatial framework for the entire process
Revenues and expenditures are spatial Revenues Expenditures The ideal transaction processing system Strategic Decisions Tactical Decisions Operational Decisions Data Processing (transactions) Spending/ Capital Improvement decisions Comprehensive Plan analysis Land Use / Neighborhood analysis Parcel level analysis
We do not have the ideal transaction processing system We do have factors that can be used as surrogates to model such a system that can be approximately distributed among parcels: o Population o Employment o Assessed Value o Building Market Value o Locally maintained road frontage, by type o Police and Fire Calls o Site-specific features Parcels are the lowest common denominator for land use so we can estimate and summarize by detailed land use categories and neighborhoods; focus not on individual parcel
Step 1 Analyze city finances Step 2 Determine the factors to use in the analysis Step 3 Develop multipliers Step 4 Calculate fiscal impact Step 5 Summarize by land use and neighborhood Step 6 Retrospective view of infrastructure Step 7 Summarize and present the results This is a brief summary. Obtain free copy of draft how to book.
A. Obtain the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) B. Separate operating from capital Operating regular items that occur from year to year Capital and Special items than can vary from year to year, or are dedicated to special areas of the city Examples: -TIF districts - road construction - CDBG - special taxing zones
Revenue and Expenditure Categories Funds Control Totals: Revenue = $98,019,507 Expenditures = $95,564,353 Surplus = $2,155,154
1. Population 2. Employment 3. Assessed Value 4. Building Market Value 5. Addresses for matching 6. Police and Fire Calls 7. Locally maintained road frontage, by type 8. Site-specific features, like TIF districts, special taxing zones, etc.. 9. Infrastructure Capacity Cross-tabulation features 10. Detailed Land Use 11. Neighborhoods 12. Distance 13. Homestead status 14. Year built
Do Not use average and apply it to all housing units Important: distribute population as realistically as possible based on residential types. Employment does affect the costs of delivering city services Distributing it among parcels can be difficult An Employment Inventory would be ideal
Factor 3 Building Market Value Assessed value starts with land and building market values Land does not demand services; People and businesses do Building market value reflects the intensity of the demand as well as some types of revenue Gets at both residential and C/I demands Should include tax exempt building market value Comes straight from the Assessor Used to calculate property taxes Values may be far less than actual market value, but for all parcels they are relative to the fair market value, and relative among parcels Other adjustments: senior citizens, homestead status
Assessor s file has parcel addresses The street names and addresses may need to be standardized for consistent spelling and street types GIS tools can help with that The addresses are used to assign things like police and fire calls as well as utility billing to parcels.
Public Safety is usually the biggest expense item 43% in Bloomington Call data from police and fire/ems Addresses in assessor s file used to assign police and fire calls to parcels Other calls to intersections and blocks; use centerline data to locate Duration of calls is important Later used police call equivalents
Road maintenance is a big city expense item Locally maintained road frontage is needed to allocate the cost Need to create a right of way file and then Measure the amount of frontage on locally maintained streets Commercial/industrial uses are more likely to be located along county or state highways Single family has more road frontage than apartments and is almost always located on local streets; mobile homes typically have private streets
Sewer force mains in outlying areas with unused capacity City maintained roads with taxable parcels on only one side, or passing through unincorporated, non taxable areas
Assessor s file provides basic land use information for commercial/industrial, residential types and tax exempt Bloomington there was no breakdown of commercial, a big shortcoming Planners can provide more detail Restaurants Banks Auto service Retail Personal services
Factor 11 Distance Distance affects the cost of providing services Development beyond 2.5 miles requires satellite facilities mostly police and fire/ems Distance factor: (% population + % building market value) times distance from center Central city 2.5 mile radius Others:Primarily residential Primarily commercial Urban fringe Urban sprawl
