|
•
<br /> ATTACHMENT 5
<br /> Exhibit 57
<br /> Johnson Drive Economic Development Zone(EDZ)
<br /> Annual Net Fiscal Impact Analysis(1)
<br /> City of Pleasanton General Fund
<br /> FY 2015116 Dollars
<br /> Option 1 Hotel Option 2 Hotel
<br /> (150 rooms) (231 rooms)
<br /> General Fund Revenues and Expenditures Categories Phase I Buildout Phase I Buildout
<br /> Net Fiscal Revenues (2)
<br /> Property Taxes(3) $179,133 $351,450 $211,658 $383,975
<br /> Property Tax in Lieu of VLF(4) $20,711 $40,634 $24,472 $44,395
<br /> Retail Store Retail Sales Taxes(5) $841,369 $1,634,439 $841,369 $1,634,439
<br /> Other Retail Sales Taxes(Employees and Hotel Guests)(5) $8,220 $24,104 $8,753 $24,637
<br /> Transient Occupancy Taxes(5) $410,625 $410,625 $632,363 $632,363
<br /> Employee-Based Revenues(5) $8,220 $24,104 $8,753 $24,637
<br /> Sub-total $1,468,278 $2,485,357 $1,727,367 $2,744,445
<br /> Expenditures(6)(7)
<br /> General Government $6,848 $20,079 $7,292 $20,523
<br /> Community Development $5,727 $16,792 $6,098 $17,163
<br /> Operations Services $10,367 $30,398 $11,039 $31,070
<br /> Community Services $3,337 $9,785 $3,553 $10,001
<br /> Library $3,831 $11,234 $4,080 $11,483
<br /> Police $22,720 $66,620 $24,193 $68,094
<br /> Fire $13,592 $39,856 $14,474 $40,737
<br /> Sub-total $66,422 $194,764 $70,728 $199,071
<br /> General Fund Net Impact (8)(9) 51,401,857 52,290,593 51,656,639 $2,545,375
<br /> General Fund Net Impact Assuming Lower Club Retail Sales(9)(10)
<br /> Amount 51,108,820 51,927,692 $1,363,603 $2,182,474
<br /> Percent of Net Impact Assuming Higher Club Retail Sales 79.1% 84.2% 82.3% 85.7%
<br /> Sources:Memorandum,Brion&Associates,"Draft Summary-Johnson Drive EDZ Fiscal Impact Analysis,City of Pleasanton,February 5,2015:
<br /> and ALH Urban&Regional Economics.
<br /> (1)Includes estimated General Fund revenues less estimated General Fund expenditures.
<br /> (2)Includes the most substantial revenues anticipated to accrue to the City of Pleasanton General Fund resulting from the Project's stabilized
<br /> operations.However,there may be yet additional revenues flowing to the General Fund pursuant to the Project's operations.This analysis also
<br /> include the revenues and expenditures included in the Brion&Associates February 2015 analysis for the Johnson Drive EDZ.
<br /> (3)See Exhibit 52.
<br /> (4)See Exhibit 53.
<br /> (5)See Exhibit 55.
<br /> (6)The estimated service costs per employee were derived in Exhibit 56.These costs were multiplied by the estimated number of Project
<br /> employees presented in Exhibit 47.
<br /> (7)It is possible the City of Pleasanton may be responsible for a portion of the Project's transportation costs,but the amount of this expenditure is
<br /> not presently identified.Thus,Project expenditures may increase by some as yet unidentified amount.
<br /> (8)Comprises revenues less expenditures.
<br /> (9)Depending upon whether or not the City funds a portion of the Project's transportation costs,as referenced in footnote(7),the net revenues
<br /> generated by the Project may be lower than estimated.
<br /> (10)The Brion&Associates analysis assumed a lower sales per square foot figure for the club retail space than assumed in the preceding urban
<br /> decay analysis.This sales figure was$700 per square foot(see Table A-3 in the Brion&Associates Memorandum).At this lesser level of sales
<br /> performance the amount of sales tax generated by the club retail space would be lower.ALH Economics estimates that the Retail Store Retail
<br /> Sales Taxes assuming the$700 per square foot sales performance would result in approximately 35%lower retail sales taxes for Hotel Option 1,
<br /> and 22%lower retail sales taxes for Hotel Option 2.This estimation was determined through sensitivity analysis,and continues to include some
<br /> assumption for diverted retail sales from existing retailers.
<br />
|