1. The Fiscal Implications of Subdivision Development in Hopkinton, Rhode Island Ariana E. Johnson Masters Candidate – Community Planning University of Rhode Island Summary of 2003 Report

2. Background Began as an examination of developer impact statements Developed standard impact assumptions and applied to proposals Compared to open space acquisition costs Included in Land Trust presentation to Town Council

3. Key Land Trust Presentation Elements Pace of population and housing growth Importance of rural quality and sense of place Examination of currently protected open space Benefits of bonding for open space acquisition Recognition of local support for open space protection Cost to the taxpayer

4. Analysis I: Fiscal Impact Analysis Comparison of a projects projected revenues and costs Different techniques for different situations –Average Costing Approach – relies on stable per capita assumptions about costs –Marginal Costing Approach – considers supply and demand fluctuations based on capacity

5. PROS Ease of data collection Better for one-year or long-term projections CONS Is not sensitive to marginal changes Does not consider indirect impacts Relies on simplistic assumptions Average Costing Approach

6. The Process 1.Determine local education and municipal education costs per capita 2.Estimate the subdivisions projected population 3.Calculate the total costs for proposal 4.Calculate the proposals projected tax revenue 5.Calculate the difference between costs and revenues

7. Development Profile

8. Projected Annual Costs and Revenues SubdivisionCostRevenueNet Cost Deer Creek$117,750$70,084$47,666 Beechwood$326,077$202,054$124,023 Kenney Hill$697,443$415,111$282,332

9. Cost of Open Space Acquisition Assumptions Data Land would be purchased at original sale price: Deer Creek: $285,000 Beechwood: $420,00 Kenney Hill: $1,075,000 Consider only relative portion of bond for each parcel (used $5 million bond for 25 years at 4%) Deer Creek: 5.7% or approx. $18,000/year Beechwood: 8.4% or approx. $26,500/year Kenney Hill: 21.5% or approx. $68,000/year

10. Comparison of Development Costs to Open Space Acquisition Assumptions Data Build Out Rate 10 units/year Impact Fees $1,564/unit Fair share discount rate.005 to 3% Potential tax roll impacts $1,452 to $5,478

12. Avoided Service Costs Deer Creek $643,108 Beechwood $1,586,750 Kenney Hill $ 2,163,637 Assumptions are important – conservative population estimates yield at net loss of $175,000 to 260,000

13. Analysis II: Existing Subdivision Examined hard data of recent subdivision: –14 lots –2-3 bedroom units –Built out by 1998 Compared property revenue to education costs Need for further research

14. Assumptions Data: Annual education cost increase based on average in period under study 8% Annual tax revenue increase based on average in period under study 3.26% Current households would remain

16. Conclusions Can be a key argument for open space Need to think carefully about assumptions and their implications –What if the proposed units are age restricted? Or assessed at $500,000 –How does open space protection fit into the communitys overall plan Do not discount other arguments for open space protection