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.