550 likes | 685 Views
Southeast Michigan Council of Governments. SEMCOG University: Restructuring Under Shrinking Revenue January 27 & 29, 2009 The workshop begins at 9 a.m. Southeast Michigan Council of Governments. Agenda. 9:00-9:05 Welcome and Introductions
E N D
SEMCOG University: Restructuring Under Shrinking Revenue January 27 & 29, 2009 The workshop begins at 9 a.m. Southeast Michigan Council of Governments
Agenda • 9:00-9:05 Welcome and Introductions • Paul Tait, SEMCOG Executive Director 1/27/09 • Mark Vanderpool, Sterling Heights City Mgr. 1/29/09 • 9:05-9:30 Property Tax Revenue Outlook for 2009 and 2010 • Xuan Liu, SEMCOG Data Center Manager • 9:30-10:00 Restructuring Techniques and Best Practices • Dave Boerger, SEMCOG Efficiency Consultant • 10:00-10:10 Break • 10:10-11:00 Case Studies • Discuss your fiscal issues and successes in breakout sessions • 11:00-11:40 Report out from Breakout sessions • Representative from each breakout session • 11:40-11:50 Q&A • 11:50-12:00 Closing remarks and evaluation - Dave Boerger
Property Tax Revenue Outlook for Southeast Michigan Xuan Liu Manager of Data Center SEMCOG University: Restructuring Under Sinking Revenues January 27, 2009 Southeast Michigan Council of Governments 535 Griswold St., Suite 300 Detroit, MI 48226 www.semcog.org
Revenue Sources for All Michigan Local Governments2005-2006 Source: Census Bureau
Home Prices, SEVs, and Taxable Values • Home Prices: S&P Case Shiller Index • SEVs: State Equalized Values • Taxable Values: Impact of Proposal A, approved by the voters of the State of Michigan on March 15, 1994
Percent Change in SEV 2007-2008Real Property Large loss, -5% to -11.7% Moderate loss, -2% to -4.9% Small loss, down to -1.9% Gain, up to 13.7%
Percent Change in Taxable Value 2007-2008Real Property Loss, -2% to -6.9% Small loss, down to -1.9% Small gain, up to 1.9% Gain, 2% to 28.2%
Percent Change in Taxable Value 2007-2008Residential Property Loss, -2% to -11.6% Small loss, down to -1.9% Small gain, up to 1.9% Gain, 2% to 7.8%
Changing Assessing Practice • Using one-year study of home sale prices instead of two-years • Including foreclosed housing sales in the study Consequences: Greater decline in assessed values
Taxable Value as Percentage of SEVReal Property 2005 2008 80% or less 80.1% to 85% 85.1% to 90% 90.1% or more
Taxable Value as Percentage of SEVResidential Property 2005 2008 80% or less 80.1% to 85% 85.1% to 90% 90.1% or more
Percent of Parcels with Taxable Value to SEV Ratios of 90 Percent or GreaterTop Communities
Analysis by Parcel Community Total Taxable Value = 75% SEV Smallville A Smallville B Assuming: (1) SEV decreases 10%, and (2) Inflation rate is 5% Smallville B: 5% loss Smallville A: 5% gain
Example Assuming -10% SEV change, 5% inflation, and no new construction Aggregated Taxable Value/SEV = 92% If tax rate is 10 mills, it will lost 1 million in tax.
Summary • Significant loss of taxable values in SE Michigan in the next two years • Following types of communities will lose more: • High concentration of residential • High rate of newly developed property • High rate of recently sold property • Local governments will have tough choices to make.
Brian Parthum Senior Planning Analyst Parthum@semcog.org 313-324-3432 Xuan Liu Manager, Data Center liu@semcog.org 313-324-3441 Southeast Michigan Council of Governments 535 Griswold St., Suite 300 Detroit, MI 48226 www.semcog.org
Restructuring Local Government Dave Boerger Local Government Effectiveness and Collaboration SEMCOG University: Restructuring Under Sinking Revenues January 27 & 29, 2008 Southeast Michigan Council of Governments 535 Griswold St., Suite 300 Detroit, MI 48226 www.semcog.org
Fiscal Challenges • Poor economy reducing home prices • Property tax collections down • Expenses for energy & healthcare up • State revenue sharing flat at best • Municipal revenues shrinking
And it’s getting worse! • Credit crunch continuing • Stagflation – negative growth with rising costs • More auto restructuring risks • Further drop in housing prices • State TxV restrictions if SEV’s drop • State revenue sharing losses
Bottom Line: Somehow survive ~20% revenue reduction over the next 3 years?
Typical First Steps • Hiring/pay freezes • Layoffs • Benefit reductions • Service cuts • Tax increases • Tap fund balances • More debt • Etc, etc, etc…..
Fiscal Alternatives • Improve efficiencies ~3-5% and • Restructure your local government ~10-20%
Improving Efficiency • SEMCOG AgileGov searchable database of >400 successfully implemented ideas • Self assessment tool – 25 characteristic of the best local governments • Long range financial plan • Benchmarking comparisons • Accelerating service delivery processes
Value Matrix Focus here 1st - Reduce , eliminate or privatize High Cost/Low Importance Services Focus here 3rd - Improve efficiency of High Cost/High Importance Services Focus here 2nd – Reduce or eliminate Low Cost/Low Importance Services Focus here 4th – speed delivery of Low Cost/High Importance Services Program Cost Prioritized Importance
For additional help or more information contact: Dave Boerger SEMCOG boerger@semcog.org 248-875-7120 Southeast Michigan Council of Governments 535 Griswold St., Suite 300 Detroit, MI 48226 www.semcog.org
Restructuring Worksheet • Complete the worksheet in your folders in preparation for the breakout session • Include an example of a successfully completed cost savings approach within your local government • Indicate the current challenges/areas of greatest restructuring need for your local government • Take a 10 minute break when you are done