Tourism Hubs

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

Size – Small
Property value – High
Commercial activity – High
Growth – Moderate
Geography – East and west

Cluster characteristics
Population
Economic characteristics
Other community characteristics

Fiscal conditions
Major revenue base
General financial outlook

Burlington, Chelan, Cle Elum, Friday Harbor, La Conner, Leavenworth, Long Beach, Ocean Shores, Port Townsend, Sequim, Stevenson, Westport, Winthrop

Proximity to mountains, rivers and the ocean defines these cities and attracts people from near and far. These tourism-based economies provide some additional resources, but in this recession these cities are challenged more each year to continue to meet needs. A quarter of these cities have reopened the 2009 budget or decreased expenditures in response to reduced revenue; of these, the majority are reducing spending on public safety and general government.

All data is recorded as median value for all cities in the cluster.

Data for individual cities may vary significantly in some categories.

Cluster Characteristics

Population

Average population size:

Year 1990 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Pop. 1,778 2,074 2,080 2,095 2,115 2,165 2,180 2,210 2,225 2,295 2,300

Population density, 2009: 900 persons per square mile
Population growth rate, 2000-2009: 14.3%

Economic characteristics

Median household income (1999): $32,101
Poverty rate (1999): 15%
Major local employers by industry (1999):

Major local employers % of cities in cluster
(w/ industry as 1 of 3 top employers)

Retail trade 85%

Accommodation and food services 85%

Health care and social services 62%

Other Community Characteristics

Date of incorporation: 1907
GMA-planning cities: 69%
Number of housing units:

2000 2009 Growth
2000-2009

1,155 1,357 15.9%

Fiscal Conditions

Major Revenue Base

Per capita assessed value, 2008: $172m270
Per capita sales & use tax revenue, 2008: $408
Decline in sales & use tax distributions, October 2007 - May 2009: 52%

General Financial Outlook

Change in local economic conditions since June 2008:

(% of respondents)

Improved 0%

Stayed about the same 75%

Worsened 25%

Ability to meet financial needs:

(% of respondents)

Less able Same Better able

This year (FY 2009) compared with four years ago 63% 13% 25%

Next year compared with this year 63% 38% 0%

Four years from now compared with this year 63% 38% 0%

Steps taken to balance the budget:

(% of respondents)

Adopted with 2009 budget Imposed after 2009 budget was adopted Not as of survey date

Staffing changes

Froze hiring (city is not replacing employees when they leave/retiree) 25% 0% 75%

Decreased the number of hours/days worked or imposed furloughs 0% 0% 100%

Offered voluntary leave without pay 0% 0% 100%

Laid off employees 13% 0% 88%

Compensation/benefit changes

Eliminated salary increases for employees 0% 0% 100%

Delayed or reduced salary increases for employees 13% 13% 75%

Reduced spending on some employee benefits (i.e. deferred compensation, health care) 0% 0% 100%

Eliminated some employee benefits (i.e. deferred compensation, health care) 0% 0% 100%

Required increased employee contributions for employee/family health care 0% 13% 88%

Cities reopening budget or decreasing expenditures in response to reduced revenues:

Have taken these steps 25%

Had not but considered likely 38%

Had not and did not consider likely 38%

Actions cities are taking to balance budgets for remainder of 2009 (shows responses only from cities planning to amend budgeted expenditures):

Significant increase Slight increase Maintain Slight decrease Significant decrease Not authorized in your city

Infrastructure spending 0% 0% 21% 40% 40% 0%

Public safety spending 20% 0% 20% 60% 0% 0%

General government spending 0% 0% 0% 79% 21% 0%

Scope of services 0% 0% 60% 40% 0% 0%

Size of workforce 0% 0% 60% 40% 0% 0%

AWC Website | About AWC | Contact Us

Cluster 3