Document Pahrump_doc_deda833b48

Draft Report Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Pahrump, Nevada Prepared for: The Town of Pahrump Prepared by: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. January 2010 EPS #19064 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table of Contents 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 Feasibility of City Operations Impacts on the County 2. CITY FORMATION 10 Option 1 (NRS 10 Option 2 (City 11 Recent 11 3. THE INCORPORATION 12 Name of the New 12 Form of Government 12 City 12 Reorganization 12 Service Levels 12 Effective 13 Taxes 13 Public Facilities and 13 4. PUBLIC SERVICES PLAN AND COST 14 City 14 Administrative Services 17 Buildings and 18 Recreation 18 Fire Protection and 18 Sheriff 18 Animal 21 Judicial 21 Public Works 22 Planning, Code Compliance and Building 23 Other 24 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table of Contents 5. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND 26 6. GROWTH AND 27 7. MUNICIPAL REVENUE ESTIMATES 28 Property Tax 28 Licenses and Permits 29 Consolidated Tax Revenue 30 Transportation 31 Fines and Forfeitures 32 Other Revenues 32 8. IMPACTS UPON EXISTING AGENCIES 33 County 33 Service Areas and Special 33 Other Agencies 33 APPENDIX A: SUMMARY OF INCORPORATION TIMELINE APPENDIX B: BUDGET ANALYSIS APPENDIX C: NRS 266 INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS ---PAGE BREAK--- List of Figures and Tables Figure 1: Study Table A: Summary of the Pros and Cons of Incorporation Table 1: Summary of Revenues and Expenses (Constant No Growth) Table 2: Summary of Nye County Change in Revenues and Expenses Table 3: Municipal Service Providers – Existing and 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Report\19064rpt_admin_draft2010Jan_v2.doc 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The unincorporated town of Pahrump, Nevada, is evaluating the feasibility of becoming an incorporated city. As a city, Pahrump would become responsible for additional public services including control over land use decisions, code compliance and building safety, and maintenance of roads and infrastructure. The city also has the option to provide police protection. Incorporation provides additional local control over municipal services, however, with additional financial and management responsibility. Table A summarizes pros and cons of incorporation. Figure 1 depicts the Pahrump Regional Planning District. The ability of the new city to generate sufficient revenues is critical to the evaluation of a new city. Revenues must be sufficient to continue public services at current levels, without adversely affecting other local jurisdictions. The Incorporation Feasibility Analysis (IFA) documents current and proposed service provision options, and provides a projected city budget. Potential property tax implications are estimated. The IFA describes measures for mitigating potential adverse impacts on other agencies, most notably the County of Nye. The projected budget is based on existing Pahrump staff and costs, focusing on the General Fund. The cost of additional services and responsibilities is based on a review of other cities, as well as on the current cost of County-provided services. Revenues were estimated assuming an exchange of revenues between the County and the new city, and growth when population growth returns. Costs are escalated over time. Forecasts are based on a gradual economic recovery beginning within the next two years; however, there is a risk of continued recession which would make city feasibility more difficult to achieve. If the community elects to proceed, Nevada statutes define several paths to incorporation. As described in subsequent sections, this process could extend over one to two years. F e a s i b i l i t y o f C i t y O p e r a t i o n s The new city would take responsibility for services currently provided by the County. In exchange, a portion of current County revenues equal to the costs would be shifted to the city. This results in no net increase in total property tax and CTX revenues currently collected by the County and the Town together. However, there would be a slight increase in the combined property tax rate within the new city of about 3-4 percent, since the property tax revenue shifted from the County to the new city will be spread over a smaller assessed value base. However, some additional services and related costs will be incurred that are unique to the new city, and would not justify a transfer of County revenues. For example, the new city will require a clerk, a municipal court, and additional staff to manage the increased service responsibilities. The new city will need to use reserves or other resources to meet this additional cost, as well as to meet current needs of the Town. ---PAGE BREAK--- Incorporation Feasibility Analysis for Pahrump, Nevada Draft Report 1/12/10 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 2 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Report\19064rpt_admin_draft2010Jan_v2.doc Table A: Summary of the Pros and Cons of Incorporation Pros Comments Municipal decisions will be made by the city council, not by the county commissioners City provides greater local control over level and type of services staffing levels and priorities), including police, planning, public works City controls land use and development Pahrump Regional Planning Commission (RPC) currently affords residents with input into planning decisions, however, recommendations are non- binding on the County City would determine priorities for use of capital funds impact fees) Currently managed by the County, with the exception of park impact fees directed by the Town City has access to apply and compete for federal grants The Town currently relies on County pursuit of funding and allocation Cons Initially, City will require additional staff to fill a city clerk position and provide a municipal court It is likely that additional administrative staff will be required beyond the initial years, however, funding for additional staff depends on future revenue growth Municipal court functions may partially be handled through cooperative agreement with existing Justice Court (to be determined) No other duplication of current services within Town/city boundaries would occur; new city council will replace Town board Feasibility analysis assumes initial contracts with the County for services, however, city may choose to establish city departments with city staff in the future City will become financially responsible for services currently handled by the County The feasibility analysis assumes revenues would be transferred equal to current costs of new (transferred) city services, however, future cost increases or revenue shortfalls become the city’s responsibility ---PAGE BREAK--- Figure 1 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- Incorporation Feasibility Analysis for Pahrump, Nevada Draft Report 1/12/10 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Report\19064rpt_admin_draft2010Jan_v2.doc The recession and revenue reductions add to the challenges of funding new costs. A new city could be feasible, assuming a number of conditions are met: 1. The new city provides services via contracts with County departments. This minimizes initial startup costs and the need for new staff, and reduces impacts on County staffing. Over time, revenues permitting, the city can consider other options for services such as consolidation or creation of new departments. 2. In addition to agreeing to provide contract services, the County agrees (and/or legislation is enacted) to continue to deliver services in the initial year. The services would be funded by city payments and revenues CTX) retained by the County which would not be transferred to the new city until the subsequent year per NRS. 3. A “bare bones” increase in staff, which would be facilitated through the initial reliance on contracts. This also reduces financial risks in the event of a protracted recession. 4. The Pahrump Justice Court agrees to act as municipal court during a transition period. The court would retain all revenues. Additional caseload may be minimal to the extent that initially the city ordinances mirror current Town ordinances. 5. Any revenue shortfalls experienced by the Town before incorporation as a result of the recession are adequately funded through reserves or other sources, and/or eliminated to avoid any additional cost burdens on the new city. 6. Growth and development activity recover during the initial years of the new city to help fund incorporation costs and additional staff that may be required that may not have been hired during the initial transition to a city. The budget forecast shows the addition of city staff in future years funded by increasing revenues, dependent on an economic recovery. Table 1 compares Town revenues and costs to the initial budget for a new city. The numbers are expressed in today’s dollars, and include no assumptions about new development, growth, inflation or economic recovery. The bottom line shows a net increase in costs, after accounting for additional revenues, of about $220,000 annually based on the conditions described above. In the near-term, the new city should be able to fund those additional costs from reserves, and/or funds carried forward from prior years. Table 1b in Appendix B summarizes a projected future city budget assuming that growth and development begin to recover when the new city is formed. Cost inflation is also included. With an increase in revenues over time, the new city would be able to reduce the use of reserves, help to fund a municipal court that would experience an increased caseload as population grows, and hire additional staff needed to manage the city. If the economy worsens and does not recover, the new city will have more difficulty funding new city services and existing services. In addition to the conditions described above, there are additional strategies to improve the likelihood of a viable city. One approach is to defer the effective date one to two years depending on the legal incorporation process pursued. This would reduce risks related to whether and when a recovery will begin, and allow more time to work out contracts and other service provision issues. The city could charge franchise fees, in addition to the solid waste collection fee that Pahrump collects. This would significantly improve prospects for financial feasibility. For example, other small cities collect franchise fees from electric, cable, and gas ---PAGE BREAK--- Incorporation Feasibility Analysis for Pahrump, Nevada Draft Report 1/12/10 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 5 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Report\19064rpt_admin_draft2010Jan_v2.doc providers. The new city will also be able to compete for various federal funds and grants, although these funds generally would be limited to special projects of a limited duration or equipment and capital improvements. The new city will also have the ability to control the level and costs of services. The feasibility generally assumes the staffing and salaries currently incurred by the County to serve Pahrump; however, the new city will have the ability to modify the manner in which services are provided through contracts and/or city staff, and the city’s future budget would differ from the estimates shown in this study. Economic conditions and development activity will also influence staffing levels; for example, planning staff and building inspection costs have been reduced, reflecting current development activity. ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 1 Summary of Revenues and Expenditures (constant$$, no growth) City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Item Town City Change REVENUES PROPERTY TAXES: 2,855,000 8,740,334 5,885,334 LICENSES AND PERMITS: 400,701 958,301 557,600 INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES: 631,000 6,706,206 6,075,206 FINES AND FORFEITURES: 50,000 255,519 205,519 MISCELLANEOUS: 103,355 103,355 0 OTHER 902,304 902,304 0 TOTAL 4,942,360 17,666,019 12,723,659 EXPENDITURES GENERAL GOVERNMENT: 2,581,248 2,677,119 95,871 JUDICIAL na 334,300 334,300 PUBLIC SAFETY 2,228,789 11,021,789 8,793,000 PUBLIC WORKS 0 2,254,352 2,254,352 BUILDING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT 0 473,965 473,965 CULTURE AND RECREATION 28,000 28,000 0 HEALTH (animal control and shelter) 0 553,923 553,923 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 0 437,881 437,881 OTHER add'l office space) na tbd OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT 104,323 104,323 0 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 4,942,360 (16) 17,885,652 12,943,293 Increased Expenditures Compared to Additional Revenues (219,634) NET 0 (219,634) Town vs. City Budget Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 6 ---PAGE BREAK--- Notes to Table 1 Includes Capital Outlay. Source: M.Sullivan, file: "10_Budget_work_sheets_FY10_052809_D01.xlsx" Gas tax revenues currently received by the Town are transferred to the County for road maintenance purposes. 1.75 cent fuel tax based on Pahrump FY10 budget; State estimates differ Economic Development and collections clerks costs not shown; assumed offset by business license and room taxes. Town provides planning review and recommendations to County. City planning staff reduced compared to current County staff, based on Fernley staffing and reduced development activity. No new franchises assumed electric, cable, gas, telephone) Franchise fee revenue from Pahrump Valley Disposal franchise agreement. Shift of Road Fund tax rate (.005) based on Pahrump a.v./County a.v. (86%) Assumes current County animal control costs and revenues attributable predominantly to Pahrump. (10) Building Fees from County Budget FY10 allocated proportionate to Pahrump population/County population. Net Building Fee revenue to City assumes contract with private firm similar to current County contract. Private contractor assumed to receive average of 70% of building fee revenue. (11) Planning and zoning fee revenue proportionate to Pahrump population/County population. (12) Muni. Ct. revenues based on Fernley as a % of judicial costs (13) Swimming pool fund (and property tax funding) not included. (14) Operating transfers include Cemetery Fund and Ambulance Debt Service. (15) No change assumed for new city compared to existing Town. (16) Note: FY10 budget included the use of fund balances to fund expenditures shown. (17) The shift of property tax from County to new city assumes amo 57% of shifted net costs. The percentage based on property tax as a % of total County property tax See Table 2a (18) The shift of CTX from County to new city assumes amount equ 43% of shifted net costs. The percentage based on CTX as a % of total County property tax and CTSee Table 2a (19) Other unreserved funds, carry-forward from prior year, contingencies. (20) Inflation factor applied to future years expen 2.0% (shown in annual forecast) (21) Assumes initially that justice court continues to hear violations of local ordinances during transition. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 7 ---PAGE BREAK--- Incorporation Feasibility Analysis for Pahrump, Nevada Draft Report 1/12/10 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 8 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Report\19064rpt_admin_draft2010Jan_v2.doc Tax Rates The IFA assumes that property taxes and Consolidated Taxes (CTX) are shifted from the County to the new city equal to the cost of services transferred. This results in an increase in the current Town tax rate, but a nearly corresponding drop in the County’s tax rate. The net result will be a slight increase in the cumulative tax rate in Pahrump, since the shifted County property taxes are collected from a smaller assessed value base, requiring a greater tax rate to collect the same amount of revenue. The increase in the overlapping tax rate is an estimated 0.10, which is about a 3.6 percent increase above the current combined tax rate of 2.8171. This increase could be reduced to the extent that the revenue shift favors CTX rather than property tax, or if the new city adopts additional revenues, such as franchise fees noted above. I m p a c t s o n t h e C o u n t y Because the revenues shifted from the County to the new city would be equal to the County’s reduced service responsibilities, there should not be a direct financial impact on the County as illustrated in Table 2. However, if the transition results in a significant loss of staff, County services to other areas of the County could be adversely affected. For example, many of the Sheriff department staff are trained to provide a range of services, such as Search and Rescue, canine, and other services that may not be available within the new city, and which would be hard to continue with a significantly reduced staff. In addition, the County may incur additional short-term employment costs if layoffs are required due to reductions in revenues and service responsibilities. These impacts could be mitigated to the extent that the new city contracts with County departments so the County could retain staff capabilities. These relationships could be formalized through functional consolidations and shared staff. In Clark County, a metropolitan police force is the result of the consolidation of the sheriff and police departments. In many counties, the justice court and municipal court share staff and facilities. ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 2 Summary of Nye County Change in Revenues and Expenditures City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Change to County Item Rev. or Expend. REVENUE REDUCTIONS NC" =No Change PROPERTY TAXES: Shift from County Road Fund for Transferred Service Costs 67,244 LICENSES AND PERMITS: 557,600 INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES (before CTX shift): Transportation Funds 1,681,121 FINES AND FORFEITURES: TOTAL REVENUE REDUCTIONS TO COUNTY 2,305,966 EXPENDITURES FOR SERVICES SHIFTED TO CITY GENERAL GOVERNMENT: NC JUDICIAL NC PUBLIC SAFETY (Sheriff) 8,793,000 PUBLIC WORKS 2,254,352 BUILDING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT 473,965 HEALTH (Animal Control and Shelter) 553,923 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 437,900 TOTAL EXPENDITURES SHIFTED FROM COUNTY TO CITY 12,513,140 COST REDUCTIONS VS. REVENUE REDUCTIONS (before tax shift) 10,207,175 Net Gain to County (less) Property Tax Shifted from County to New City 5,818,090 (less) CTX Shifted from County to New City 4,389,085 Subtotal, Revenue Shifts 10,207,175 NET IMPACT ON COUNTY (after tax shift) 0 See Table 15 The shift of property tax from County to new city assumes 57% of shifted net costs. The percentage based on property tax as a % of total County property tax and CTX. The shift of CTX from County to new city assumes amount 43% of shifted net costs. The percentage based on CTX as a % of total County property tax and CTX. Includes building, planning and code compliance fees accruing to new city. Assumes no reduction in current County Justice Court revenues. County planning staff reduced by cost of new city planning staff or contract, which is about a 55% reduction in current County costs. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 10 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Report\19064rpt_admin_draft2010Jan_v2.doc 2. CITY FORMATION PROCESS Two primary options exist for the creation of a new city: 1) formation under the general laws of the State of Nevada (NRS 266 et. seq.) and 2) submittal of legislation, which includes a city charter, to the Nevada legislature. A third option, not evaluated in detail herein, would allow the creation of a commission form of city government (no mayoral election) per NRS 267. O p t i o n 1 ( N R S 2 6 6 ) Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) 266 et. seq. specify the incorporation process for “Option 1”1. A summary of the timeline is included as Appendix A. The process is initiated by filing a notice with the county clerk with accompanying map, supporting documentation and petition, which must then be signed by at least one-third of voters within the proposed city boundary within 90 days. As of August 11, 2009, Pahrump had 21,207 registered voters;2 one-third equals 7,069 signatures required. After the petition and signatures have been certified by the county clerk, the Nevada Committee on Local Government Finance and the Department of Taxation review and report on the fiscal and tax implications of the incorporation. Other local jurisdictions also have an opportunity to comment on the proposal. If the Committee finds the area unsuitable for incorporation, the process is halted. Otherwise, the board of county commissioners holds a hearing on the proposal and sets a date for an election. If the election is successful, a subsequent date is set to elect city officers. If the election of officers is held on or before the 1st Tuesday after the 1st Monday of November, the effective date is July 1 of the following year; otherwise, it is one year from July 1 of the following year. Based on the schedule described above, the process could require anywhere from 18 to 22 months; the timing depends on whether the maximum time allowed by statute is needed for each step. The petition certification process would have to be complete by about March 31, 2010 in order to reach a November 2011 election to begin operations as a city in July 2012. Otherwise, the city would begin in July 2013. 1 References to “Option 1” and “Option 2” for convenience only; no legal reference intended. 2 Sandra L. Merlino, Nye County Clerk, 8/11/09 ---PAGE BREAK--- Incorporation Feasibility Analysis for Pahrump, Nevada Draft Report 1/12/10 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 11 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Report\19064rpt_admin_draft2010Jan_v2.doc O p t i o n 2 ( C i t y C h a r t e r / L e g i s l a t i o n ) This option involves presenting a draft city charter to the county’s legislators, who can have the charter introduced at the next legislative session. The legislature may approve (or approve with amendments) or deny the charter.3 The charter provides a legal framework for the city, and is generally comparable to the legal structure for a city as defined in State law. Option 2 provides the opportunity to advance the schedule, e.g., it would be more likely that city operations could begin by 2012 if approved by the voters and the legislature. This option puts the process in the hands of the legislature rather than the County Commissioners as in Option 1. With both options, supporting data, feasibility and impact analysis, and consideration of a range of tax and other factors is required. It is assumed that this option would be preceded by a November vote of residents. If the legislation is approved, then a vote would be held to elect council members and mayor. R e c e n t I n c o r p o r a t i o n s The City of Fernley (population approximately 18,000) was the last community to incorporate in Nevada, in 2001, and was also one of only two new cities formed within the last 20 years. West Wendover (population approximately 5,000) was incorporated in 1991. The Fernley experience raises issues that are applicable to consideration of Pahrump incorporation. The new city did not take over police protection upon incorporation. For several years, the community had an agreement with the Sheriff for services; however, apparently there was no transfer (or minimal transfer) of revenues from the County to the new city. The sheriff stopped renewing the agreement several years ago; however, he asserted his authority to continue to provide service within the community. The community has expressed concern about the issues that occurred from a lack of formal contract, and lack of financial resources (and accounting of those resources) initially transferred upon incorporation. To the extent that the current Town residents wish to police protection services within the new city, the city incorporation should include a permanent shift of revenues from the County to the new city consistent with the shift in services. State law provides that a county may allocate Road Fund revenues to a city. Apparently Lyon County allocated revenues to the city for several years, and then discontinued the transfer in recent years. The city is attempting to regain these revenues. The Pahrump feasibility analysis assumes that the formation of the new city includes a request for a permanent shift of Road District revenues to the new city. The community, until recently, has experienced significant growth. The city’s budget has also grown substantially over the years. The city has several enterprise funds, including sewer, that help to generate revenue for overhead functions. 3 “Legal and Economic Considerations for Incorporation of Nevada Towns,” University of Nevada, Reno, Technical Report USED 2000/01-02. ---PAGE BREAK--- Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 12 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Report\19064rpt_admin_draft2010Jan_v2.doc 3. THE INCORPORATION PROPOSAL This section summarizes key elements of the proposed new city. The petition and ballot measure would specify many of these items, which may change from the assumptions described herein. N a m e o f t h e N e w C i t y The name of the new city would be specified on the petition for incorporation,4 and placed on the ballot measure.5 F o r m o f G o v e r n m e n t The new city may be formed with either a three- or a five-member city council; those council members may be elected by ward or at large. In addition the electorate would elect a mayor. For purposes of the current report, a five-member city council and a mayor are assumed, which would replace the existing Town board. C i t y B o u n d a r y The boundaries are assumed to coincide with the current Town of Pahrump boundaries, at a minimum, as required by Pahrump Town Ordinance 46. The actual boundaries will be determined by the Town Board. The final boundary may consider a number of factors, including the location and type of development and parcelization unsubdivided parcels equal to or greater than 100 acres6). R e o r g a n i z a t i o n The incorporation feasibility analysis assumes no reorganization of special districts or services other than existing municipal services provided by the County, as described in this report. S e r v i c e L e v e l s The feasibility analysis assumes that future service levels as a city remain at least equal to existing levels of service. 4 NRS 266.019 5 NRS 266.019 6 NRS 266.017 ---PAGE BREAK--- Incorporation Feasibility Analysis for Pahrump, Nevada Draft Report 1/12/10 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 13 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Report\19064rpt_admin_draft2010Jan_v2.doc E f f e c t i v e D a t e The new city would become effective July 1, 2012, if the election of council members occurs in early November 2011.7 This would be preceded by the election on the incorporation by 30 to 120 days8. However, in order to meet this timeline, the petition process would have to be completed by March 31 or earlier;9 if the subsequent required reports and hearings took the maximum time allowed by law, the vote for council members could not occur until “after the 1st Tuesday after the 1st Monday of November,”10 and the effective date would by July 1, 2013. T a x e s The new city would require a shift in revenues from the County to the new city comparable to the cost of services shifted from the County to city responsibility. This shift in revenue would not result in a significant net increase in property taxes or other taxes to residents, businesses and property owners in Pahrump and in the County. P u b l i c F a c i l i t i e s a n d I n f r a s t r u c t u r e The feasibility analysis assumes that the new city initially would contract with the County for various services to be shifted to the new city; the contract cost should reflect all building maintenance and related costs. Further discussions between the Town and the County will be necessary to address the disposition of existing County facilities which house services to be shifted to the new city. The new city would continue to collect and utilize existing impact fees collected on behalf of the Town impact fees for fire and park facilities). The new city would also adopt other existing fees currently being collected by the County from new development within Town boundaries for streets. Existing fund balances held by the County for the benefit of the Town should continue to be used for that purpose, and/or transferred to the new city. 7 NRS 266.042 8 NRS 266.029 9 See Appendix A 10 NRS 266.042 ---PAGE BREAK--- Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 14 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Report\19064rpt_admin_draft2010Jan_v2.doc 4. PUBLIC SERVICES PLAN AND COST ASSUMPTIONS Table 3 summarizes changes in service responsibility in Pahrump. As noted, it is assumed that the new city initially contracts for many new services from the County. Other arrangements may be developed over the longer term by future city councils. This chapter described services in greater detail, and explains current as well as future services. Where appropriate, options are identified. The analysis assumes that all municipal services are transferred from the County to the new city; however, the services plan may be revised by the Town Board to limit the services transferred. As noted previously, the IFA assumes a “transition period” during which the new city would need to hire staff, namely a city clerk, and some additional administrative staff to help handle increased financial and other responsibilities. This hiring could be phased over the initial years. To the extent that the new city creates its own departments rather than utilize contracts, administrative staff would be greater than shown. Over time, it is assumed that additional staff may be added as revenues allow. For example, additional planning staff may be required depending on future development activity. These additional staff would be funded by growth in property taxes and other revenues. No new taxes are assumed, although a future city council may choose to add taxes as permitted by law. C i t y C o u n c i l The Town of Pahrump is directed by five Town board members elected at large. The council establishes ordinances governing the Town, and approves all actions of the Town including the policy matters, contracts and personnel. Future City Services Nevada statutes allow for a “Category Two” city (population between 5,000 and 50,00011) to elect either three or five council members; the members may be elected by “ward” within the City, with each ward being of equal population. The number of council members would be determined upon incorporation, and the boundaries of the wards (if utilized) would be determined initially by the Board of County Commissioners.12 In addition to the councilmembers, the city residents would elect (at large) a mayor. The mayor is the presiding officer of the city council and does not vote except in cases of a tie vote. The mayor may veto city council actions; the veto can be overridden by the city council by four-fifths of a five- member council, or by all members of a three-person council). The projected city budget for the new city assumes a five-member council, similar to the current Town Board structure. No salaries are assumed for council members or mayor, although a provision is made for expenses including workman’s comp, and expenditures for memberships, conference attendance and other miscellaneous items. 11 NRS 266.055 12 NRS 266.095 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3 Municipal Service Providers - Existing and Proposed City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Current Provider/ Service Services Change to Current Provider City Responsibility General Government Governing Board 5-member County Commission County Commission would oversee any contracts for services between the County and the new city Elected Mayor and City Council - 3 to 5 councilmembers, may be elected at-large or by ward Administration, legal, personnel and finance services and other overhead County and Town staff each provide administration and overhead services related to their respectives service responsibilities County will have reduced responsibilities for services to Pahrump, and corresponding reduced admin. and overhead City will have additional service responsibilities that will incur additional administration. City Clerk position will be required, in addition to additional finance and HR staff Buildings and Grounds (B&G) Town County responsibilities may be reduced depending on buildings and facilities (if any) transferred to new city City will continue maintenance of Town B&G, and any additional facilities transferred from County Elections County No Change City Clerk responsible for coordinating city ballot issues and elections with County Clerk Public Protection Court County responsible for Justice Court No Change City will create a municipal court to enforce municipal ordinances (may co-operate with Justice Court) Law Enforcement County Sheriff Fire Protection Town/Pahrump Valley Fire and Rescue Service Ambulance Town Animal Control County County not responsible within Pahrump; may contract to provide services to new city City responsibility; may contract with County for services, or form new department Vector Control and Mosquito Abatement No Change No city responsibility Land Use and Planning Regulation & Planning Plan Check and Bldg. Inspection Code Enforcement County County not responsible within Pahrump; may contract to provide services to new city City responsibility; may contract with County for services, or form new department Community Services Recreation Town Local Parks/Other Com'y Facilities Town Library Pahrump Community Library District No Change No city responsibility Schools County School District No Change No city responsibility No change to existing districts or facilities (pool, arena) Future Services Feasibility analysis assumes that the new city is responsible for sheri protection, and initially contracts with Sheriff. Other options include a new city department, or a combined city/county "metropolitan" police department City continues existing fire protection services City continues existing ambulance services Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3 Municipal Service Providers - Existing and Proposed City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Current Provider/ Service Services Change to Current Provider City Responsibility Future Services Public Works/Public Utilities Admin. and Maintenance of Roads, Signals, Drainage, Other Infrastructure County (NDOT maintains highways) County not responsible within Pahrump; may contract to provide services to new city City responsibility; may contract with County for services, or form new department Bridges County (NDOT maintains highways) No change No city responsibility Domestic Water Various utility providers, in addition to onsite systems No Change No city responsibility Wastewater Collection/Treatment/Disposal Various utility providers, in addition to onsite systems No Change No city responsibility Solid Waste Collection/Disposal Pahrump Valley Disposal (private) franchise agreement with Town Nye County Landfill No Change No city responsibility Solid Waste Management County No Change No city responsibility Flood Control & Conveyance Drainage County Other Utilitites Private providers No Change City may require/oversee franchise agreements Cemetary Town oversees cemetary Source: Economic & Planning Systems City continues existing services City continues existing franchise agreement County collaboration with new city Other Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 16 ---PAGE BREAK--- Incorporation Feasibility Analysis for Pahrump, Nevada Draft Report 1/12/10 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 17 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Report\19064rpt_admin_draft2010Jan_v2.doc A d m i n i s t r a t i v e S e r v i c e s The Town of Pahrump administrative staff would provide the basis for the city’s administrative