High Income Residential

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

Size – Small
Property value – Highest
Commercial activity – Moderate
Growth – Low
Geography – All west

Cluster characteristics
Population
Economic characteristics
Other community characteristics

Fiscal conditions
Major revenue base
General financial outlook

Clyde Hill, Hunts Point, Medina, Woodway, Yarrow Point

Home to some of Washington’s wealthiest residents, these distinctly residential cities feature very high property values and family incomes. Even so, all of these communities expect more difficulty meeting financial needs in the coming years. Half have imposed furloughs in an effort to balance the budget, and more than half have reopened the 2009 budget in response to declining revenues, or expected to do so. Of these, all have reduced general government spending.

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. 957 1,008 1,010 1,010 1,050 1,075 1,140 1,165 1,180 1,180 1,190

Population density, 2009: 1,850 persons per square mile
Population growth rate, 2000-2009: -1.4%

Economic characteristics

Median household income (1999): $133,139
Poverty rate (1999): 2%
Major local employers by industry (1999):

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

Professional, scientific, technical 100%

Health care and social services 100%

Retail trade 60%

Other Community Characteristics

Date of incorporation: 1955
GMA-planning cities: 100%
Number of housing units:

2000 2009 Growth
2000-2009

393 445 0%

Fiscal Conditions

Major Revenue Base

Per capita assessed value, 2008: $900,501
Per capita sales & use tax revenue, 2008: $197
Decline in sales & use tax distributions, October 2007 - May 2009: 35%

General Financial Outlook

Change in local economic conditions since June 2008:

(% of respondents)

Improved 0%

Stayed about the same 50%

Worsened 50%

Ability to meet financial needs:

(% of respondents)

Less able Same Better able

This year (FY 2009) compared with four years ago 50% 50% 0%

Next year compared with this year 100% 0% 0%

Four years from now compared with this year 100% 0% 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) 0% 25% 75%

Decreased the number of hours/days worked or imposed furloughs 25% 25% 50%

Offered voluntary leave without pay 0% 0% 100%

Laid off employees 0% 0% 100%

Compensation/benefit changes

Eliminated salary increases for employees 0% 0% 100%

Delayed or reduced salary increases for employees 0% 0% 100%

Reduced spending on some employee benefits (i.e. deferred compensation, health care) 25% 0% 75%

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

Required increased employee contributions for employee/family health care 25% 0% 75%

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

Have taken these steps 20%

Had not but considered likely 40%

Had not and did not consider likely 40%

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% 33% 67% 0% 0%

Public safety spending 0% 33% 33% 0% 33% 0%

General government spending 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0%

Scope of services 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0%

Size of workforce 0% 0% 67% 33% 0% 0%

AWC Website | About AWC | Contact Us

Cluster 9