Revenue Category General Government Charges for Services Property Taxes Amount Distribution Factor Weight Distribution Amount Factor Amount Multiplier Description $11,431,189 Population 45% $5,144,035 77679 $66.22 per capita Employment 10% $1,143,119 62300 $18.35 per employee Police Calls 6% $685,871 109010 $6.29 per police call equivalent Fire Calls 31% $3,543,669 14634 $242.15 per fire call equivalent Road Frontage 8% $914,495 3246670 $0.28 per front foot $17,541,312 Net Assessed Value 100% $17,541,312 1716746188 $10.22 per $1,000
Expenditure Category Public Safety Police and Fire Calls Amount Distribution Factor Weight $41,102,503 Distribution Amount Factor Amount Multiplier Des cription Police C all Equivalents 19% $7,809,476 87,364 $89.39 per police call equivalent Police Street Calls 6% $2,466,150 100% $24,661.50 per % Dis tance Factor Fire Call Equivalents 22% $9,042,551 12,517 $722.42 per fire call equivalent Building Safety and C ode Enforcement Patrolling and Readiness Commercial /Industrial and Apartment Market Value 5% $2,055,125 495,953,368 $4.14 per $1,000 of value Population 14% $5,754,350 77,679 $74.08 per capita Total Building Market Value 15% $6,165,375 1,708,719,772 $3.61 per $1,000 of value Dis tance Factor 13% $5,343,325 100% $53,433.25 per % Distance Factor Employment 6% $2,466,150 62,300 $39.59 per employee
Multipliers summarized by the allocation factor Allocation Factor Revenue Expense Multiplier Multiplier Population $449.6070 $253.7945 Employment $114.6894 $96.1585 Police call equivalents $29.0836 $104.7577 Fire call equivalents $295.2253 $735.2863 Net assessed value $0.0138 Local road frontage $0.2842 Commercial/indust. BMV $0.0240 Residential BMV $0.0060 Commercial/indust./apartment BMV $0.0041 Building Market Value (BMV) $0.0054 Arterial road frontage $5.7034 Collector road frontage $4.7305 Local road frontage $1.1803 Alleys $0.4844 Population and BMV distance factor $12,145,559
Operating Fiscal Impact plus Capital Fiscal Impact plus Allocation of the negative fiscal impact of tax exempt = Net Fiscal Impact
TAXABLE LAND USE NUMBER OF PARCELS ACRES PRELIMINARY FISCAL IMPACT ADJUSTMENT FOR TAX EXEMPT AND SURPLUS NET TAXABLE FISCAL IMPACT AMOUNT PER ACRE COMMERCIAL 1,555 2,739 6,830,087-1,784,529 5,045,557 $1,842 INDUSTRIAL 29 220 228,532-54,662 173,871 $791 INSTITUTIONAL 10 3 30,122-7,001 23,121 $7,178 RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE 92 1,583-697,628-99,661-797,289 ($504) PER UNIT RESIDENTIAL 22,034 5,667 2,654,975-6,474,612-3,819,637 ($674) ($106) TRANSPORTATION 4 350-146,652-98,617-245,269 ($701) VACANT 1,108 522-313,185-67,169-380,354 ($728) SUBTOTAL 24,832 11,084 $8,586,251 ($8,586,251) $0 $0
By Neighborhood Other summaries: By land use by neighborhood By detailed land use By year built By homestead status (renter versus owner) By square footage And on, and on
What has the city built in the past and is still paying for? How long until it is paid for? What is the unused capacity? What is the relationship to current land use patterns? Note: Data may be hard to come by because it happened in the past and record keeping may be lacking
Tailor your message Purpose Audience Outcome Save the details, paint the big picture Don t make it personal Exercise caution when presenting fiscal impacts of a policy. Fox Creek -$2,438 -$450 -$343 -$521 $2,239 $872 $4,138 $7 $61 Grove -$488
Grove Subdivision Fox Creek Subdivision Approved around 2005 Public Costs: 11 Million total Recouped $0.5 Million or 4.5% as of 2013. Approved around 23 years ago Public Costs: 10 Million total Recouped $1.5 Million or 15% as of 2013.
Purpose: to inform the comprehensive plan. Audience: Council, Residents, Businesses, Developers, Realtors, Engineers Big picture: Slower economy and slow population growth Aging infrastructure and deferred maintenance
Complete buy-in from the Council and the community. Still a disconnect between planning and engineering professions
Bloomington Project (population about 80,000): Preliminary estimate - $60,000 Subsidized amount - $30,000 Actual time spent: about 800 hours, or about 1 hour per 100 population Skills Needed This is not rocket science ; it is just common sense Staff need basic GIS and database skills ArcGIS or even the old ArcView Use ArcGIS Model Builder
No longer guessing at what is the existing fiscal impact of land use Project the impact of a proposed development: residential, commercial or tax exempt Identify areas in need of redevelopment Project impact of Comprehensive Plan Work with finance department and operational departments and gain better understanding of issues Develop robust planning database, maybe update every 5 years Others: Payment in Lieu of Taxes, long range financial planning, impact fees
Presentation will be available at www.bloomington-fiscalimpact.com, along with the entire final report for Bloomington. Draft of forthcoming book available free of charge: please email at Ltomaselli@GISRDC.com for access. Looking for other research and development cities.