structure. Generally, the current services mirror those required of a city, although a city will need to add staff to handle the additional responsibilities and requirements of a city, as summarized in the following sections and shown in Appendix B Table 4. New city responsibilities will be incurred for contracts and/or staffing for police protection, public works and planning, code enforcement and building inspection. Actual staffing levels will vary depending on future service provision, e.g., whether the new city contracts with the County for certain services or adds new city departments and staff. The latter approach will incur greater administrative costs in various departments. City Manager The new city’s council would be responsible for the hiring of a city manager. The city manager would implement city council policy and direction, and manage the day-to-day operations of the city. The projected city budget assumes salary and benefits comparable to the current Town manager. Finance The city’s finance director would supervise all of the city’s financial affairs under the review of the city council, including budgeting, financial management, and investment of funds acting as city treasurer. The projected city assumes salary and benefits comparable to current levels. Staffing includes positions similar to the current finance director, financial assistant and two business license technicians. Over time, it is assumed that an accountant position and technical specialist will be required to handle additional city responsibilities related to contracts and/or staffing for increased city responsibilities, and as allowed by future city revenues. City Clerk The city clerk maintains the corporate seal and all papers and records of the city, keeps records of the city council proceedings, countersigns all city contracts, and is responsible for publishing city notices in local newspapers. The city clerk is also responsible for overseeing city elections. This office may also be tasked with functions currently handled by Town staff business license collections) as is done in other small cities, and may also provide staff to the municipal court (clerical staff are shown in the judicial budget). This function represents a new cost center that currently does not exist within the Town. City Attorney Similar to the Town, the new city would fund the position of city attorney who would be responsible for preparing resolutions and ordinances, reviewing legal issues on the city’s agenda, and coordinating with outside counsel as necessary. The projected city budget of $150,000 for the city attorney is based on other, similar cities, and represents an increase over the current $100,000 Town budget to account for increased city services and potential legal liabilities. ---PAGE BREAK--- Incorporation Feasibility Analysis for Pahrump, Nevada Draft Report 1/12/10 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 18 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Report\19064rpt_admin_draft2010Jan_v2.doc Human Resources The city’s human resources department, similar to the current Town function, would be responsible for personnel activities, including hiring, compliance with personnel policies and applicable laws, training, and other related functions. The city’s projected budget includes a human resources coordinator at a salary comparable to the current Town level, and adds an office assistant to help deal with an increased city workload as the city grows. Information Technology (IT) The IT functions will provide for managing the acquisition, operation and maintenance of technology, including financial and productivity software, computer hardware and related network and other equipment. The projected city budget includes an IT manager and an IT specialist, as well as budget for contract services and acquisitions. Initially, staffing is assumed to be less, and more comparable to existing city contracts. Economic Development The projected city budget assumes economic development staff and expenditures comparable to the Town’s current level of activity. No additional staff, other than a “Commercial Business and Development Services Manager”, are assumed. This staff cost, and account clerks, are assumed to be funded by business licenses and room taxes consistent with current practices. B u i l d i n g s a n d G r o u n d s No change is assumed to the Town’s current staff and expenditures for maintaining Town buildings and facilities, which would become a city responsibility. The projected city budget assumes contracts initially with the County for services transferred to the new city, which would include an overhead factor for any related facility maintenance costs. Depending on the number of new city staff, additional space may be required. R e c r e a t i o n The projected city budget assumes no change or impact upon the operations or funding of the swimming pool (funded by a separate property tax factor), or other cultural activities currently sponsored by the Town. F i r e P r o t e c t i o n a n d A m b u l a n c e The projected city budget assumes no change or impact upon the operations or funding of fire protection or ambulance services. S h e r i f f The Nye County Sheriff’s Department currently provides police protection services to the Pahrump area from its South Area Command located at the substation at 1520 E. Basin Road. Sheriff responsibilities and authority are defined in NRS Chapter 248. ---PAGE BREAK--- Incorporation Feasibility Analysis for Pahrump, Nevada Draft Report 1/12/10 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 19 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Report\19064rpt_admin_draft2010Jan_v2.doc The Sheriff’s Department provides a range of services to the area, including: • Patrol and “Field Services” - Deputies patrol 3 separate “sectors” which cover the Pahrump area. Minimum “field services” staffing currently provided by the Sheriff is three patrol personnel per sector, per shift, or a total of 9 patrol deputies per shift and 27 per 24- hour period. The total annual staff required to fill the 27 positions after accounting for vacation training, and other time off requires approximately 46 patrol deputies. An additional 5.1 sergeants and 3.4 lieutenants are required to supervise the patrol deputies. Currently, 33 patrol deputies are budgeted (FY10) and assigned to Pahrump. An additional 3 deputies are assigned to the Street Crimes Unit in Pahrump and 3 deputies are designated School Resource Officers. • Communications – The County provides dispatch services to the area. The Pahrump Dispatch Center is staffed by 11 dispatchers and 1 dispatch supervisor. • Detention – The County maintains a detention facility in Pahrump staffed by 8 deputies and 2 sergeants. The County is in process of constructing a new facility, estimated to cost $25 million, which will replace the current facilities. • Investigation – 7 detectives are assigned to Pahrump. • Crime Prevention – The County provides programs such as D.A.R.E. (Drug Abuse Resistance Education) to help reduce the incidence of crime. • Administration and Support – Countywide department management includes the Sheriff, Assistant Sheriffs and Captains, in addition to administrative and technical support. • Other Countywide Services – The Sheriff’s Department provides services to residents of Pahrump that will continue to be a County responsibility, even if the new city takes over responsibility for police protection. The Sheriff serves as County Coroner and is on the County Health Board and Licensing Board. The Sheriff is also the County Constable, compiles jury duty summons, serves as court bailiff, and is responsible for civil services. The Sheriff’s Department relies upon volunteer staff to augment paid staff, for search and rescue operations, and functions such as serving papers thereby relieving paid deputies for other functions. Volunteer staffing Countywide includes 4 reserve deputies, 3 reserve dispatchers, 25 search and rescue, 22 auxiliary members, and 1 clerk. Services to Pahrump total approximately $9.5 million annually,13 as shown in Appendix B Table 5 based on staffing allocations to Pahrump.14 Approximately 50 percent of Administrative Support and Crime Prevention, which are staffed by Countywide staff and/or personnel in other locations, were allocated by the Sheriff to Pahrump. The allocations include the Sheriff and two 13 Position titles and salaries based on table provided by Susan Paprocki, Nye County Finance, 10/12/09, file: "Information requested by Mr. Berkson.xlsx". 14 FTE's based on Position Allocations to Pahrump provided by Sheriff DeMeo, 10/9/09, file: "personnel County wide- pahrump.xlsx". ---PAGE BREAK--- Incorporation Feasibility Analysis for Pahrump, Nevada Draft Report 1/12/10 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 20 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Report\19064rpt_admin_draft2010Jan_v2.doc Assistant Sheriff positions located in Pahrump, although those positions are also responsible for other Countywide Sheriff functions. The budget estimate includes annual vehicle purchases and fuel for Field Services. Future City Services The new city has several options for how police protection may be provided following incorporation and in the longer term. 1. Nye County retains responsibility for policing the new city - This scenario would facilitate the incorporation process as it would entail no transfer of services, facilities or funding to the new city; primary responsibility for management and delivery of police protection would remain with the County Sheriff. This is the model followed by the City of Fernley, incorporated in [2001]. The County Sheriff provided services under a contract until 2007, including enforcement of City ordinances; the County discontinued the contract, but asserted its authority to continue providing services. The City indicated that certain revenues were retained by the County upon incorporation for the purpose of funding police protection as well as other services; however, the City does not have a reconciliation for that intended exchange of revenues.15 2. The City of Pahrump contracts for services with the Nye County Sheriff - This scenario allows the City to negotiate levels of service and minimizes start-up costs that may be required for creating a new department. A corresponding transfer of revenues from the County to the City would be required to fund the contract costs. This approach is utilized, for example, between White Pine County and the City of Ely. 3. The City of Pahrump creates its own police department - This scenario vests control of police services entirely with the City. Upon incorporation, a corresponding transfer of revenues from the County to the City would be required to fund the transferred costs. This option would require acquisition of equipment, facilities, as well as the hiring of staff. 4. A "metropolitan police department" consolidates City/County services - NRS allows for the merger of city and county law enforcement agencies to "increase the efficiency of such agencies by increasing communication facilities, lowering purchasing costs and coordinating law enforcement efforts throughout metropolitan areas.”16 The Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (also known as the or Metro) is a joint city-county police department. It is run by the Sheriff of Clark County, elected every four years. The Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department was formed on July 1, 1973 by merging the Las Vegas Police Department with the Clark County Sheriff's Department. 15 EPS correspondence with Lisa Farmer, City of Fernley, City Clerk's Office, 11/4/09. 16 NRS 280.110. Note: NRS 280.105 requires that any city-county law enforcement mergers occurring within a county with a population of 100,000 or more must follow the provisions in NRS 280, but does not exclude counties of a smaller size from creating metropolitan departments. ---PAGE BREAK--- Incorporation Feasibility Analysis for Pahrump, Nevada Draft Report 1/12/10 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 21 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Report\19064rpt_admin_draft2010Jan_v2.doc The transition to cityhood may involve some combination of the options described above. For example, the new city initially may contract for County sheriff services (or defer to the County to continue current sheriff services), then create its own department or merge with the County to create a metropolitan police department at a future time. City Budget Estimates The budget forecast for the new city assumes a "contract" scenario. The costs are estimated based on staffing assigned to the Pahrump area, with adjustments to reflect an allocation of staff to Pahrump services. A contract with the County is assumed initially, as this would provide a basis for calculating the transfer of revenues from the County to the City, and would minimize initial City startup costs and transition efforts. This option still leaves open the possibility of subsequently creating a consolidated County/City metropolitan police department or a new City department at a future time. Appendix B Table 6 provides a preliminary estimate of potential police costs based on existing services to Pahrump. Certain adjustments are shown to account for staffing not fully allocated to Pahrump, e.g., only a portion of the Sheriff’s time is included, and administrative support, communications, and detention are allocated proportionate to Town population. The budget assumes that all applicable and allocated costs to Pahrump, including equipment, facilities, and training, are included in the contract. These terms are subject to further discussions between the community, the Board of County Commissioners, and the Sheriff’s Department regarding levels of service to be provided to Pahrump and their costs. Specific provisions may be made related to the sharing of certain costs, for example, detention; a cost sharing arrangement could be determined, and/or a cost per booking. A n i m a l C o n t r o l The projected city budget assumes a contract with the County, with costs based upon the population of the city compared to the total county population. These costs would be partially offset by animal control revenues (licenses, fines, etc.). Costs associated with the animal shelter may also need to be allocated to a contract. J u d i c i a l There are three Justice Courts in Nye County, one each in Beatty, Tonopah and Pahrump. The Justice Court is a court of limited jurisdiction, created by statute (NRS Chapter The court hears criminal matters (which include traffic violations), small claims up to $5,000, evictions and civil matters up to $10,000. In addition, the Court issues search warrants and arrest warrants, holds arraignments and trials for misdemeanor cases, and handles gross misdemeanor and felony cases from the initial arrest through the preliminary hearing stage, including bail setting and probable cause determinations. The Court is responsible for issuing, reporting and monitoring temporary protective orders for domestic violence or stalking and harassment. ---PAGE BREAK--- Incorporation Feasibility Analysis for Pahrump, Nevada Draft Report 1/12/10 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 22 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Report\19064rpt_admin_draft2010Jan_v2.doc Future City Services The new city will be required to create a Municipal Court which will hear violations of the city’s municipal code, including misdemeanor traffic and criminal cases (NRS 266.550 through 266.595 describe the jurisdiction and operation of municipal courts). The municipal court has similar powers and jurisdiction in the city as are provided by law for justices’ courts, subject to the overall limited jurisdiction of misdemeanor criminal offenses. The powers of the municipal court include the power to charge and collect fees (as authorized pursuant to NRS 5.073). Many cities and counties in Nevada operate a consolidated justice and municipal court system. In those cases, the Justice of the Peace also hears municipal court cases as well as Justice Court cases, thereby reducing overhead costs and improving the efficiency of the court system. This arrangement will require the concurrence of, and agreement with, the Justice Court. A preliminary budget for the Municipal Court includes total costs of approximately $330,000. The budget is based on the municipal court budgets for the cities of Fernley and Mesquite, which operate a consolidated Justice and Municipal Court; the costs ranged from $250,000 to $330,000 annually, respectively, as shown in Appendix B Table 7. The costs represent the city’s contribution towards the total costs of the system. A portion of the costs will be offset by fees and charges, and other revenues collected by the Court, assumed to equal about 60 percent of costs, based on the Fernley budget. The municipal court may retain certain revenues which currently accrue to the State, to the extent that the municipality adopts the corresponding State ordinances. The budget estimates indicate a net city cost, after court revenues, of approximately $130,000. The net city cost depends on the staffing and costs for the judge and clerical support, prosecution services and other charges, offset by fines and forfeitures. The Mesquite Municipal Court, with a budget of about $330,000, disposed of approximately 900 non-traffic misdemeanor cases in Fiscal Year 2009, and nearly 3,700 traffic and parking violations. By comparison, the Pahrump Justice Court disposed of about 4,800 traffic and parking violations in Fiscal Year 2009. P u b l i c W o r k s The Nye County Public Works/Road Department provides a range of services in the County, including transportation, solid waste management, water and wastewater. The Department’s Pahrump office, located at 250 N. Hwy 160, handles engineering, road maintenance for Pahrump’s 794 lane miles17 and equipment maintenance functions. The Department maintains a maintenance facility, and 107 active vehicles and other equipment in Pahrump.18 17 Summary of Roads Maintained by Nye County as of 12/31/2008, David Fanning, Interim