1 / 30

Understanding Community Service Costs: Impact and Policy Implications

Explore the methodology, results, limitations, and policy implications of the Cost of Community Services Studies. Understand how different land use categories impact fiscal contributions and make informed decisions regarding community development.

dcorbett
Télécharger la présentation

Understanding Community Service Costs: Impact and Policy Implications

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Understanding the Cost of Community Services Rebecca Roberts Center for Land Use Education Center for Land Use Education

  2. Tonight’s presentation: • Introduction to COCS • Methodology • Results • Resources • Limitations of method • Policy implications

  3. Community Services • Public safety - police, fire, ambulance, inspection • Public works - gas/electric, water, sewer, solid waste, recycling • Transportation - road construction, maintenance, mass transit • Education - K-12, technical schools

  4. Community Services • Culture and recreation - library, parks, community center • Health and human services - hospitals, elderly care, disability services, cemeteries • Local government

  5. Who pays for services? • Direct charge for services • Licenses, fees, fines • State and federal subsidies • Local taxation

  6. Land Use Categories • Residential • Agricultural-residences • Commercial • Manufacturing • Agricultural • Forests • Undeveloped

  7. COCS Studies • Case study approach to determine the fiscal contribution of existing land uses at a particular point in time • Results displayed as a set of ratios comparing annual revenues to annual expenditures across land use categories • Example: Residential 1.00 : 1.25

  8. History • Developed by American Farmland Trust in the mid-1980s • Designed as a straightforward and inexpensive way to measure the contribution of agricultural lands to the local tax base • Conducted in over 100 communities throughout the U.S.

  9. Methodology • Collect local data • Allocate revenues and expenditures by land use category • Compute revenue-to-expenditure ratios

  10. Methodology • Collect data • Budget - DOR Municipal Financial Report • School district data - DPI • Other local records • Interviews

  11. Methodology • Allocate revenues and expenditures

  12. Methodology • Allocate revenues and expenditures • Default percentage

  13. Methodology • Allocate revenues and expenditures

  14. Methodology • Calculate revenue-to-expenditure ratio • For every $1 in revenue generated from residential uses, $1.01 is spent on public services.

  15. Typical Results • United States (AFT, 2004):

  16. Typical Results • Wisconsin (PATS, 2000):

  17. Resource requirements • Time • Money • Staff

  18. Criticisms of Method • Many underlying assumptions • Default percentage • Data and interviewer accuracy • Objectiveness of analyst • Too many land use types grouped together (i.e. agricultural land and residences, open space, etc.) • Results are often misinterpreted

  19. Limitations • COCS studies cannot… • Predict future revenues or expenditures • Analyze specific development proposals • Measure non-economic costs or benefits derived from services (ex. aesthetics, traffic, environment, etc.) • Distinguish between different development types in a single land use category (ex. old vs. new neighborhood or single vs. multi-family housing)

  20. Capabilities • COCS studies can… • Provide a snapshot in time of revenues and expenditures by land use category • Provide a relatively quick, straightforward and inexpensive method • Help local officials and citizens make informed land use and policy decisions

  21. Policy Implications • Will residential development result in a net fiscal gain for our community? • What types of development do we want? • How much are we willing to pay to maintain working and other open lands?

  22. Conclusions • One type of land use is not intrinsically better than another • COCS studies are not meant to judge the overall public good or long-term merits of any land use or taxing structure • COCS studies provide communities with an inexpensive tool to make decisions about future land uses

  23. Thank You! • Questions?

  24. Extra slides follow

  25. COCS vs. Impact Analysis • COCS studies are a subset of fiscal impact analysis • Findings are consistent: • Document high cost of residential development • Recommend commercial and industrial development to balance local budgets

  26. COCS vs. Impact Analysis • Impact analyses rarely consider contribution of working and open lands • COCS studies show that agricultural land can be used to subsidize residential demand for public services • Impact analyses consider fiscal as well as broader social, environmental, and transportation impacts • COCS studies require fewer resources/expertise

  27. Methodology • Allocate revenues and expenditures

  28. Methodology • Allocate revenues and expenditures

  29. Methodology • Allocate revenues and expenditures

  30. Methodology • Allocate revenues and expenditures

More Related