Growth Impact Analysis

Growth's Impact to the General Fund Budget- Today v. 2025


At the Special Council Meeting held on April 5, 2016, we received comments that the information, while good, wasn’t specific enough to Tega Cay.  In an attempt to help show previously provided information in a easier to understand format, the City went back pulled information from the original cost/benefit analysis provided to City Council prior to the Public Hearing on Windhaven, information from the tax impact analysis provided to City Council during first reading.  City staff also looked at methodologies used in the 2006 study by Clemson University for the City of York and methodologies suggested by the ICMA (International City/County Managers Association) in a 2000 publication.  In looking at those methodologies, staff found that each would require a variety of assumptions to be made in building a benefit or cost-to-serve analysis.  Instead of compiling a large cost-benefit analysis study, staff has compiled a side-by-side comparison of what our general fund budget looks like today versus what it would look like in 9 years once the development projects reach “build out” (assuming Windhaven, if approved, is the last annexation between now and then). 

As you look at the information, please note the very few assumptions that were made at the top of the page.  

The figure used to determine the future property tax amount was arrived at by using the figure located in the year 2025  line on the previously provided growth tax impact analysis + the commercial taxes that would be brought from Windhaven.

The figure use for auto tax is only what the city currently receives plus what the city would have at buildout with Windhaven at 300 homes, instead of 400 homes.   

Franchise Fees collected from York Electric, Duke Energy and Comporium were increased by a modest 4.2% (At 300 homes, Windhaven would represent approximately 8.3% of the total homes the city has today).  

The figure used for future Business Licenses envisions the city collecting only 1% more in 2025 that it collects today.  

Revenue collected for recreation programs was increased by 20%.  The City has experience a 2.5% growth in recreation every year for the past 10 years.  

While not all budget categories, or specific line items in a category, would generally be used in a cost-to-serve analysis, the comparison compiled by staff included everything in an effort to reduce assumptions.  As stated in the assumptions on the document, each department/category was increased by 20%.  That’s more than a 2% increase a year.  In the non-departmental section of the budget, the current bond debt payments + the proposed debt payment for the new fire station were included before the 20% increase was added which is why there is an almost $2 million swing from current budget to 2025 in that category. 

Budget Comparison- Today v. 2025