Director Nye County Public Works, 10/5/09, Enclosure 18 Equipment Inventory Report, David Fanning, Interim Director Nye County Public Works, 10/5/09, Enclosure ---PAGE BREAK--- Incorporation Feasibility Analysis for Pahrump, Nevada Draft Report 1/12/10 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 23 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Report\19064rpt_admin_draft2010Jan_v2.doc According to a Public Works Department, approximately 23 positions work in the Pahrump area at a total salary and benefits cost of $1.6 million.19 Other non-staff costs add about $600,000 annually20 (not including solid waste). Appendix B Table 8 summarizes current costs. The allocations include the Public Works Director, although this position and related support staff are also responsible for other Countywide services. Future City Services The new city would be responsible for the services and functions currently provided to Pahrump by the County Public Works Department. Appendix B Table 9 provides a preliminary budget for the City Public Works department based on current levels of staffing and salaries. A contract with the County is assumed initially, as this would provide a basis for calculating the transfer of revenues from the County to the City, and would minimize initial City startup costs and transition efforts. This option still leaves open the possibility of subsequently creating a new City department. To the extent public works services are required outside of the city boundaries, or to maintain County facilities, the city department could contract to the County to provide certain services, and avoid unnecessary duplication of equipment and services. This arrangement potentially could generate additional net revenue to the city, depending on the services provided and the need to hire additional city staff to provide the services. The new city budget assumes that all applicable and allocated costs to Pahrump, including equipment, facilities, and training, would be included in an initial contract with the County. These terms are subject to further discussions between the community, the Board of County Commissioners, and the Public Works Department regarding levels of service to be provided to Pahrump and their costs. Public Works services would be funded primarily through road-related revenues fuel taxes) as described in Chapter 7. Major capital improvements would also be funded through impact fees paid by new development projects in Pahrump. Federal funding and grants could also help to fund major one-time costs, including capital improvements. P l a n n i n g , C o d e C o m p l i a n c e a n d B u i l d i n g I n s p e c t i o n The Nye County Planning Department assists with issues related to planning, zoning, and development functions. The Department comprises two subdivisions: Planning and Code Compliance. The Planning division is responsible for planning, zoning and development functions. Ten positions are budgeted for the Pahrump Planning Office located at 250 N. Hwy 160.21 Appendix B Table 10 summarizes the expenditures totaling approximately $800,000 annually. The allocations include the Planning Director, although this position and related support 19 Staff, by Position, and Full-Time Equivalents, Serving Pahrump, David Fanning, Interim Director Nye County Public Works, 10/5/09, Enclosure 20 Summary Budget Report, David Fanning, Interim Director Nye County Public Works, 10/5/09, Enclosure 21 Susan Paprocki, Nye County Finance, 10/12/09, 'file: "Information requested by Mr. Berkson.xlsx". ---PAGE BREAK--- Incorporation Feasibility Analysis for Pahrump, Nevada Draft Report 1/12/10 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 24 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Report\19064rpt_admin_draft2010Jan_v2.doc staff are also responsible for other Countywide services. A Regional Planning Commission enables Pahrump residents to submit advisory recommendations to the County on planning matters. The Code Compliance Division is responsible for building safety and handles complaints or concerns regarding violations of the County’s nuisance and zoning ordinances within the Pahrump Regional Planning District. The Division is also responsible for air quality and floodplain management programs. Current costs are shown in Appendix B Table 10. The Department also manages a contract with a private firm to operate a building and safety services office in Pahrump. The private firm is paid a percentage of the Building and Safety Fees collected for services provided by the firm. The percentage ranges from 55 percent to 90 percent of fees, depending on the amount of fees collected. Future City Services It is assumed that the new city will take over the services and functions of planning, code compliance and building inspection that currently are provided by the County. Appendix B Table 11 is an initial estimate of planning staff and costs based on current County services, reduced to reflect staffing of comparable cities Fernley) as well as reduced development activity that is likely in the near term. Appendix B Table 12 estimates code enforcement and building inspection costs. Building inspection costs assume a contract with a private firm, similar to the current County service provision. Permit revenues generated from the Pahrump area totaled $485,000 in FY09;22 however, for the first five months of FY10 permit revenues are down about 50 percent compared to the same period in the prior year, thus the analysis has reduced the revenues proportionately. Payments to the private firm would average about 70 percent of revenues based on the current County contract. O t h e r C o s t s It is assumed that the new city would continue to participate in the municipal insurance pool that provides the Town with insurance. A higher cost (approximately $200,000) is included in the projected city administration budget to reflect an increased level of responsibility. To the extent that the new city creates new city departments rather than contracting with the County for services, insurance costs could be much greater.23 There will be a need to accommodate an additional five to ten new administrative staff positions. The capacity of existing Town facilities may need to be expanded, and/or office space leased in the interim. Potential costs have not been estimated at this point in time. To the extent that new city departments are formed, it may be appropriate to utilize County facilities that currently house those services that would be transferred to the new city. 22 Lisa Whitt, Building & Safety Department, 12/14/09. 23 EPS interview with Wayne Carlson, Executive Director, Nevada Public Agency Insurance Pool, 12/4/09 ---PAGE BREAK--- Incorporation Feasibility Analysis for Pahrump, Nevada Draft Report 1/12/10 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 25 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Report\19064rpt_admin_draft2010Jan_v2.doc Nevada law allows for the inclusion of a contingency in the budgeting process. Currently, the County and Town budgets do not show a contingency amount. The projected new city budget does not show a contingency; however, interest earnings on additional funds and deposits from increased city revenues has not been estimated, and could provide a contingency of 1 to 3 percent. ---PAGE BREAK--- Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 26 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Report\19064rpt_admin_draft2010Jan_v2.doc 5. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE The new city would continue to operate from its current offices, although expansion or lease of additional space may be necessary to accommodate additional administrative staff. The need for space for city services such as police protection, planning and public works will depend upon the manner in which each service is provided. Currently those corresponding County services are housed in County-owned facilities in Pahrump. If the new city contracts with the County to continue providing those services, no new facilities should be necessary. If the new city creates new departments for police, planning and public works, additional space will be required. This space potentially could be accommodated through conveyance of existing County facilities to the new city; terms of the conveyance would need to be negotiated between the new city and the County. Alternatively, the new city would need to construct or lease additional space to house staff and equipment. Existing County facilities potentially subject to conveyance (or partial use by the new city) include the following: 1520 East Basin Road - This building contains sheriff offices, as well as other County functions such as the County Clerk, courts and district attorney; the latter functions do not transfer to the new city. 250 North Hwy. 160 - These buildings house County Public Works, as well as Planning, Public Health Nurse, Bureau of Community Health, and Search and Rescue. Only public works and planning potentially would be services taken over by the new city. 171 North Kittyhawk – This is the location of County animal control facilities. Public Works/Road Department Corp. Yard – located just west of the Town corp. yard, the facility houses vehicles, equipment and supplies. The new city and the County may create agreements for the joint use of other facilities, for example, if the Pahrump Justice Court and city Municipal Court share facilities and staff. The County detention facility will still be required by the County; however, a contractual arrangement could specify terms of use by the new city. New public facilities could be funded through impact fee revenue. The new city would continue to collect and utilize existing impact fees collected on behalf of the Town impact fees for fire and park facilities). The new city would also adopt other existing fees currently being collected by the County from new development within Town boundaries for streets. Existing fund balances held by the County for the benefit of the Town should continue to be used for that purpose, and/or transferred to the new city. ---PAGE BREAK--- Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 27 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Report\19064rpt_admin_draft2010Jan_v2.doc 6. GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT Pahrump’s population on July 1, 2008 totaled 38,882 according to the certified estimate24 produced by the Nevada State Demographer. The population increased 2.5 percent from the prior year, significantly slower because of the recession compared to prior years. Nye County estimates25 that Pahrump’s population declined to 38,275 by the end of the third quarter of 2009. For the decade from 1996 through 2006, the Town’s population grew from 17,540 to 36,645 at an average annual rate of 7.6 percent. The rate of growth peaked at 10.2 percent in 2006 before slowing to its current rate. Projections26 published in August 2008 forecast a moderate recovery for the period from 2007 to 2014. The estimates forecast the equivalent of a 4.8 percent annual average growth rate for Nye County; although projections are unavailable by town, Pahrump historically accounts for most of the Nye County growth. The 4.8 percent rate is projected to slow to 2.6 percent between 2014 and 2021. For the entire period 2007 to 2021 the forecasted population grows at a 3.7 percent annual average. At an average growth rate of 3.7 percent, Pahrump’s population would grow by about 1,400 people annually, or 570 units per year assuming 2.5 persons per household (2000 census). The actual rate of development will depend on economic cycles. At some point, buildout may be constrained by the availability of water, which currently is being studied by the County. The estimates described above are lower than the estimates produced in 200527 for the Pahrump Capital Improvement Plans and Impact Fees. That report projected residential unit growth of 750 units to 1,000 units per year through 2015. 24 Nevada County Population Estimates July 1, 1986 to July 1, 2008, Nevada Dept. of Taxation 25 Nye County Population Estimates Through the Third Quarter, 2009, Nye County Department of Planning, 19/20/09 26 Nevada County Population Projections 2008 to 2028, Nevada State Demographer’s Office, August 2008 27 Nye County CIPs and Impact Fee Study, Appendix 8: Land Use Assumptions & Demographics, Consensus Planning and TischlerBise, Draft 7/8/05 ---PAGE BREAK--- Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 28 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Report\19064rpt_admin_draft2010Jan_v2.doc 7. MUNICIPAL REVENUE ESTIMATES This section describes anticipated city revenues. As noted previously, there is the potential for the city to increase revenues through franchise fees paid by utility providers; however, none are assumed in this analysis. As described below, the feasibility of the new city depends upon a significant increase in revenues to fund services transferred from the County. NRS provides mechanisms for a new local government to request allocations of property tax and CTX. In turn, the allocation of revenues to the local government previously providing the service the County) would be reduced by an equal amount. It is likely the new city could receive grants for various purposes; however, these would typically be for “one-time” or special purposes, and are not assumed in the current analysis. P r o p e r t y T a x Property taxes are based on the taxable value of two components: land and depreciated value of improvements.28 The “assessed value” is equal to the taxable value times 35 percent, which is the “rate of assessment”.29 It is this assessed value that is multiplied by a tax rate to calculate the tax bill for a property. Property taxes are capped in several ways. The cumulative tax rate for all entities cannot exceed $3.64 per $100 of assessed value (not including legislatively approved overrides above the cap). The property tax revenues of a local government entity are not allowed to increase by more than 6 percent over the prior year.30 The projected budget for the new city assumes no significant increase in assessed value to the Town or the County over the next few years. New development is likely to be minimal, and may be offset by potential reductions in existing assessed values. Over the longer term, growth in property taxes to the Town (and to the new city in its place) could approach the 6 percent limit, depending on future rates of new development. This estimate assumes a relatively conservative growth rate (by comparison to recent trends) of 2 to 3 percent annual growth in units, and 2 to 3 percent annual growth in market value, after the next few years of stabilization and recovery. Future City Revenues Appendix B Table 14a illustrates projected property tax revenue. Fiscal feasibility of the new city depends on shifting revenues from the County to the new city approximately equal to the cost of any shifted service responsibilities. The city budget projection assumes that the shift in revenues from the County comprises property tax and CTX revenue, which are the two major 28 NRS 361.025, NRS 361.227 29 NRS 361.225 30 NRS 354.59811 ---PAGE BREAK--- Incorporation Feasibility Analysis for Pahrump, Nevada Draft Report 1/12/10 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 29 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Report\19064rpt_admin_draft2010Jan_v2.doc County funding sources for services provided to Pahrump. Property tax represents about 57 percent of the two sources combined. Therefore, it is assumed that property tax is shifted in an amount equal to 57 percent of shifted service costs; the balance is funded through shifted CTX. These amounts are calculated after accounting for shifted service charge and fee revenues accompanying the shifted services. The actual amount and source of shifted revenues will depend on the most recent and available cost information before incorporation, and decisions to be made by the Town and County, as well as the State agencies charged with reviewing the incorporation. State law provides that the allowed revenue from taxes ad valorem of any local government must be established by the Nevada Tax Commission for the first fiscal year it is in existence, and includes revenue in an amount equal to the share of revenue that funded services assumed by the new city from the County.31 In turn, the revenues of the “predecessor” service provider (the County) are reduced by an equal amount so that there is no increase in total revenues of all agencies.32 The amount also would include revenues of the predecessor government if it no longer exists, i.e., the Town of Pahrump.33 The maximum allowed revenue to the local government is increased by the total amount of tax revenues shifted. It is expected that the actual rates and revenues would be established in accordance with NRS whereby “…Nevada Tax Commission shall request the Committee on Local Government Finance to prepare a statement of the prior cost of performing the function for each predecessor local government. Within 60 days after receipt of such a request, the Committee on Local Government Finance shall prepare a statement pursuant to the request and transmit it to the Nevada Tax Commission.”34 L i c e n s e s a n d P e r m i t s Business Licenses The Town currently receives business license revenue which funds economic development efforts, including the position of “Commercial Business and Development Services Manager”, and collection clerks. The projected city budget assumes no change in this revenue source following city formation. The staff costs are assumed offset by business license and room tax revenues. 31 NRS 354.5987, including sec. 2(b) 32 NRS 354.5987 sec. 4 33 NRS 354.598743 34 NRS 354.5987 sec. 