My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2008/10/15 Council Agenda Packet
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2008
>
2008/10/15 Council Agenda Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/3/2017 8:34:34 AM
Creation date
4/3/2017 8:33:30 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Council Agenda Packet
Date
10/15/2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
231
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
CITY OF EVERETT FISCAL ANNEXATION ANALYSIS <br /> Beginning July 1, 2007, a city with a population less than 400,000, located in a county with a <br /> population greater than 600,000 that annexes an area with a population of over 10,000 (prior to <br /> January 1, 2010) may impose a sales or use tax. The tax must be taken as a credit against the sales <br /> tax, so it is not an additional tax to a consumer. Key stipulations: <br /> • Net Deficit. The tax may only be imposed if the City determines that the projected cost to <br /> provide services to the annexation area exceeds the projected revenue from the annexation area. <br /> All revenue from the tax must be used to provide, maintain, and operate municipal services for <br /> the annexation area. <br /> • Ten Year Limit. The tax imposed must only be imposed at the beginning of a fiscal year and <br /> must continue for no more than ten years from the date it is imposed. <br /> • The Maximum Tax Rate. <br /> o 0.1 percent for each annexation area with a population over 10,000 and <br /> o 0.2 percent for an annexation area over 20,000 <br /> • Revenues May Not Exceed Deficit.The revenues may not exceed the difference of that which <br /> the city deems necessary to provide services for the annexation area and the general revenue <br /> received from the annexation. If the revenues due exceed that which is needed to provide the <br /> services, the tax must be suspended for the remainder of the fiscal year. <br /> 1.3 Annexation Scenarios <br /> It is generally not practical or reasonable to evaluate each of the potential annexation areas in <br /> isolation; there is a logical order of annexing the closest areas first and then the outlying ones. <br /> Moreover, there could be economies of scale benefits in annexing several areas at once. For these <br /> reasons, the nine contemplated annexation areas were rolled into the seven annexation "scenarios," <br /> based on the following criteria: (1) the areas under consideration must have logical geographical <br /> boundaries and be contiguous; and (2) the scenarios must have at least 10,000 population, to <br /> ensure receipt of the State sales tax credit. <br /> The following are the annexation scenarios that have been analyzed: <br /> • Scenario 1: Emander and North Creek <br /> • Scenario 2: Emander, North Creek, and Lake Stickney(all areas west of City boundary) <br /> • Scenario 3: Eastmont, Hilton Lake, and Rugg's Lake <br /> • Scenario 4: Eastmont, Hilton Lake, Rugg's Lake, and Larimer <br /> • Scenario 5: Eastmont, Hilton Lake, Rugg's Lake, Larimer, Cathcart, and Silver Firs (all areas east <br /> of City boundary) <br /> • Scenario 6: Emander, North Creek, Eastmont, Hilton Lake, Rugg's Lake, Larimer, and Cathcart (all <br /> areas within the UGA) <br /> • Scenario 7: All nine study areas <br /> nl Final Report:October 2008 Page 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.