My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 27 - Appeal Application Nos. 2020-03 and 2020-04 - Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2021
>
01/19/2021 Regular
>
Item 27 - Appeal Application Nos. 2020-03 and 2020-04 - Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/10/2024 2:34:56 PM
Creation date
8/22/2023 9:23:52 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Agenda Packet
Agency
Clerk of the Council
Item #
27
Date
1/19/2021
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
694
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
Sales Tax <br />Estimates for indirect Sales Tax rely on several assumptions regarding household/employee spending habits and the <br />City's capture of this spending. The Report estimates a City capture rate of 60 percent of taxable spending for new <br />households. Capture rates in comparable studies from AECOM (2018), Economic and Planning Systems (2016) and <br />Keyser Marston Associates (2018) show a range from 25 percent to 50 percent with greater capture rates for <br />developments near the commercial center of larger cities. Precedents from other studies suggest that the 60 percent <br />capture rate for new households may be high considering the Project's central in Orange County with numerous <br />shopping centers in neighboring jurisdictions. A more conservative and defensible capture rate would be between 30 <br />percent and 40 percent. <br />The estimate of taxable sales for households is within the range of several data sources. The Bureau of Labor <br />Services Consumption Survey for the Los Angles Metro Area estimates taxable sales of approximately $22,000 per <br />household in the region, while ESRI estimates approximately $18,000 for the City. Because of the small average size <br />of the households projected to occupy the principally 1-BR and 2-BR dwelling units, the Report's approximate annual <br />household spending of $17,800 is a reasonable estimate. <br />For the business -derived sales tax, the Report assumes a rate of $250 per square foot of retail space to estimate <br />total sales. According to an eMarketer survey of retail locations in Southern California, sales per square foot averaged <br />$436 in 2018 with a median of $322. Consequently, assuming a higher sales tax rate may be defensible. <br />The Report shows inconsistency in the sales tax estimates as indicated in Table 2 and Tables 6 and 7 of the Report. <br />Table 2 in the Report, which shows a cashflow analysis representing the 25-year net new recurring fiscal impact <br />projections of all estimated revenue streams and expenditures, lists the base rate sales tax at buildout at $90,244 and <br />the Measure X sales tax at $135,366. These figures are consistent with the concluding text on page 42 of the Report <br />that summarizes the fiscal impacts of sales tax. However, Tables 6 and 7 in the Report and the accompanying text <br />show a combined $103,700 for base rate sales tax at buildout and $155,550 for Measure X sales tax at buildout. <br />These measures are approximately 15 percent higher than the measures shown in the cashflow analysis in Table 2 of <br />Report on which the net fiscal revenue calculations are based. In a final version of the Report, TCG should explain <br />this discrepancy if intended or correct it if an error. <br />In order to test the impacts of observations above about different input assumptions for calculating fiscal revenues <br />and fiscal expenditures, AECOM prepared an alternate estimate that assumes $350/square foot in retail sales and a <br />capture rate of 40 percent. In addition, to explore whether the data discrepancy discussed above might also have a <br />meaningful impact, AECOM prepared an alternate version of the Report's estimate: as shown in Table 4 below, <br />"Report" represents TCG's base estimate, which uses the cashflow shown in the Report's Table 2. The "Report <br />Alternative" estimate is based on the sales tax measures shown in the Report's Tables 6 and 7. The results of these <br />alternate calculations show the Report's original estimate to be the lowest and most conservative, with a net present <br />sales tax value (NPV at 4% discount rate) of approximately $3.6 million. The AECOM alternative, with a higher sales <br />yield per square foot but lower capture rate, is higher at approximately $4.1 million. Finally, the Report Alternative is <br />highest at approximately $4.3 million. From this, it may be concluded that the Report's original finding is defensible <br />but that higher Project fiscal revenues may be achievable. <br />Table 4: Adjusted Fiscal Revenue Estimate for Sales Tax <br />Fiscal Impact of Sales Tax Assumptions <br />25-Year Recurring <br />Sales Tax (NPV at 4% <br />Sales Tax Base Rate' Sales Tax Measure X' Total Sales Tax' Discount <br />Report2 $90,244 $135,366 $225,610 $3,640,360 <br />Report Alternative $103,700 $155,550 $259,250 $4,298,055 <br />AECOM $99,584 $149,376 $248,960 $4,127,459 <br />(1) Annual revenues at first year of buildout of the Project <br />(2) Cash Flow Analysis from Table 2 in the Report <br />(3) Derived from Tables 6 and 7, based on the methodology described in the Report <br />(4) Assumes 40% capture rate for Project residents and $350 per square foot for Project retail space <br />Souce: TCG, RSG, AECOM <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.