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- Incorporation Feasibility Analysis for Pahrump, Nevada Draft Report 1/12/10 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 30 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Report\19064rpt_admin_draft2010Jan_v2.doc Franchise Fees The Town collects a 5 percent franchise fee from its solid waste collection provider. Nevada law allows cities to also collect franchise fees from other public utility providers, for example, gas, electric, cable and telephone. No additional franchise fee revenue is assumed in the projected city budget. Liquor and Gaming License Fees The Town receives approximately $250,000 from a share of County liquor and gaming license fees collected from within the Town. This revenue is assumed to continue at a comparable level with the new city. Animal License and Spay/Neuter Fees Currently the County is responsible for animal control. The services plan for the new city assumes the city would take over responsibility for animal control services. Although the new city initially may contract with the County, fee revenue would offset the cost of services. Building Fees Building fee revenue to the new city is based on total County fee revenues proportionate to Pahrump population. A portion of those fees are paid to the private contractor that provides building services, and the balance of the revenue accrues to the County. The projected city budget assumes a similar arrangement initially; the budget shows the total fee revenue, and deducts the contractor payments under the building services expenditure category. Planning and Zoning Fees Planning and zoning fee revenue to the new city is based on total County fee revenues proportionate to Pahrump population. C o n s o l i d a t e d T a x R e v e n u e The CTX revenue pools several State revenues allocated to Nye County; these revenues are then allocated to the County, cities, towns and districts. Revenues consist of portions of the State sales tax, including Supplemental City-County Relief Tax and Basic City-County Relief Tax Cigarette Tax; Liquor Tax, Motor Vehicle Privilege Tax (MVPT); and Real Property Transfer Tax (RPTT). The allocations to the County and other jurisdictions apply the Consumer Price Index (CPI) to the prior year base amounts to determine the current year base (NRS 360.600 through 360.740). Allocations to jurisdictions increase if excess revenues above the base are available; the revenues proportionately decrease if less revenues are available. Over the past ten years, the growth in total State and Nye County CTX approximately equaled inflation, on average. During peak years CTX growth was significantly greater than inflation, although recently recessionary declines drag the overall average down. ---PAGE BREAK--- Incorporation Feasibility Analysis for Pahrump, Nevada Draft Report 1/12/10 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 31 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Report\19064rpt_admin_draft2010Jan_v2.doc Future City Revenues As discussed in the section on property tax revenues, it is assumed that property tax and CTX revenues are shifted from the County to the new city comparable to the shift in service responsibilities and costs. CTX represents about 43 percent of the County’s combined property tax and CTX revenues, therefore it is assumed that 43 percent of the shifted services will be funded by CTX shifted from the County. The actual amount and source of shifted revenues will depend on costs at the time of incorporation, and decisions to be made by the Town and County. State law does not specify any change in the distribution of CTX upon incorporation, except by request of the new city or by cooperative agreement. The law provides that a newly created government may request an allocation of CTX; however, it requires that the governing body of the new city submit the request, so no additional revenues would be available initially. The request would be submitted by December 31 before the fiscal year in which the revenues would be received. The Statutes do not specify how the allocation is determined, except to say that the revenues would be shifted from the share currently allocated to the County of Nye. 35 The Statutes also provide a mechanism whereby two governmental entities may enter into a cooperative agreement to shift CTX.36 Although not specified, it should be possible for the current Town to enter into a cooperative agreement with the County to shift CTX contingent upon the incorporation and shift in service responsibilities and costs, assuming County agreement. If no agreement is reached with the County before incorporation, another approach for the new city to receive CTX in its initial years would be to include a requirement for the continuation of County services for the first year of incorporation funded by the CTX that will be shifted in the subsequent year. This approach assumes that incorporation “Option 2” is pursued whereby the Town submits a charter to be approved by the Nevada legislature. For purposes of forecasting future revenues, a CTX growth comparable to inflation (after the economy has stabilized) produces a conservative estimate. In the near term, continued declines or no growth are likely. The actual future annual amount is likely to vary in any given year and may be greater than estimated if robust growth returns to the State. T r a n s p o r t a t i o n F u n d s Currently, there are a number of revenue sources which provide County funding for road-related maintenance and improvements. These sources include a portion of sales tax dedicated to transportation, and various fuel taxes collected per gallon of fuel sold, and allocated to local jurisdictions. 35 NRS 360.740 provides that a newly created local government may request a distribution of CTX revenue, and the amount allocated to the local government that previously provided the services to be funded must be reduced by an equivalent amount per NRS 360.740, sec.3(a). This transferred revenue may be used to fund services provided by the County via an interlocal agreement in an equivalent amount per NRS 360.740, sec.7. 36 NRS 360.730 ---PAGE BREAK--- Incorporation Feasibility Analysis for Pahrump, Nevada Draft Report 1/12/10 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 32 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Report\19064rpt_admin_draft2010Jan_v2.doc Appendix B Table 14 summarizes the current County road-related revenues, and the estimated amounts accruing to a new city. The revenues to the city total approximately $1.6 million. F i n e s a n d F o r f e i t u r e s Fines and Fees The new city is assumed to continue to collect fines and fees based on current Town revenues. Municipal Court Revenues The municipal court would collect court assessments from disposed cases (guilty verdicts), as well as fines and forfeitures. The projected city budget revenue amount is based on a review of other city municipal courts; revenue covered about 60 percent of costs, although this amount will vary depending on the specific cases and municipal ordinances violated. Revenue is generated by an administrative fee assessed to cases not dismissed by the court, and from traffic fines as well as other penalties associated with violations of city ordinances. O t h e r R e v e n u e s Room Tax State and local room taxes accrue to the Town, and are dedicated to a variety of purposes including the promotion of tourism, economic development, parks, arena and the fairgrounds. No change or impact on this funding source is assumed as a result of the formation of a new city. Ambulance Fees and Grants Ambulance fees are the primary source of funding for ambulance operations, although additional funds are necessary to cover shortfalls in collections of ambulance billings. No change or impact on the ambulance services or funding is assumed as a result of the formation of a new city. Pool Fund Revenues The Pool Fund benefits from its own property tax rate separate from the Town rate. The fund also receives an allocation of CTX revenue. No change or impact on the Pool Fund is assumed as a result of the formation of a new city. Interest Earnings Various Town funds accrue interest earnings on balances. Similarly, the new city will accrue interest earnings. It is likely that these earnings will be greater than the Town’s current interest earnings because of the larger projected new city’s budget. However, these earnings are not estimated because of uncertainties about future interest rates, and fund balances. Although not shown, this conservative approach provides a small contingency of likely additional funds on the order of 2 to 3 percent of the new city’s larger budget. ---PAGE BREAK--- Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 33 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Report\19064rpt_admin_draft2010Jan_v2.doc 8. IMPACTS UPON EXISTING AGENCIES C o u n t y Because the revenues shifted from the County to the new city would be equal to the County’s reduced service responsibilities, there should not be a direct financial impact on the County, as illustrated in Table 2. However, if the transition results in a significant loss of staff, County services to other areas of the County could be adversely affected. For example, many of the Sheriff department staff are trained to provide a range of services, such as Search and Rescue, canine, and other services that may not be available within the new city, and which would be hard to continue with a significantly reduced staff. In addition, the County may incur additional short-term employment costs if layoffs are required because of reductions in revenues and service responsibilities. These impacts could be mitigated to the extent that the new city contracts with County departments so the County could retain staff capabilities. These relationships could be formalized through functional consolidations and shared staff. In Clark County, a metropolitan police force is the result of the consolidation of the sheriff and police departments. In many counties, the justice court and municipal court share staff and facilities. S e r v i c e A r e a s a n d S p e c i a l D i s t r i c t s No change in existing special districts, such as the pool or library district, is assumed to occur. O t h e r A g e n c i e s No agencies have been identified that may be adversely affected by the formation of a new city. ---PAGE BREAK--- APPENDIX A: Summary of Incorporation Timeline 34 ---PAGE BREAK--- Incorporation Feasibility Analysis for Pahrump, Nevada Draft Report 1/12/10 1. Committee of five qualified electors files a notice to incorporate with the county clerk, including copy of the petition to be circulated (266.018) 2. Petition must be signed by at least one-third of qualified electors, and filed within 90 days after notice to incorporate is filed (266.022) 3. County clerk verifies signatures and issues a certificate as to the sufficiency of the petition and notifies committee (266.023) 4. County clerk files with the board of county commissioners 5. Upon receipt of certified petition, board of county commissioners within 30 days shall request a report from the Committee on Local Government Finance. The report must be prepared within 90 days after the report is requested (266.0261) 6. The board shall also transmit a copy of the petition to the Executive Director of the Dept. of Taxation, within 30 days, and to every other local government in the county (266.0261) 7. Any local government reviewing the repot may report recommendations to the board no later than 60 days after receiving a copy of the petition (266.0262) 8. The Dept. of Taxation prepares a report of fiscal effects, including tax rates, and files it with the Committee on Local Government Finance within 30 days (266.0263) 9. The Committee on Local Government Finance approves or revises the statement of estimated effect at a public meeting, and transmits the statement to the county clerk within 30 days after receipt from the Department of Taxation (266.0263). If the Committee finds the area is unsuitable for incorporation, no further action may be taken unless reversed by district court (266.0265) 10. Within 14 days after board receives the report from the Committee on Local Government Finance, the board sets a public hearing that occurs within 14 to 30 days after setting the date (266.027). Additional hearings must be completed within 30 days after the initial hearing 11. Within 30 days of conclusion of hearing, the board issues an opinion and sets the election within 60 to 120 days after the opinion (266.029) 12. Upon approval of incorporation at ballot, the board designates a date for election of officers within 60 to 120 days after the initial election (266.036) 13. If election of officers is held on or before the 1st Tuesday after the 1st Monday of November, the effective date is July 1 of the following year; otherwise, it is one year from July 1 of the following year (266.042) Note: this summary is intended to provide an overview of the process; the reader should refer to the statutes for the actual language and additional detail. 35 ---PAGE BREAK--- APPENDIX B: Budget Analysis 36 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 1 Summary of Revenues and Expenditures (constant$$, no growth) City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Item Town City Change REVENUES PROPERTY TAXES: 2,855,000 8,740,334 5,885,334 LICENSES AND PERMITS: 400,701 958,301 557,600 INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES: 631,000 6,706,206 6,075,206 FINES AND FORFEITURES: 50,000 255,519 205,519 MISCELLANEOUS: 103,355 103,355 0 OTHER 902,304 902,304 0 TOTAL 4,942,360 17,666,019 12,723,659 EXPENDITURES GENERAL GOVERNMENT: 2,581,248 2,677,119 95,871 JUDICIAL na 334,300 334,300 PUBLIC SAFETY 2,228,789 11,021,789 8,793,000 PUBLIC WORKS 0 2,254,352 2,254,352 BUILDING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT 0 473,965 473,965 CULTURE AND RECREATION 28,000 28,000 0 HEALTH (animal control and shelter) 0 553,923 553,923 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 0 437,881 437,881 OTHER add'l office space) na tbd OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT 104,323 104,323 0 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 4,942,360 (16) 17,885,652 12,943,293 Increased Expenditures Compared to Additional Revenues (219,634) NET 0 (219,634) Town vs. City Budget Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 37 ---PAGE BREAK--- Notes to Table 1 Includes Capital Outlay. Source: M.Sullivan, file: "10_Budget_work_sheets_FY10_052809_D01.xlsx" Gas tax revenues currently received by the Town are transferred to the County for road maintenance purposes. 1.75 cent fuel tax based on Pahrump FY10 budget; State estimates differ Economic Development and collections clerks costs not shown; assumed offset by business license and room taxes. Town provides planning review and recommendations to County. City planning staff reduced compared to current County staff, based on Fernley staffing and reduced development activity. No new franchises assumed electric, cable, gas, telephone) Franchise fee revenue from Pahrump Valley Disposal franchise agreement. Shift of Road Fund tax rate (.005) based on Pahrump a.v./County a.v. (86%) Assumes current County animal control costs and revenues attributable predominantly to Pahrump. (10) Building Fees from County Budget FY10 allocated proportionate to Pahrump population/County population. Net Building Fee revenue to City assumes contract with private firm similar to current County contract. Private contractor assumed to receive average of 70% of building fee revenue. (11) Planning and zoning fee revenue proportionate to Pahrump population/County population. (12) Muni. Ct. revenues based on Fernley as a % of judicial costs (13) Swimming pool fund (and property tax funding) not included. (14) Operating transfers include Cemetery Fund and Ambulance Debt Service. (15) No change assumed for new city compared to existing Town. (16) Note: FY10 budget included the use of fund balances to fund expenditures shown. (17) The shift of property tax from County to new city assumes amo 57% of shifted net costs. The percentage based on property tax as a % of total County property tax See Table 2a (18) The shift of CTX from County to new city assumes amount equ 43% of shifted net costs. The percentage based on CTX as a % of total County property tax and CTSee Table 2a (19) Other unreserved funds, carry-forward from prior year, contingencies. (20) Inflation factor applied to future years expen 2.0% (shown in annual forecast) (21) Assumes initially that justice court continues to hear violations of local ordinances during transition. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 38 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 1a Summary of Revenues and Expenditures (constant$$, no growth) - Detail City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Item Town City Change REVENUES PROPERTY TAXES: Current Town Rate 2,855,000 2,855,000 Other Property Tax Revenues Shift from County GF for Transferred Service Costs na 5,818,090 (17) Shift from County Road Fund for Transferred Service Costs na 67,244 Subtotal, Property Taxes 2,855,000 8,740,334 5,885,334 LICENSES AND PERMITS: Business Licenses na na Public Utility Business License na na Franchise Fees 149,876 149,876 Liquor License Fees 10,000 10,000 Gaming License Fees 240,825 240,825 Animal Spay and Neutering Fees na 53,828 Animal License Fees na 27,576 Building Fees na 250,000 (10) Planning Fees na 68,120 (11) Zoning Fees na 158,076 (11) Subtotal, Licenses and Permits 400,701 958,301 557,600 INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES: Consolidated Tax (CTX) Current Town Share 631,000 631,000 Shift from County for Transferred Service Costs na 4,389,085 (18) Transportation Funds RTC (Regional Transportation) na 675,217 County Option 1.0 cent na 168,558 MVFT (Gas Tax) 1.75 cent 325,000 330,000 MVFT (Gas Tax) - 2.35 cent na 512,346 Other (Transfer of 1.75 cent tax to County) (325,000) see above Subtotal, Transportation 0 1,686,121 Subtotal, Intergovernmental 631,000 6,706,206 6,075,206 FINES AND FORFEITURES: Fines & Fees 50,000 50,000 Municipal Court Revenues na 205,519 Subtotal 50,000 255,519 205,519 MISCELLANEOUS: Subtotal 103,355 103,355 0 OTHER 902,304 (19) 902,304 (19) TOTAL 4,942,360 17,666,019 12,723,659 Town vs. City Budget Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 39 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 1a Summary of Revenues and Expenditures (constant$$, no growth) - Detail City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Item Town City Change Town vs. City Budget EXPENDITURES GENERAL GOVERNMENT: Administration 1,179,760 1,275,631 Buildings and Grounds 1,401,488 1,401,488 Subtotal 2,581,248 2,677,119 95,871 JUDICIAL na 334,300 Subtotal 0 334,300 334,300 PUBLIC SAFETY Fire 2,228,789 2,228,789 Police na 8,793,000 Subtotal 2,228,789 11,021,789 8,793,000 PUBLIC WORKS Engineering/Administration 513,558 Site Development 124,801 Pahrump Equipment Shop 346,591 Pahrump Roads na 1,269,403 Subtotal 0 2,254,352 2,254,352 BUILDING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT Administration and Code Enforcement na 298,965 Building Inspection na 175,000 (10) Subtotal 0 473,965 473,965 CULTURE AND RECREATION Subtotal 28,000 (13) 28,000 0 HEALTH Animal Control and Shelter na 553,923 Subtotal 0 553,923 553,923 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Planning na 437,881 Subtotal 0 437,881 437,881 OTHER Additional Office Space na tbd Subtotal 0 0 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT 104,323 (14) 104,323 (15) TOTAL EXPENDITURES 4,942,360 (16) 17,885,652 12,943,293 Increased Expenditures Compared to Additional Revenues (219,634) NET 0 (219,634) Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 40 ---PAGE BREAK--- Notes to Table 1a Includes Capital Outlay. Source: M.Sullivan, file: "10_Budget_work_sheets_FY10_052809_D01.xlsx" Gas tax revenues currently received by the Town are transferred to the County for road maintenance purposes. 