gis and fiscal impact esri.ppt - earthlinkhome.earthlink.net/~ltomaselli3/gis and fiscal...
TRANSCRIPT
GIS and Fiscal Impact:toward an “Enterprise GIS”
Presented by:
Dr. Linda Tomaselli, GISRDCESRI User Conference, July 24, 2012
GIS and Planning
Planners are often asked to project the fiscal impact of a new development but use simplistic methods
Almost everything local government spends money on is spatial in nature:
Police calls
Snowplowing and road maintenance
Recreation services
Almost all revenue collected by government is based on a spatially-distributed feature:
Property taxes
User fees
Population distribution
Land Use Determines the Distribution of Revenues and Expenditures
Land parcels are the best way to determine land use
Most counties maintain a parcel database using GIS
Assessors have the most familiarity with the land use of the parcels
Tax Capacity and property taxes are a function of the market value and land use
Local Finance and Enterprise GIS
Two ideal concepts behind the“GIS Approach” to Fiscal Analysis
An ideal “transaction processing” system where every dollar coming in and every dollar going out could be tracked by location and parcelAn “Enterprise GIS” where all of the functions
of city government would contribute to, share and analyze standardized city-wide parcel-level dataThis approach builds a database to model each
How is this approach different than other methods?
Expenditures are not just a function of Market ValuePopulation is not the only factorAll land uses are studied:
ResidentialCommercial/IndustrialTax Exempt
Comprehensive – includes operating and capital items, transfers in and transfers outDetailed parcel level database
How is this approach different than other methods?
Each city is unique
TIF districts
Financing policies
Enterprise funds (Electrical Utility in Anoka)
Emphasis is not just on projecting growth, but understanding the existing patterns of finance
Involves all city departments, the city council, and economic development committee
City Involvement
Finance Director
Local government finance is very complicated!
Other City Staff: • Community Development Director
• Planner
• Police & Fire
• Public Works
• Parks & Recreation
• City Assessor
Parcels Parcels
Usually thelowest common denominator forland use
Parcel Identification Number (PIN)
Market ValueBuilding ValueTax CapacitySpecial AssessmentsParcel AddressOwner NameStructure TypeHomestead Status
Year BuiltTIF DistrictTaxable Use Status
Also other files by PIN:TIF parcels
Parcel data comes from Anoka County tax list
Without the parcel file, the project would not be possible.
Parcels
Right-of Way Parcels
Right of way split down centerline and closed at intersections
GIS topology used to assign ROW attributes to parcels
Multiple ROW assign-ments at corners
Jurisdiction determines maintenance
responsibility and aidfunding
Methodology
Separate operating from capital items
Identify major budget categories
Determine which measurable factors are indicators of revenues and expenditures, i.e., not just population
Methodology: Separate Operating and Capital
Total Revenue and Expenditures City of Anoka, 2009
Operating67%
Capital33%
Operating ($10M):Regular, recurring expenses from one year to the next, such as police, fire, public works maintenance, etc.
Capital ($5M):Expenditures for capital improvements and other itemsthat may not recur from one year to the next, such as street renewal, right of way acquisition, etc. Affected by TIF
Identify Major Budget Categories: Revenue
Identify Major Budget Categories: Expenditures
Methodology: Determine Allocation FactorsExamples of Operating Revenue Allocation
Charges for Services ($1,563,877):General Government: Population (40%), Employment (10%),
Market value (50%)Public Safety: Police calls, Fire calls, Site contracts, Site market
values (restaurants, parking, commercial inspections)Public Works: Main St. lighting, parking lot rentParks & Recreation: Population (90%), Employment (10%)
Property Taxes ($5,684,751) : Net Tax CapacityOperating Grants ($439,407):
Police: police calls (50%), population (10%), employment (5%), market value (35%)
Fire: Market value (100%)Public Works: MSA – MSA frontage (70%), population (30%);
State – State frontage (100%)
Major Allocation Factors added to Parcel Database
Population (estimated)Housing UnitsEmploymentPolice CallsFire CallsRoad FrontageSidewalk FrontageElectrical BillingOthers
Overall, 50 factors used, many as variations of the above
The GIS Database
7300 “parcels” including right-of-way50 allocation factors25 property tax variables65 operating revenue variables15 capital revenue variables25 operating expenditure variables15 capital expenditure variables15 county tax list variables210 total variables210 variables by 7300 parcels = 1,533,000 “cells”
Generalized Land Use
Population & Employment
Police Calls
Commercial/Industrial: 18%
Tax Exempt: 23%
Residential: 58%
Roads & Sidewalks
Electrical Billing
TIF and Fiscal Disparities
TIF: mostly C/I
Fiscal Disparities Contribution: C/I
Fiscal Disparities Distribution: Residential
Net Property Taxes
“Net”: after adjusting for TIF and Fiscal Disparities
Residential bears most of operating cost
Local Government
Aid
• Population
• Vehicle Accidents
• Pre-1940 Housing
Public Works Expenses
Total Fiscal Impact
Impact by parcel butreally only to be able to summarize by land use
Why do Fiscal Impact Down to the Parcel Level?
Parcels vary greatly with respect to:
Land Use
Neighborhood / original developer
Valuations
Size; number of bedrooms
Year Built
Road and sidewalk frontage
Electrical usage
TIF status
Police demands
Benefits of a Parcel Level of Analysis
Detailed land use analysis (70 categories)Impacts can be measured at the parcel level and then cross-tabulated in hundreds of ways:
Police calls by:age of housing detailed land usehomestead status
Electrical usage by square footage
Data can be summarized by neighborhood
Fiscal Impact by Neighborhood
Commercial/Industrial Total Fiscal Impact
Current Total Fiscal Impact $ per Acre, Commercial & Industrial
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000Office
Shopping
Restaurant
Auto Service
Bank
General Commercial
Motel
Personal Service
Commercial School
Industrial
Light Industrial
Residential Total Fiscal Impact
Current Total Fiscal Impact per Unit, Residential Uses
-150.00
-100.00
-50.00
0.00
50.00
100.00
150.00
200.00
250.00
Apartments
Duplexes
Quad Homes
Tw in Homes
Single FamilyA ttached
Single FamilyDetached
Tax Exempt Total Fiscal Impact
Total Surplus or Deficit for Tax Exempt Land Uses,
City of Anoka, 2009
-600,000
-500,000
-400,000
-300,000
-200,000
-100,000
0
100,000
Churches & Charities
City
County
State
Federal
Schools
Railroad
Special Service District
Roads
City Usage
Estimate fiscal impact as questions come up
Daily, non-fiscal planning decisions
Monitor trends, e.g., changes in housing values, changes to state aid formulas
Keep information up to date
Other use of database:Code compliance
Long term financial planning
SummaryEvery city is unique.Local government finance is complicated, especially with TIF.Revenues and Expenditures are spatially-distributed.Parcels provide an excellent unit of data collection and good data already exists.Approach gets city departments to work together….toward an enterprise GIS.City officials have a better idea of where revenues come from and where expenditures are needed.