HomeMy WebLinkAbout13.A.2. Assessment Policy for Future Bituminous Overlay Projects /3. ��,
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Memorandum
TO: Mayor & City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FROM: Jeff Weyandt, Assistant City Engineer
SUBJECT: Assessment Policy for Future Overlays
DATE: June 15, 2010
BACKGROUND:
Given the economy and the recent discussion with regards to the impacts the City's assessment
projects have on residents, staff looked at the impacts of eliminating assessments for future
overlay projects. Currently, the City assesses 30% of the project costs to benefitting properties.
Following is a summary of assessments paid for overlay projects since 2004.
Tax Impact
Average Cost Per
Year Assessment Amount Household Per Month
2004 $ 46,893.00 $0.20
2005 $ 42,893.00 $0.18
2006 $143,561.00 $0.60
2007 $176,896.00 $0.73
2008 $268,054.00 $1.11
2009 $103,310.00 $0.43
2010 (Projected) $136,000.00 $0.57
Total $917,695.00 $0.55
The average cost per household per month is just a rough estimate assuming 62% of the City's
property tax revenue comes from residential properties, therefore, 62% of the cost will be funded
by residential property taxes. The number of households was based on the following: 34,000
population with an average household size of 2.73 people equals roughly 12,454 households.
Over the years, many residents have stated that overlays are a maintenance activity and should be
included in the taxes and would prefer a small yearly increase versus a $500.00 assessment bill.
As the numbers above show, if the City did not assess overlays over the last seven years, the
average cost per household would have been approximately $0.55 /month.
An advantage to not assessing overlays is project costs will go down. The extra time required to
prepare the feasibility study and assessment roll, along with the extra mailings, costs the City an
additional $10,000 to $15,000 per project. Also, bonding for the project adds an additional cost
of 1% to the project, which is an additional $10,000.00 for every $1,000,000.00 of project cost.
Another advantage to not assessing overlays is that the City could add streets to the project if the
bids received are favorable. Currently, we cannot add streets to the project and assess for the
improvements if the improvements were not included in the feasibility study.
The one advantage to assessing the project is the City is allowed to combine it with the
reconstruction project and bond for the whole works and the tax levy portion is not currently
subject to levy limits. However, due to there being an annual overlay project, Finance is trying
to transition away from bonding overlay projects because of debt levels, interest rates and to
increase the levy limit under which the City is subject. Therefore, due to the fact that not
assessing overlays would lower project costs, give the City flexibility to add streets to the project
and lessen the financial burden on benefitted properties by eliminating assessment bills, staff
believes it is time to reconsider the policy of assessing bituminous overlay projects.
The current 5 -year CIP apportions costs based on the current Assessment Policy. If Council
chooses to eliminate assessments on overlay projects, the City could fund the assessable portion
of the projects with the State Aid/Street Fund. Attached is the projected fund balance of the
State Aid /Street Fund, if projected overlay assessments in the current CIP are funded by the State
Aid/Street Fund.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Direct staff to revise the Special Assessment Policy to eliminate the assessment of future
bituminous overlay projects beginning in 2011.
2. Direct staff to continue assessing overlay projects consistent with the current Special
Assessment Policy.
3. Table for additional information.
RECOMMENDATION:
Direct staff to revise the Special Assessment Policy to eliminate the assessment of future
bituminous overlay projects beginning in 2011.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Direct staff to revise the Special Assessment Policy to eliminate the assessment of future
bituminous overlay projects beginning in 2011.
Jeff Weyandt, P.E.
Assistant City Engineer
ENGR/2010- PROJECTS /2010- COUNCIL✓AS SES SMENT- POLICY - OVERLAYS
State Aid / Street Fund
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
(actual) (actual)
Balance 1/1 $3,068,948 $4,299,103 $4,337,295 $3,709,101 $4,193,919 $4,652,707 $4,298,551 $4,753,001
Maintenance Allocation $215,010 $248,331 $378,131 $380,000 $382,000 $383,000 $384,000 $385,000
Construction Allocation $1,039,812 $320,547 $510,000 $750,000 $750,000 $750,000 $750,000
Turn Back Funds $1,320,000
Interest $194,788 $163,732 $151,805 $129,819 $146,787 $162,845 $150,449 $166,355
Total Revenue $4,518,558 $5,031,713 $4,867,232 $6,048,919 $5,472,707 $5,948,551 $5,583,001 $6,054,356
Misc Transfer $29,054 $4,699
Expenditure $190,401 $351,388 $780,000 $1,450,000 $405,000 $1,200,000 $380,000 $240,000
Transfer to general fund $338,331 $378,131 $405,000 $415,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000
Balance $4,299,103 $4,337,295 $3,709,101 $4,193,919 $4,652,707 $4,298,551 $4,753,001 $5,364,356
Assumes 3.5% interest on previous end of the year balance.
UPDATED 6/10/10
State Aid / Street Fund (Funding overlay assessments)
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
(actual) (actual)
Balance 1/1 $3,068,948 $4,299,103 $4,337,295 $3,709,101 $3,903,919 $3,932,557 $3,493,196 $3,844,458
Maintenance Allocation $215,010 $248,331 $378,131 $380,000 $382,000 $383,000 $384,000 $385,000
Construction Allocation $1,039,812 $320,547 $510,000 $750,000 $750,000 $750,000 $750,000
Turn Back Funds $1,320,000
Interest $194,788 $163,732 $151,805 $129,819 $136,637 $137,639 $122,262 $134,556
Total Revenue $4,518,558 $5,031,713 $4,867,232 $6,048,919 $5,172,557 $5,203,196 $4,749,458 $5,114,014
Misc Transfer $29,054 $4,699
Expenditure $190,401 $351,388 $780,000 $1,450,000 $405,000 $1,200,000 $380,000 $240,000
Transfer to general fund $338,331 $378,131 $405,000 $415,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000
Overlay Assessments $290,000 $420,000 $60,000 $75,000 $450,000
Balance $4,299,103 $4,337,295 $3,709,101 $3,903,919 $3,932,557 $3,493,196 $3,844,458 $3,974,014
Assumes 3.5% interest on previous end of the year balance.
UPDATED 6/10/10