1.75 cent fuel tax based on Pahrump FY10 budget; State estimates differ Economic Development and collections clerks costs not shown; assumed offset by business license and room taxes. Town provides planning review and recommendations to County. City planning staff reduced compared to current County staff, based on Fernley staffing and reduced development activity. No new franchises assumed electric, cable, gas, telephone) Franchise fee revenue from Pahrump Valley Disposal franchise agreement. Shift of Road Fund tax rate (.005) based on Pahrump a.v./County a.v. (86%) Assumes current County animal control costs and revenues attributable predominantly to Pahrump. (10) Building Fees from County Budget FY10 allocated proportionate to Pahrump population/County population. Net Building Fee revenue to City assumes contract with private firm similar to current County contract. Private contractor assumed to receive average of 70% of building fee revenue. (11) Planning and zoning fee revenue proportionate to Pahrump population/County population. (12) Muni. Ct. revenues based on Fernley as a % of judicial costs (13) Swimming pool fund (and property tax funding) not included. (14) Operating transfers include Cemetery Fund and Ambulance Debt Service. (15) No change assumed for new city compared to existing Town. (16) Note: FY10 budget included the use of fund balances to fund expenditures shown. (17) The shift of property tax from County to new city assumes amount equals 57% of shifted net costs. The percentage based on property tax as a % of total County property tax and CTX. See Table 2a (18) The shift of CTX from County to new city assumes amount equals 43% of shifted net costs. The percentage based on CTX as a % of total County property tax and CTX. See Table 2a (19) Other unreserved funds, carry-forward from prior year, contingencies. (20) Inflation factor applied to future years expenditures 2.0% (shown in annual forecast) Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 41 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 1b Summary of Revenues and Expenditures (forecast with growth) City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Item 0 1 2 3 REVENUES PROPERTY TAXES: Subtotal, Property Taxes 9,042,783 9,406,093 9,829,238 10,316,163 LICENSES AND PERMITS: Subtotal, Licenses and Permits 1,009,197 1,037,212 1,071,177 1,099,065 INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES: Consolidated Tax (CTX) Current Town Share 664,513 682,959 705,323 723,687 Shift from County for Transferred Service Costs 4,622,192 4,750,502 4,906,062 5,033,790 Transportation Funds Subtotal, Transportation 1,775,672 1,824,964 1,884,724 1,933,793 Subtotal, Intergovernmental 7,062,376 7,258,426 7,496,109 7,691,270 FINES AND FORFEITURES: Subtotal 269,090 276,559 285,616 293,052 MISCELLANEOUS: Subtotal 108,844 111,866 115,529 118,537 OTHER 400,000 400,000 200,000 0 TOTAL 17,892,290 18,490,156 18,997,668 19,518,085 EXPENDITURES GENERAL GOVERNMENT: Administration 1,275,631 1,597,683 1,713,713 1,740,581 Buildings and Grounds 1,401,488 1,429,518 1,458,108 1,487,270 Subtotal 2,677,119 3,027,201 3,171,821 3,227,851 JUDICIAL 334,300 340,986 347,806 354,762 PUBLIC SAFETY 11,021,424 11,232,107 11,447,003 11,666,198 PUBLIC WORKS 2,254,376 2,279,764 2,305,660 2,332,074 BUILDING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT 473,965 483,444 493,113 502,975 CULTURE AND RECREATION 28,000 28,560 29,131 29,714 HEALTH Animal Control 553,923 553,923 553,923 553,923 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Planning 437,881 446,639 455,572 464,683 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 42 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 1b Summary of Revenues and Expenditures (forecast with growth) City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Item 0 1 2 3 OTHER tbd tbd tbd tbd Additional Office Space OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT 104,323 106,409 108,538 110,708 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 17,885,311 18,499,034 18,912,567 19,242,888 Increased Expenditures Compared to Additional Revenues NET 6,978 (8,878) 85,101 275,197 Inflation factor applied to future years expenditures 2.0% Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 43 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 2 Summary of Nye County Change in Revenues and Expenditures City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Change to County Item Rev. or Expend. REVENUE REDUCTIONS NC" =No Change PROPERTY TAXES: Shift from County Road Fund for Transferred Service Costs 67,244 LICENSES AND PERMITS: 557,600 INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES (before CTX shift): Transportation Funds 1,681,121 FINES AND FORFEITURES: TOTAL REVENUE REDUCTIONS TO COUNTY 2,305,966 EXPENDITURES FOR SERVICES SHIFTED TO CITY GENERAL GOVERNMENT: NC JUDICIAL NC PUBLIC SAFETY (Sheriff) 8,793,000 PUBLIC WORKS 2,254,352 BUILDING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT 473,965 HEALTH (Animal Control and Shelter) 553,923 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 437,900 TOTAL EXPENDITURES SHIFTED FROM COUNTY TO CITY 12,513,140 COST REDUCTIONS VS. REVENUE REDUCTIONS (before tax shift) 10,207,175 Net Gain to County (less) Property Tax Shifted from County to New City 5,818,090 (less) CTX Shifted from County to New City 4,389,085 Subtotal, Revenue Shifts 10,207,175 NET IMPACT ON COUNTY (after tax shift) 0 See Table 15 The shift of property tax from County to new city assumes 57% of shifted net costs. The percentage based on property tax as a % of total County property tax and CTX. The shift of CTX from County to new city assumes amount 43% of shifted net costs. The percentage based on CTX as a % of total County property tax and CTX. Includes building, planning and code compliance fees accruing to new city. Assumes no reduction in current County Justice Court revenues. County planning staff reduced by cost of new city planning staff or contract, which is about a 55% reduction in current County costs. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 44 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 2a Summary of Nye County Change in Revenues and Expenditures - Detail City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Change to County Item Rev. or Expend. REVENUE REDUCTIONS NC" =No Change PROPERTY TAXES: Shift from County Road Fund for Transferred Service Costs 67,244 LICENSES AND PERMITS: Business Licenses NC Public Utility Business License NC Franchise Fees NC Liquor License Fees NC Gaming License Fees NC Animal Spay and Neutering Fees 53,828 Animal License Fees 27,576 Building Fees 250,000 Planning Fees 68,120 Zoning Fees 158,076 Subtotal, Licenses and Permits 557,600 INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES (before CTX shift): Transportation Funds 1,681,121 FINES AND FORFEITURES: Municipal Court Revenues TOTAL REVENUE REDUCTIONS TO COUNTY 2,305,966 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 45 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 2a Summary of Nye County Change in Revenues and Expenditures - Detail City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Change to County Item Rev. or Expend. EXPENDITURES FOR SERVICES SHIFTED TO CITY GENERAL GOVERNMENT: Administration NC Buildings and Grounds NC Subtotal 0 JUDICIAL NC Subtotal 0 PUBLIC SAFETY Fire Police 8,793,000 Subtotal 8,793,000 PUBLIC WORKS Engineering/Administration 513,558 Site Development 124,801 Pahrump Equipment Shop 346,591 Pahrump Roads 1,269,403 Subtotal 2,254,352 BUILDING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT Administration and Code Enforcement Building Inspection Subtotal 473,965 HEALTH Animal Control Subtotal 553,923 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Planning Subtotal 437,900 TOTAL EXPENDITURES SHIFTED FROM COUNTY TO CITY 12,513,140 COST REDUCTIONS VS. REVENUE REDUCTIONS (before tax shift) 10,207,175 Net Gain to County (less) Property Tax Shifted from County to New City 5,818,090 (less) CTX Shifted from County to New City 4,389,085 Subtotal, Revenue Shifts 10,207,175 NET IMPACT ON COUNTY (after tax shift) 0 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 46 ---PAGE BREAK--- See Table 15 The shift of property tax from County to new city assumes 57% of shifted net costs. The percentage based on property tax as a % of total County property tax and CTX. The shift of CTX from County to new city assumes amount 43% of shifted net costs. The percentage based on CTX as a % of total County property tax and CTX. Includes building, planning and code compliance fees accruing to new city. Assumes no reduction in current County Justice Court revenues. County planning staff reduced by cost of new city planning staff or contract, which is about a 55% reduction in current County costs. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 47 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3 Municipal Service Providers - Existing and Proposed City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Current Provider/ Service Services Change to Current Provider City Responsibility General Government Governing Board 5-member County Commission County Commission would oversee any contracts for services between the County and the new city Elected Mayor and City Council - 3 to 5 councilmembers, may be elected at-large or by ward Administration, legal, personnel and finance services and other overhead County and Town staff each provide administration and overhead services related to their respectives service responsibilities County will have reduced responsibilities for services to Pahrump, and corresponding reduced admin. and overhead City will have additional service responsibilities that will incur additional administration. City Clerk position will be required, in addition to additional finance and HR staff Buildings and Grounds (B&G) Town County responsibilities may be reduced depending on buildings and facilities (if any) transferred to new city City will continue maintenance of Town B&G, and any additional facilities transferred from County Elections County No Change City Clerk responsible for coordinating city ballot issues and elections with County Clerk Public Protection Court County responsible for Justice Court No Change City will create a municipal court to enforce municipal ordinances (may co-operate with Justice Court) Law Enforcement County Sheriff Fire Protection Town/Pahrump Valley Fire and Rescue Service Ambulance Town Animal Control County County not responsible within Pahrump; may contract to provide services to new city City responsibility; may contract with County for services, or form new department Vector Control and Mosquito Abatement No Change No city responsibility Land Use and Planning Regulation & Planning Plan Check and Bldg. Inspection Code Enforcement County County not responsible within Pahrump; may contract to provide services to new city City responsibility; may contract with County for services, or form new department Community Services Recreation Town Local Parks/Other Com'y Facilities Town Library Pahrump Community Library District No Change No city responsibility Schools County School District No Change No city responsibility No change to existing districts or facilities (pool, arena) Future Services Feasibility analysis assumes that the new city is responsible for sheri protection, and initially contracts with Sheriff. Other options include a new city department, or a combined city/county "metropolitan" police department City continues existing fire protection services City continues existing ambulance services Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3 Municipal Service Providers - Existing and Proposed City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Current Provider/ Service Services Change to Current Provider City Responsibility Future Services Public Works/Public Utilities Admin. and Maintenance of Roads, Signals, Drainage, Other Infrastructure County (NDOT maintains highways) County not responsible within Pahrump; may contract to provide services to new city City responsibility; may contract with County for services, or form new department Bridges County (NDOT maintains highways) No change No city responsibility Domestic Water Various utility providers, in addition to onsite systems No Change No city responsibility Wastewater Collection/Treatment/Disposal Various utility providers, in addition to onsite systems No Change No city responsibility Solid Waste Collection/Disposal Pahrump Valley Disposal (private) franchise agreement with Town Nye County Landfill No Change No city responsibility Solid Waste Management County No Change No city responsibility Flood Control & Conveyance Drainage County Other Utilitites Private providers No Change City may require/oversee franchise agreements Cemetary Town oversees cemetary Source: Economic & Planning Systems City continues existing services City continues existing franchise agreement County collaboration with new city Other Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 49 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 4 City Administration City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Total Cost Cost Function/ Service notes Factor by Position Inflator 0 1 2 3 Mayor/Council Mayor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $5,000 2.0% $5,000 $5,100 $5,202 $5,306 Council Members 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Salaries and Benefits $25,000 2.0% $25,000 $25,500 $26,010 $26,530 Subtotal, Mayor/Council Salaries and Benefits $30,000 $30,600 $31,212 $31,836 Services and Supplies $10,000 2.0% $10,000 $10,200 $10,404 $10,612 Capital Outlay $0 $0 $0 $0 Subtotal, Staff & Other Costs $40,000 $40,800 $41,616 $42,448 City Manager City Manager 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $105,000 30% $136,500 2.0% $136,500 $139,230 $142,015 $144,855 Executive Assistant 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $40,000 35% $54,000 2.0% $54,000 $55,080 $56,182 $57,305 Subtotal, City Manager Staff 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Salaries and Benefits $190,500 $194,310 $198,196 $202,160 Services and Supplies (18) 5% $9,525 $9,716 $9,910 $10,108 Capital Outlay Subtotal, Staff & Other Costs $200,025 $204,026 $208,106 $212,268 Finance Director/Treasurer 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $98,100 30% $127,530 2.0% $127,530 $130,081 $132,682 $135,336 Accountant 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $48,000 30% $62,400 2.0% $0 $63,648 $64,921 $66,219 Financial Assistant 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $40,800 30% $53,040 2.0% $53,040 $54,101 $55,183 $56,286 Technical Specialist 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $38,400 30% $49,920 2.0% $0 $25,459 $51,937 $52,976 Business License Tech. 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Salaries and Benefits 30% $0 2.0% $0 $0 $0 $0 Subtotal, Finance Staff 4.0 5.5 6.0 6.0 Salaries and Benefits $180,570 $273,289 $304,723 $310,817 Services and Supplies (19) 13% $23,474 $35,528 $39,614 $40,406 Capital Outlay (19) 3% $5,417 $8,199 $9,142 $9,325 Subtotal, Staff & Other Costs $209,461 $317,015 $353,478 $360,548 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 50 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 4 City Administration City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Total Cost Cost Function/ Service notes Factor by Position Inflator 0 1 2 3 City Clerk City Clerk 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $60,000 30% $78,000 2.0% $78,000 $79,560 $81,151 $82,774 Deputy City Clerk 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits (10) $48,000 30% $62,400 2.0% $0 $31,200 $62,400 $62,400 Office Assistants 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits (11) $31,100 30% $40,430 2.0% $0 $20,215 $40,430 $40,430 Subtotal, City Clerk Staff 1.