Main Home | 2005 Report Home | Press Room | Cluster Profiles | City Level Data | Talking Points

Cluster 5

Small Residential Communities

Overview | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14

All data is recorded as an average for all cities in the cluster.
Data for individual cities may vary significantly in some categories.

Community Conditions

Population

• Average Population Size, 1990-2002:

Year	1990	1991	1992	1993	1994	1995	1996	1997	1998	1999	2000	2001	2002
Pop.	1,171	1,184	1,205	1,228	1,258	1,304	1,340	1,366	1,390	1,424	1,454	1,468	1,469

• Population Density, 2000: 1,091 persons per square mile*

• Population Growth Rate, 1990-2000: 25.5%

• Proportion of Housing Units Newly Built, 1990-2000: 15%*

• Proportion of Adults with a Bachelor’s or Higher Degree, 2000: 16%

• Proportion of Population in Racial/Ethnic Minority, 2000: 13%*

Economy

• Median Household Income:

Year	1999	1989
Median Household Income	$38,600 (in 1989 dollars)	$31,275

• Median Household Income Growth, 1989-1999 (Inflation Adjusted): 26%*

• Poverty Rate, 1999: 11%*

• Unemployment Rate:

Year	2000	1990
Unemployment Rate	4.9%	4.9%*

• Unemployment Rate Growth, 1990-2000: 0.64%

• Major Local Employers by Industry:

Major Local Employers	% of Cities in Cluster (w/ Industry as 1 of 3 Top Employers)
Retail trade	75%
Educational Services	40%
Health care and social assistance	40%
Manufacturing	35%
Construction	30%

Other Community Characteristics

• Date of Incorporation: 1911*

• Local Conditions Most Improved Since 1999:

Local Conditions	% of Cities in Cluster
Streets/bridges	54%
Drinking water systems	46%
Parks & Recreation	31%

• Local Conditions Most Deteriorated Since 1999:

Local Conditions	% of Cities in Cluster
Overall city budget condition	64%
City property tax base	45%
Overall economic conditions of community	36%

• Local Conditions Most Important to Address over Next 5 Years:

Local Conditions	% of Cities in Cluster
Overall city budget condition	58%
Sales tax base	50%
City property tax base	33%

Fiscal Conditions

General Financial Outlook

• Ability to Meet Needs Compared to Current Year:
  

	(% of Respondents)
	Less Able	Same	Better Able
Five years ago	86%	14%	0%
Next Year	79%	21%	0%
In Next Five Years	86%	14%	0%

Major Revenue Base

• Per Capita Assessed Value, 2002: $40,890

• Per Capita Sales Tax Revenue, 2002: $59

Significant Budget Drivers

• Top Positive & Negative Budget Influences:

Positive Budget Influences	% of Cities in Cluster		Negative Budget Influences	% of Cities in Cluster
Amount of Reserves	64%		Amount of state aid to city	54%
Value of city property tax base	55%		State/federal mandates	46%
Reliance on user fees to pay for city services	55%		Tax-limiting voter initiatives	38%

Initiative Impacts

• Average Proportion of Operating Budget Lost Due to I-695 (MVET Repeal): 20.37%

• Impacts of Initiatives on City Services/Operations:

Impacts	% of Cities in Cluster
Used Reserves	70%
Increased User Fees	60%
Reduced Staff Training	50%
Increased Taxes	40%
Eliminated Staff Positions	40%
Eliminated Services	20%
Adopted New User Fees	10%
Reduced Services	10%
Diverted Services	10%

Transportation/Infrastructure

• Local Commuter Impacts
  Proportion of Employed Residents that Work in the City, 2000: 23%*

• Infrastructure Needs
  (In order: most important to least important)

New Capacity Needs	Replacement Needs
Sidewalks Stormwater Streets Street lighting Bridges Sewer Water	Sewer Water Streets Stormwater Sidewalks Bridges Street lighting

• Delayed Capital Spending: Past and Future

Spending	% of Responding Cities (7) in Cluster
Delayed Spending over the Past 6 Years	63%
Expect to Delay Spending Over the Next 6 Years	88%

* = High degree of variability in cluster data

AWC Website | About AWC | Contact Us

State of the Cities © 2005 Association of Washington Cities