Urban Outskirts

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

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

Cluster characteristics
Population
Economic characteristics
Other community characteristics

Fiscal conditions
Major revenue base
General financial outlook

Airway Heights, Algona, Battle Ground, Benton City, Buckley, Bucoda, Carbonado, Carnation, Cheney, Connell, Coupeville, Darrington, Deer Park, Eatonville, Everson, Fairfield, Ferndale, Gold Bar, Grandview, Granger, Granite Falls, Harrah, Index, Kahlotus, Latah, Lynden, Mabton, Medical Lake, Mesa, Millwood, Milton, Moxee, Naches, Nooksack, Orting, Pacific, Prosser, Rainier, Rockford, Roy, Ruston, Selah, South Prairie, Spangle, Steilacoom, Sultan, Sumas, Sunnyside, Tenino, Tieton, Toppenish, Wapato, Washougal, Waverly, Wilkeson, Yacolt, Zillah

Many of these communities display a rural character, but are in close proximity to urban centers. As urban populations have spread, they have experienced high population growth in the past decade. Like Cluster 4, these communities faced sharp revenue declines in 2000 when they lost sales and use tax equalization funds. Revenues have stabilized at lower levels since then, and these cities find it increasingly difficult to meet needs. Many of these cities expected to reopen the 2009 budget to address reduced revenues, and they have been forced to reduce spending in many areas, especially for general government needs.

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. 1,377 2,012 2,035 2,015 2,045 2,065 2,080 2,125 2,165 2,210 2,285

Population density, 2009: 1,447 persons per square mile
Population growth rate, 2000-2009: 13.9%

Economic characteristics

Median household income (1999): $38,890
Poverty rate (1999): 14%
Major local employers by industry (1999):

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

Retail trade 75%

Manufacturing 70%

Health care and social services 60%

Other Community Characteristics

Date of incorporation: 1908
GMA-planning cities: 100%
Number of housing units:

2000 2009 Growth
2000-2009

769 842 15.7%

Fiscal Conditions

Major Revenue Base

Per capita assessed value, 2008: $71,998
Per capita sales & use tax revenue, 2008: $102
Decline in sales & use tax distributions, October 2007 - May 2009: 23%

General Financial Outlook

Change in local economic conditions since June 2008:

(% of respondents)

Improved 4%

Stayed about the same 50%

Worsened 46%

Ability to meet financial needs:

(% of respondents)

Less able Same Better able

This year (FY 2009) compared with four years ago 44% 41% 16%

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

Four years from now compared with this year 47% 47% 6%

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) 13% 25% 63%

Decreased the number of hours/days worked or imposed furloughs 13% 4% 83%

Offered voluntary leave without pay 4% 4% 92%

Laid off employees 8% 4% 88%

Compensation/benefit changes

Eliminated salary increases for employees 9% 0% 91%

Delayed or reduced salary increases for employees 8% 0% 92%

Reduced spending on some employee benefits (i.e. deferred compensation, health care) 8% 0% 92%

Eliminated some employee benefits (i.e. deferred compensation, health care) 4% 0% 96%

Required increased employee contributions for employee/family health care 8% 8% 83%

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

Have taken these steps 14%

Had not but considered likely 43%

Had not and did not consider likely 43%

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% 6% 39% 33% 17% 6%

Public safety spending 6% 6% 44% 17% 11% 17%

General government spending 11% 5% 26% 37% 16% 5%

Scope of services 5% 5% 40% 35% 10% 5%

Size of workforce 0% 11% 61% 11% 11% 6%

AWC Website | About AWC | Contact Us

Cluster 7