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 Salaries and Benefits $78,000 $130,975 $183,981 $185,604 Services and Supplies (19) 14% $10,920 $18,337 $25,757 $25,985 Capital Outlay 3% $2,340 $3,929 $5,519 $5,568 Subtotal, Staff & Other Costs $91,260 $153,241 $215,258 $217,157 City Attorney City Attorney/Contract and Outside Counsel 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits (12) $150,000 2.0% $150,000 $153,000 $156,060 $159,181 Human Resources Human Resources Coordinator 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits (13) $64,100 30% $83,330 2.0% $83,330 $84,997 $86,697 $88,430 Office Assistant 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits (11) $31,100 30% $40,430 2.0% $0 $41,239 $42,063 $42,905 Subtotal, Human Resources Staff 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Salaries and Benefits $83,330 $126,235 $128,760 $131,335 Services and Supplies (19) 10% $8,333 $12,624 $12,876 $13,134 Capital Outlay Subtotal, Staff & Other Costs $91,663 $138,859 $141,636 $144,469 Information Technology IT Manager 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits (14) $62,500 30% $81,250 2.0% $0 $82,875 $84,533 $86,223 IT Specialist 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Salaries and Benefits (14) $40,300 30% $52,390 2.0% $26,195 $0 $0 $0 Subtotal, IT Staff 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $26,195 $82,875 $84,533 $86,223 Services and Supplies (17) 50% $13,098 $41,438 $42,266 $43,112 Capital Outlay (17) 15% $3,929 $12,431 $12,680 $12,933 Subtotal, Staff & Other Costs $43,222 $136,744 $139,479 $142,268 Economic Development (15) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits 30% $0 2.0% $0 $0 $0 $0 Subtotal, Economic Development Staff 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $0 $0 $0 $0 Services and Supplies (20) 10% $0 $0 $0 $0 Capital Outlay Subtotal, Staff & Other Costs $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Administrative Staff (excludes mayor and council) 10.5 14.5 16.0 16.0 Salaries and Benefits $738,595 $991,284 $1,087,465 $1,107,157 Services and Supplies $75,350 $127,841 $140,827 $143,356 Capital Outlay (21) $11,686 $24,559 $27,341 $27,826 Other Costs General Insurance (22) $200,000 2.0% $200,000 $204,000 $208,080 $212,242 Other Costs (23) $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 Total Cost $1,275,631 $1,597,683 $1,713,713 $1,740,581 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 51 ---PAGE BREAK--- Notes to Table 4 Assumes mayor and council members are not paid, but receive receive workman's comp; other costs include memberships, conference, subscriptions, etc. Current Town manager salary, plus 30% benefits. Current Town executive assistant ("max") plus 30% benefits. Current Town finance director plus 30% benefits. New position, based on low end of Mesquite and Fernley pay range, plus benefits. Current Town financial assistant. New position, based on Fernley staffing, assume salary at low end of Fernley scale (similar to current Town salary for Bus. License Tech.) Current Town positions. City Clerk is a new position; salary based on low end of Mesquite, mid-range of Fernley. (10) Deputy City Clerk is a new position; salary based on Mesquite. (11) Office Assistants are new positions; salary based on low end of Pahrump billing clerk range. (12) Legal/Litigation based on Fernley budget. (13) Based on existing Town position. (14) IT positions based on Mesquite, low end of range. Note: Mesquite has a total of 3 IT positions. (15) Based on existing Town position. Note: assumed funded by business license fund. (16) Mesquite and Fernley both spend about $60,000 annually for City Council Services and Supplies. (17) IT services and capital based on Mesquite; includes service contracts, computer/copier/telephone maintenance and purchase, etc., as % of staff costs. % is 50% less initially. (18) City Manager Services and Supplies based on Mesquite (conference, subscriptions, supplies). Fernley expenditures also includes legal and professional service contracts, printing, etc. (19) Based on Mesquite. (20) EPS estimate. (21) Capital outlay based on current Town budget; does not include expenditures for new facilities. (22) Based on Mesquite ($230,000) adjusted proportionate to new city's budget. (23) Other Costs based on Pahrump (added to services and supplies and insurance for $500,000 total) Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 52 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 5 Current Nye County Sheriff Expenditures in Pahrump (FY2010) City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Item FTE Average Salary Average Benefits Total Cost per Position Total Cost % of Salaries & Benefits Administration Sheriff 1 $104,058 $49,599 $153,657 $153,657 Assistant Sheriff 2 $117,920 $45,608 $163,527 $327,055 Subtotal $480,712 Services and Supplies $143,250 30% Total 3 $623,962 Admin Support Lieutenant, Support/Narcotics (12) 1 $98,417 $47,386 $145,803 $145,803 Technical Services Manager (14) 1 $75,000 $25,396 $100,396 $100,396 Admin Tech/Grant Admin 1 $71,625 $24,253 $95,878 $95,878 Administrative Technician 7.5 $53,050 $18,673 $71,724 $537,928 Deputy 2 $45,634 $26,429 $72,063 $144,126 Evidence & Property Control (13) 1 $60,129 $20,292 $80,421 $80,421 Seasonal Workers (21) $253 $26 $279 $5,859 Subtotal $1,110,410 Services and Supplies $395,182 36% Total 13.5 $1,505,592 Crime Prevention & DARE Deputy (school resource officers) 3 $62,888 $31,681 $94,569 $283,707 Subtotal $283,707 Services and Supplies $24,250 9% Total 3 $307,957 Investigations Detectives 8 $63,251 $31,791 $95,042 $760,332 Lieutenant 1 $98,417 $47,386 $145,803 $145,803 Subtotal $906,135 Services and Supplies $143,250 16% Total 9 $1,049,385 Communications Chief Supervising Dispatcher $108,127 $30,096 $138,222 $0 Dispatcher 11 $49,853 $17,564 $67,417 $741,590 Supervising Dispatcher 1 $70,054 $21,623 $91,677 $91,677 Subtotal $833,266 Services and Supplies $30,000 4% Total 12 $863,266 Detention Deputy 8 $52,645 $28,014 $80,658 $645,265 Detention Technician 3 $39,359 $16,094 $55,454 $166,361 Sergeant 2 $72,869 $35,231 $108,100 $216,199 Subtotal $1,027,825 Services and Supplies $30,000 3% Total 13 $1,057,825 Field Services Administrative Captain 1 $114,217 $53,461 $167,678 $167,678 Deputy 36 $53,597 $28,352 $81,950 $2,950,188 Lieutenant 1 $85,720 $42,504 $128,223 $128,223 Sergeant 5 $74,360 $35,742 $110,102 $550,509 Subtotal $3,796,598 Services and Supplies $263,800 7% Total 43 $4,060,398 Capital (10) $500,000 Total (11) 97 $9,468,385 Sworn FTE's 72 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 53 ---PAGE BREAK--- Position titles and salaries based on table provided by Susan Paprocki, Nye County Finance, 10/12/09, file: "Information requested by Mr. Berkson.xlsx" FTE's based on Position Allocations to Pahrump provided by Sheriff DeMeo, 10/9/09, file: "personnel County wide- pahrump.xlsx" Services and Supplies budget provided by Sheriff DeMeo, 10/5/09 for Pahrump Budget SCO, file: "PAHRUMP BUDGET SAC.xlsx" Includes 0.5 FTE part-time/no benefits, and one radio technician. Includes 1 deputy "background/training", and 2 "PT NB OTS Funded" 0.5 FTE each. County budget data titles Investigations/Detectives as "Investigators"; this table assumes same salary. Includes 33 patrol and 3 Street Crimes deputies. 50% of total departmental budget allocated to Pahrump, per Sheriff DeMeo. Pods, computers, phones, support, and software (excludes service contracts) per Sheriff DeMeo, 9/24/09, file: "Pahrump Dispatch Center.doc" (10) Includes Field Services Vehicle Purchase $500,000/year per Sheriff DeMeo, 9/24/09, file: "Pahrump Dispatch Center.doc" note: this cost is higher than $225,000 (5 vehicles) provided by County Finance Dept. plus other capital projects of 52,748 $ see source for Note above (sheet (11) Note: corresponds approximately to total $9,493,637 shown in "Pahrump Budget South Area Command" per Sheriff DeMeo, 10/5/09, file: "PAHRUMP BUDGET SAC.xlsx" (12) Based on Lieutenant, Investigations, per Finance Dept. (not shown in Sheriff's allocations). (13) Position included in Finance Dept. listing, but title does not correspond to Sheriff's allocation list. (14) Salary estimate; not included in Finance Dept. listing. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 54 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 6 City of Pahrump Police Budget City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Total Cost Cost Function/ Position notes Factor by Position Inflator 0 1 2 3 Administration Sheriff 50% allocation of County costs 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Salaries and Benefits $153,657 2.0% $76,828 $78,365 $79,932 $81,531 Assistant Sheriff 50% allocation of County costs 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $163,527 2.0% $163,527 $166,798 $170,134 $173,537 Subtotal, Salaries and Benefits $240,356 $245,163 $250,066 $255,067 Services and Supplies 30% $143,250 $71,625 $73,058 $74,519 $76,009 Total FTEs 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Total Cost $311,981 $318,220 $324,585 $331,077 Admin Support Lieutenant, Support/Narcotics 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $145,803 2.0% $145,803 $148,719 $151,693 $154,727 Technical Services Manager 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $100,396 2.0% $100,396 $102,404 $104,452 $106,541 Admin Tech/Grant Admin 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $95,878 2.0% $95,878 $97,795 $99,751 $101,746 Administrative Technician 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 Salaries and Benefits $71,724 2.0% $537,928 $548,687 $559,660 $570,853 Deputy 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Salaries and Benefits $72,063 2.0% $144,126 $147,008 $149,949 $152,948 Evidence & Property Control 82% allocation of County costs 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 Salaries and Benefits $80,421 2.0% $66,010 $67,331 $68,677 $70,051 Seasonal Workers Salaries and Benefits $5,859 total $279 2.0% $5,859 $5,976 $6,096 $6,218 Subtotal, Salaries and Benefits $1,096,000 $1,117,920 $1,140,278 $1,163,084 Services and Supplies 36% $395,182 $390,054 $397,855 $405,812 $413,928 Total FTEs 13.3 13.3 13.3 13.3 Total Cost $1,486,054 $1,515,775 $1,546,090 $1,577,012 Crime Prevention Crime Prevention Deputies 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Salaries and Benefits $94,569 $283,707 $283,707 $283,707 $283,707 Services and Supplies 9% $24,250 $24,250 $24,250 $24,250 $24,250 Total FTEs 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Total Cost $307,957 $307,957 $307,957 $307,957 Investigations Detectives 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Salaries and Benefits $95,042 2.0% $760,332 $775,539 $791,050 $806,871 Lieutenant 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $145,803 2.0% $145,803 $148,719 $151,693 $154,727 Subtotal, Salaries and Benefits $906,135 $924,258 $942,743 $961,598 Services and Supplies 16% $143,250 $143,250 $146,115 $149,037 $152,018 Total FTEs 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 Total Cost $1,049,385 $1,070,373 $1,091,780 $1,113,616 Fiscal Year Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 55 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 6 City of Pahrump Police Budget City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Total Cost Cost Function/ Position notes Factor by Position Inflator 0 1 2 3 Fiscal Year Communications Chief Supervising Dispatcher 82% allocation of County costs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Salaries and Benefits $138,222 2.0% $0 $0 $0 $0 Dispatcher 82% allocation of County costs 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 Salaries and Benefits $67,417 2.0% $608,708 $620,882 $633,300 $645,965 Supervising Dispatcher 82% allocation of County costs 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 Salaries and Benefits $91,677 2.0% $75,250 $76,755 $78,290 $79,856 Subtotal, Salaries and Benefits $683,957 $697,637 $711,589 $725,821 Services and Supplies 4% $30,000 $24,624 $25,117 $25,619 $26,132 Total FTEs 9.8 9.8 9.8 9.8 Total Cost $708,582 $722,754 $737,209 $751,953 Detention Deputy 82% allocation of County costs 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 Salaries and Benefits $80,658 2.0% $529,643 $540,236 $551,040 $562,061 Detention Technician 82% allocation of County costs 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 Salaries and Benefits $55,454 2.0% $136,552 $139,283 $142,068 $144,910 Sergeant 82% allocation of County costs 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 Salaries and Benefits $108,100 2.0% $177,460 $181,009 $184,629 $188,322 Subtotal, Salaries and Benefits $843,654 $860,527 $877,738 $895,292 Services and Supplies 3% $30,000 $24,624 $25,117 $25,619 $26,132 Total FTEs 10.7 10.7 10.7 10.7 Total Cost $868,279 $885,644 $903,357 $921,424 Field Services Administrative Captain 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $167,678 0.0% $167,678 $167,678 $167,678 $167,678 Deputy 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0 Salaries and Benefits $81,950 2.0% $2,950,188 $3,009,192 $3,069,376 $3,130,763 Lieutenant 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $128,223 2.0% $128,223 $130,788 $133,404 $136,072 Sergeant 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Salaries and Benefits $110,102 2.0% $550,509 $561,519 $572,749 $584,204 Subtotal, Salaries and Benefits $3,796,598 $3,869,177 $3,943,207 $4,018,717 Services and Supplies 7% $263,800 $263,800 $268,843 $273,987 $279,234 Total FTEs 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 Total Cost $4,060,398 $4,138,020 $4,217,194 $4,297,951 Total FTE 90.3 90.3 90.3 90.3 Sworn Officers (included above) 68.5 68.5 68.5 68.5 Total Cost (nominal $8,792,636 $8,958,743 $9,128,172 $9,300,989 Vehicle Maintenance 91,619 Vehicle Purchase and Fuel 649,994 Police Total (nominal $8,792,636 $8,958,743 $9,128,172 $9,300,989 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 56 ---PAGE BREAK--- Note: Titles and salaries assume contract with County; City department would have similar positions, although with different titles. Cost by position based on current County salaries and benefits. Number of positions based on current County allocation to Pahrump. See Table 5 Services and Supplies based on current County ratio (Services and Supplies/Salaries and Benefits). See Table 5 Assumes dispatch costs are shared with County; preliminary allocation based on City pop./Cnty pop. Assumes detention costs are shared with County; preliminary allocation based on City pop./Cnty pop. Actual cost sharing to be negotiated, and may be based on other factors. Total County population (certified, 2008): 47,370 82% City/County Vehicle maintenance per Sheriff DeMeo, 10/5/09, avg. for 2008 and 2009 for Pahrump only. Includes fuel at $149,994 and vehicle purchase $500,000 for Pahrump Field Services, calendar year 2008, per Sheriff DeMeo, 9/24/09, "Pahrump Dispatch Center.doc" Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 57 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 7 City of Pahrump Municipal Court Budget City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Total Cost Cost Fiscal Year Function/ Position notes Factor by Position Inflator 0 1 2 3 4 Judge 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits 2.0% Court Clerks 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 Salaries and Benefits 2.0% Total Municipal Court Staff 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 Salaries and Benefits $299,100 2.0% $299,100 $305,082 $311,184 $317,407 $323,755 Services and Supplies 11.8% $35,200 $35,200 $35,904 $36,622 $37,355 $38,102 Capital Outlay Total Cost $334,300 $340,986 $347,806 $354,762 $361,857 Positions and Salaries and Benefits based on Mesquite FY10 budget. Services and Supplies based on based on Mesquite FY10 budget. Includes contract services for prosecutor and public defender, court fees, etc. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 58 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 8 Current Nye County Public Works Expenditures in Pahrump (FY2010) City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Item FTE Average Salary Average Benefits Total Cost per Position Total Cost % of Salaries & Benefits Engineering/Administration Director 1 $122,061 $34,863 $156,923 $156,923 Engineering Tech III 1 $58,509 $19,524 $78,033 $78,033 Engineering Tech II 1 $66,929 $19,710 $86,639 $86,639 Secretary II 1 $37,653 $15,079 $52,732 $52,732 Account Clerk II 1 $35,878 $1,596 $37,474 $37,474 Office Assistant 1 $28,104 $12,658 $40,762 $40,762 Subtotal $452,564 Services and Supplies $60,994 13% Total $513,558 Site Development Engineering Tech I 1.5 $53,585 $19,735 $73,319 $109,979 Subtotal $109,979 Services and Supplies $14,822 13% Total $124,801 Pahrump Equipment Shop Lead Heavy Equip Mech 1 $63,375 $21,871 $85,247 $85,247 Heavy Equip Mechanic 2 $44,534 $17,134 $61,668 $123,336 Subtotal $208,583 Services and Supplies $138,008 66% Total $346,591 Pahrump Roads District Road Supervisor 1 $79,867 $24,483 $104,350 $104,350 Lead Maintenance Worker 2 $59,787 $20,654 $80,441 $160,881 Road Maintenance Worker I 0 $47,331 $17,712 $65,043 $0 Road Maintenance Worker II 1 $36,233 $14,014 $50,247 $50,247 Road Maintenance Worker III 9 $48,367 $17,016 $65,383 $588,450 Subtotal $903,928 Services and Supplies $365,475 40% Total $1,269,403 Total Staff $1,675,053 Services and Supplies $579,299 TOTAL $2,254,352 Position titles and salaries based on table provided by Susan Paprocki, Nye County Finance, 10/12/09, file: "Information requested by Mr. Berkson.xlsx", except where noted below. FTE's based on Staff, by position and Full-Time Equivalents, Serving Pahrump, provided by David Fanning, Interim Director Nye County Public Works, 10/5/09, Enclosure "Director" position referred to as "Road Superintendent" in Public Works information (Enclosure Certain positions include greater "longevity pay", resulting in different salaries for similar or lesser positions Engineering Tech III salary based on Public Works information (Enclosure Estimates from David Fanning, Interim Director Nye County Public Works, 10/5/09, Enclosure "Other Costs" for Site Development based on Admin/Engineering % of salaries. No Account Clerk included in Public Works data (Enclosure Position and salary from Nye County Finance, 10/12/09; funded by Public Improvement Fees, per Enc. Fund 859. No Road Maintenance Worker I including in Public Works data (Enclosure Road Maint. II and III salary based on Public Works information (Enclosure Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 59 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 9 City of Pahrump Public Works Budget City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Total Cost Cost Function/ Position notes Factor by Position Inflator 0 1 2 3 Engineering/Administration Director 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $156,923 0.0% $156,923 $156,923 $156,923 $156,923 Engineering Tech III 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $78,033 