2009 State of the Cities Masthead

Main Home2009 Report HomeCase Studies | Cluster Profiles | City Level Data | Methodology & Surveys


Survey II - Fiscal Condition Update Results

Sent to finance directors or clerk-treasurers at 281 cities in October 2008. 167 cities responded, representing 59% of cities and 68% of city residents.

Contact Information
City/Town
Name

Title
Phone
Email

Your City’s Fiscal Condition

In terms of your city’s general financial outlook overall, is your city better or less able to... (165 responses)

Meet financial needs in FY 2008 than four years ago (2004)
Less Able (count 77; 47%)
About the Same (count 56; 34%)
Better Able (count 30; 18%)

 

Meet financial needs in the next fiscal year (FY 2009) compared to this fiscal year?
Less Able (count 104; 63%)
About the Same (count 55; 33%)
Better Able (count 6; 4%)

 

Meet financial needs in the next four years (2012) compared to this fiscal year?
Less Able (count 109; 66%)
About the Same (count 43; 26%)
Better Able (count 10; 6%)

Please indicate which actions your city is likely to implement in order to balance the budget for the next year (FY 2009). (165 responses)

  Significant increase Slight increase Maintain Slight decrease Significant decrease Not authorized in your city
Reliance on ending balances/reserves Count 31; 19% Count 56; 34% Count 49; 29% Count 17; 10% Count 10; 6% Count 3; 2%
Infrastructure spending Count 11; 7% Count 20; 12% Count 55; 33% Count 33; 20% Count 44; 26% Count 2; 1%
Public safety spending Count 11; 7% Count 32; 19% Count 84; 50% Count 22; 13% Count 8; 5% Count 6; 4%
Other spending Count 1; 1% Count 14; 8% Count 53; 32% Count 62; 37% Count 31; 19% Count 1; 1%
Scope of services Count 1; 1% Count 4; 2% Count 107; 64% Count 38; 23% Count 12; 7% Count 1; 1%
Size of workforce Count 1; 1% Count 25; 15% Count 90; 54% Count 36; 22% Count 13; 8% Count 0; 0%
Number/scope of public/private partnerships Count 0; 0% Count 18; 11% Count 108; 65% Count 12; 7% Count 1; 1% Count 16; 10%
Number/scope of interlocal agreements Count 4; 2% Count 19; 11% Count 127; 76% Count 6; 4% Count 1; 1% Count 4; 2%
Number/scope of local contracts for service delivery Count 3; 2% Count 9; 5% Count 113; 68% Count 16; 10% Count 3; 2% Count 15; 9%

Is your city planning to increase any of the following taxes in order to sustain services? (167 responses)

Property
Yes (count 79; 47%)
No (count 82; 49%)

 

Sales
Yes (count 0; 0%)
No (count 163; 98%)

 

Utility
Yes (count 49; 29%)
No (count 113; 68%)

 

User fees (business licenses, ambulance, recreation, etc.)
Yes (count 57; 34%)
No (count 96; 57%)

 

Other
Yes (count 17; 10%)
No (count 8; 5%)

If your city is considering a tax increase, please identify which services you are trying to preserve? (Check all that apply.) (134 responses)

No increase (count 50; 37%)
Public safety (count 52; 39%)
Streets/transportation (count 46; 34%)
Parks/recreation (count 31; 23%)
Other infrastructure (count 18; 13%)
General government (count 58; 43%)
Other (please explain) (count 7; 5%)

Has your city recently deferred any capital development projects due to lack of financing?

Is there anything else we should know about your city’s fiscal condition?

Thank you for taking the survey.

 

AWC Website | About AWC | Contact Us

State of the Cities © 2009 Association of Washington Cities

Association of Washington cities ▪ 1076 Franklin st. se ▪ Olympia, wa 98501 ▪ 360-753-4137 ▪ www.awcnet.org