0.0% $78,033 $78,033 $78,033 $78,033 Engineering Tech II 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $86,639 0.0% $86,639 $86,639 $86,639 $86,639 Secretary II 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $52,732 0.0% $52,732 $52,732 $52,732 $52,732 Account Clerk II 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $37,474 0.0% $37,474 $37,474 $37,474 $37,474 Office Assistant 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $40,762 0.0% $40,762 $40,762 $40,762 $40,762 Subtotal, Staff 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Salaries and Benefits $452,564 $452,564 $452,564 $452,564 Services and Supplies 13.5% $60,994 $60,994 $60,994 $60,994 Total $513,558 $513,558 $513,558 $513,558 Site Development Engineering Tech I 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Salaries and Benefits $73,319 0.0% $109,979 $109,979 $109,979 $109,979 Subtotal, Staff 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Salaries and Benefits $109,979 $109,979 $109,979 $109,979 Services and Supplies 13.5% $14,822 $14,822 $14,822 $14,822 Total $124,801 $124,801 $124,801 $124,801 Pahrump Equipment Shop Lead Heavy Equip Mech 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $85,247 0.0% $85,247 $85,247 $85,247 $85,247 Heavy Equip Mechanic 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Salaries and Benefits $61,668 0.0% $123,336 $123,336 $123,336 $123,336 Subtotal, Staff 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Salaries and Benefits $208,583 $208,583 $208,583 $208,583 Services and Supplies 66.2% $138,008 $138,008 $138,008 $138,008 Total $346,591 $346,591 $346,591 $346,591 Fiscal Year Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 60 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 9 City of Pahrump Public Works Budget City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Total Cost Cost Function/ Position notes Factor by Position Inflator 0 1 2 3 Fiscal Year Pahrump Roads District Road Supervisor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $104,350 2.0% $104,350 $106,436 $108,565 $110,737 Lead Maintenance Worker 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Salaries and Benefits $80,441 2.0% $160,881 $164,099 $167,381 $170,728 Road Maintenance Worker I 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Salaries and Benefits $65,043 2.0% $0 $0 $0 $0 Road Maintenance Worker II 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $50,247 2.0% $50,247 $51,252 $52,277 $53,323 Road Maintenance Worker III 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 Salaries and Benefits $65,383 2.0% $588,450 $600,219 $612,223 $624,468 Subtotal, Staff 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 Salaries and Benefits $903,928 $922,006 $940,446 $959,255 Services and Supplies 40.4% $365,475 $372,785 $380,240 $387,845 Total $1,269,403 $1,294,791 $1,320,686 $1,347,100 Total Staff 23.5 23.5 23.5 23.5 Salaries and Benefits $1,675,053 $1,693,132 $1,711,572 $1,730,381 Services and Supplies $579,299 $586,609 $594,065 $601,669 TOTAL, Public Works 2,254,376 2,279,764 2,305,660 2,332,074 Cost by position based on current County salaries and benefits. Number of positions based on current County allocation to Pahrump. See Table 8 Services and Supplies based on current County budget.See Table 8 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 61 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 10 Current Nye County Planning and Code Compliance Expenditures in Pahrump (FY2010) City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Item FTE Average Salary Average Benefits Total Cost per Position Total Cost % of Salaries & Benefits Planning Director 1 $106,969 $31,409 $138,378 $138,378 Principal Planner 2 $66,627 $19,216 $85,843 $171,687 Planner I 2 $56,174 $20,414 $76,588 $153,176 Planning Tech I 1 $44,616 $16,568 $61,185 $61,185 Counter Technician 2 $39,811 $12,703 $52,514 $105,028 Administrative Secretary 1 $46,535 $16,997 $63,531 $63,531 Secretary I 1 $32,668 $13,688 $46,356 $46,356 Subtotal 9 $739,340 Services and Supplies $70,668 9.6% Total $810,008 Code Compliance Code Compliance Officer 1 $47,066 $18,727 $65,793 $65,793 Mgr. of Bldg. Safety and CC 1 87,168 28,395 115,563 115,563 Office Assistant 1 26,544 12,317 38,861 38,861 Secretary III 1 37,460 15,205 52,665 52,665 Subtotal 4 $272,882 Services and Supplies $26,083 9.6% Total $298,965 Position titles and salaries based on table provided by Susan Paprocki, Nye County Finance, 10/12/09, file: "Information requested by Mr. Berkson.xlsx", except where noted below. Services and Supplies based on Countywide % relative to Salaries and Benefits FY10 Adopted, Sched. B, pg. 13, Form 10: Salaries 627,440 Benefits 205,916 Subtotal 833,356 Services and Supplies 79,654 % of Salaries and Benefits 9.6% Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 62 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 11 City of Pahrump Planning Budget City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Total Cost Cost Function/ Position notes Factor by Position Inflator 0 1 2 3 Director 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $138,378 2.0% $138,378 $141,145 $143,968 $146,847 Principal Planner 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $85,843 2.0% $85,843 $87,560 $89,311 $91,098 Planner I 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $76,588 2.0% $76,588 $78,120 $79,682 $81,276 Planning Tech I 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Salaries and Benefits $61,185 2.0% $0 $0 $0 $0 Counter Technician 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $52,514 2.0% $52,514 $53,564 $54,636 $55,728 Administrative Secretary 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Salaries and Benefits $63,531 2.0% $0 $0 $0 $0 Secretary I 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $46,356 2.0% $46,356 $47,283 $48,229 $49,194 Total Planning Staff 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Salaries and Benefits $399,679 $407,673 $415,826 $424,143 Services and Supplies 9.6% $38,202 $38,966 $39,746 $40,540 Capital Outlay Total Cost $437,881 $446,639 $455,572 $464,683 Cost by position based on current County salaries and benefits. Number of positions based on current County allocation to Pahrump. See Table 10 Services and Supplies based on current County budget. See Table 10 Fiscal Year Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 63 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 12 City of Pahrump Code Enforcement Department Budget City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Total Cost Cost Function/ Position notes Factor by Position Inflator 0 1 2 3 Code Enforcement Manager of Bldg. Safety and Code Compliance 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $115,563 2.0% $115,563 $117,874 $120,232 $122,636 Code Compliance Officer 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $65,793 2.0% $65,793 $67,109 $68,451 $69,820 Secretary III 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $52,665 2.0% $52,665 $53,718 $54,793 $55,889 Office Assistant 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $38,861 2.0% $38,861 $39,638 $40,431 $41,240 Total Staff 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Salaries and Benefits $272,882 $278,340 $283,906 $289,585 Services and Supplies 9.6% $26,083 $26,604 $27,136 $27,679 Capital Outlay Total Cost $298,965 $304,944 $311,043 $317,264 Building Inspection (assumes contract with private firm) Fee Revenue $250,000 2.0% $250,000 $255,000 $260,100 $265,302 Payments to Contractor 70% $175,000 $175,000 $178,500 $182,070 $185,711 Net Revenue to New City $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 Cost by position based on current County salaries and benefits. Number of positions based on current County allocation to Pahrump. See Table 10 Services and Supplies based on current County budget. See Table 10 FY09 fees ($485,000 per Lisa Whitt, Building and Safety Dept.) reduced 50% based on current FY10 to-date. Net Building Fee revenue to City assumes contract with private firm similar to current County contract. Private contractor assumed to receive average of 70% of building fee revenue, per contract and avg. fees. Amount paid is unavailable due to confidentiality restrictions. % paid will vary depending on fee collections. Fiscal Year Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 64 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 13 City of Pahrump Animal Control Department Budget City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Total Cost Cost Function/ Position notes Factor by Position Inflator 0 1 2 3 Animal Control Animal Control Supervisor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $77,381 2.0% $77,381 $77,381 $77,381 $77,381 Animal Control Officer 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $63,504 2.0% $63,504 $63,504 $63,504 $63,504 Secretary III 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Salaries and Benefits 2.0% $0 $0 $0 $0 Office Assistant 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Salaries and Benefits 2.0% $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Staff 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Salaries and Benefits $140,885 $140,885 $140,885 $140,885 Services and Supplies 58.3% $82,110 $82,110 $82,110 $82,110 Capital Outlay Total Cost $222,995 $222,995 $222,995 $222,995 Animal Shelter Animal Shelter Supervisor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $72,678 2.0% $72,678 $72,678 $72,678 $72,678 Kennel Assistant 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Salaries and Benefits $42,416 2.0% $84,832 $84,832 $84,832 $84,832 Secretary III 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Salaries and Benefits 2.0% $0 $0 $0 $0 Office Assistant 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Salaries and Benefits $51,565 2.0% $51,565 $51,565 $51,565 $51,565 Total Staff 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Salaries and Benefits $209,075 $209,075 $209,075 $209,075 Services and Supplies 58.3% $121,853 $121,853 $121,853 $121,853 Capital Outlay Total Cost $330,928 $330,928 $330,928 $330,928 TOTAL Animal Control and Shelter $553,923 $553,923 $553,923 $553,923 Position titles and salaries based on table provided by Susan Paprocki, Nye County Finance, 12/4/09, file: "Information requested by Mr. Berkson 12.4.09.xlsx". Services and Supplies based on current County budget. 58% Bldg. fees from County Budget FY10 allocated proportionate to Pahrump pop./County pop. Net Building Fee revenue to City assumes contract with private firm similar to current County contract. Private contractor assumed to receive average of 70% of building fee revenue. Amount paid is unavailable due to confidentiality restrictions. % paid will vary depending on fee collections. Fiscal Year Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 65 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 14a Property Tax Estimates City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis New City Item not FY09-10 FY10-11 FY11-12 FY12-13 FY13-14 FY14-15 Residential Value Start-of-Year Assessed Value 0.35 $750,658,728 750,658,728 757,658,728 779,375,315 816,597,022 866,578,687 Start-of-Year Residential Value $2,144,739,223 $2,144,739,223 $2,164,739,223 $2,226,786,615 $2,333,134,347 $2,475,939,106 Market Value Rate of Growth 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 2.5% 2.5% Market Value Growth $0 $0 $21,647,392 $44,535,732 $58,328,359 $61,898,478 Market Value, End of Year $2,144,739,223 $2,144,739,223 $2,186,386,615 $2,271,322,347 $2,391,462,706 $2,537,837,584 Assessed Value, End of Year 35% $750,658,728 $750,658,728 $765,235,315 $794,962,822 $837,011,947 $888,243,154 New Residential Units 0 100 200 300 400 500 Avg. Market Value $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $202,000 $206,040 $211,191 $216,471 New Market Value Added $0 $20,000,000 $40,400,000 $61,812,000 $84,476,400 $108,235,388 Commercial/Ind'l Value Start-of-Year Assessed Value 0.35 $150,017,244 150,017,244 150,166,217 151,968,803 155,468,594 159,204,129 Start-of-Year Commercial Value $428,620,697 $428,620,697 $429,046,333 $434,196,581 $444,195,982 $454,868,941 Market Value Rate of Growth 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% Market Value Growth $0 $0 $4,290,463 $8,683,932 $8,883,920 $9,097,379 Market Value, End of Year $428,620,697 $428,620,697 $433,336,796 $442,880,512 $453,079,902 $463,966,320 Assessed Value, End of Year 35% $150,017,244 $150,017,244 $151,667,879 $155,008,179 $158,577,966 $162,388,212 New Commercial/Industrial Sq.Ft. 0 4,256 8,513 12,769 17,025 21,282 Avg. Market Value (per sq.ft.) $100 $100 $100 $101 $103 $105 $107 New Market Value Added $0 $425,636 $859,784 $1,315,470 $1,789,039 $2,281,025 Other Value Start-of-Year Assessed Value 0.35 $640,513,192 640,513,192 640,513,192 646,918,324 659,856,690 673,053,824 Start-of-Year Other Value $1,830,037,691 $1,830,037,691 $1,830,037,691 $1,848,338,068 $1,885,304,830 $1,923,010,926 Market Value Rate of Growth 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% Market Value Growth $0 $0 $18,300,377 $36,966,761 $37,706,097 $38,460,219 Market Value, End of Year $1,830,037,691 $1,830,037,691 $1,848,338,068 $1,885,304,830 $1,923,010,926 $1,961,471,145 Assessed Value, End of Year 35% $640,513,192 $640,513,192 $646,918,324 $659,856,690 $673,053,824 $686,514,901 New Other Sq.Ft. 0 0 0 0 0 0 Avg. Market Value (per sq.ft.) $100 $100 $100 $101 $103 $105 $107 New Market Value Added $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Value End of Year Assessed Value $1,541,189,164 $1,541,189,164 $1,563,821,518 $1,609,827,691 $1,668,643,737 $1,737,146,267 Existing Town Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 66 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 14a Property Tax Estimates City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Property Taxes Tax Rate: Existing Town Rate (FY10) 0.2402 0.2402 0.2402 0.2402 0.2402 0.2402 Shift from County for Transferred Service Costs 0.3775 Other Increases Total 0.2402 0.2402 0.2402 0.6177 0.6177 0.6177 Allowed A.V. Revenue Base $3,701,936 $3,701,936 $3,756,299 $3,866,806 $4,008,082 $4,172,625 Change from prior yr 0.0% 1.5% 2.9% 3.7% 4.1% Residential Existing Residential A.V. (end of yr) $750,658,728 $750,658,728 $765,235,315 $794,962,822 $837,011,947 $888,243,154 Allowed A.V. Revenue Base $1,803,082 $1,803,082 $1,838,095 $4,910,537 $5,170,277 $5,486,736 Rate of Change 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 2.5% 2.5% Rate of Change in excess of cap 3.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Change in excess of cap - - - - - - (less) Abatements $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Revenue Net of Abatements $1,803,082 $1,803,082 $1,838,095 $4,910,537 $5,170,277 $5,486,736 Commercial/Industrial Existing Comm'l/Ind'l A.V. (end of yr) $150,017,244 $150,017,244 $151,667,879 $155,008,179 $158,577,966 $162,388,212 Allowed A.V. Revenue Base $360,341 $360,341 $364,306 $957,496 $979,546 $1,003,083 Rate of Change 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% Rate of Change in excess of cap 3.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Change in excess of cap - - - - - - (less) Abatements $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Revenue Net of Abatements $360,341 $360,341 $364,306 $957,496 $979,546 $1,003,083 Other Existing Other A.V. (end of yr) $640,513,192 $640,513,192 $646,918,324 $659,856,690 $673,053,824 $686,514,901 Allowed A.V. Revenue Base $1,538,513 $1,538,513 $1,553,898 $4,075,978 $4,157,497 $4,240,647 Rate of Change 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% Rate of Change in excess of cap 3.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Change in excess of cap - - - - - - (less) Abatements $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Revenue Net of Abatements $1,538,513 $1,538,513 $1,553,898 $4,075,978 $4,157,497 $4,240,647 Total Allowed A.V. Revenue Base $3,701,936 $3,701,936 $3,756,299 $9,944,011 $10,307,321 $10,730,466 (less) accrued abatements ($721,228) ($721,228) ($721,228) ($721,228) ($721,228) ($721,228) (less) current yr abatements $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Subtotal, Abatements ($721,228) ($721,228) ($721,228) ($721,228) ($721,228) ($721,228) Subtotal, after Abatements $2,980,708 $2,980,708 $3,035,071 $9,222,783 $9,586,093 $10,009,238 ($180,000) ($180,000) ($180,000) ($180,000) ($180,000) ($180,000) TOTAL 2,800,708 2,800,708 2,855,071 9,042,783 9,406,093 9,829,238 Subtotal of abatements for FY10 correspond to Town budget (Schedule S-3). Adjustments to provide conservative estimate reflecting potential continued declines in assessed value. Required property tax shift from County: $5,818,090 See Table 2a Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 67 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 14b Estimate of Impact on County and Pahrump Tax Rates City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Town's Allowed Revenue Base $3,700,000 Increase from transferred County Revenue $5,818,090 Increase in current Town rate to equal required 157% Current Town Rate 0.2402 Addition to Town Rate 157% 0.3775 0.6177 County General Fund Rate 0.9947 County property tax (net of abatements) $20,932,765 FY10 Budget Schedule S-3 Property Tax shift to new city $5,818,090 % reduction in property tax -27.8% Current County GF rate 0.9947 Reduction in factor -0.2765 New County factor 0.7182 Increase in City factor vs. County reduction 0.1010 Current cumulative factor in Pahrump 2.8171 2.9181 % increase 3.6% Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 68 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 15 Summary of Motor Vehicle Fuel Taxes and Other Road-Related Revenues City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Town of FY10 Est'd City Nye County Rate NRS Pahrump Nye County of Pahrump Net of City Public Mass Transportation 0.25 percent NRS 377A 1,166,720 $ - 1,166,720 $ Fuel Taxes County Option (RTC) 4.00 cents/gal. NRS 373.030, .080 na 815,228 (2,8) 675,217 140,011 County Option 1 1.00 cent/gal. NRS 365.192,.196 na 205,355 168,558 36,797 MV Fuel Tax 1.25 cents/gal. NRS 365.180, .550 na 846,144 - 846,144 MV Fuel Tax 1.75 cents/gal. NRS 365.190, .560 325,000 # 32,928 (5,7) 325,000 32,928 MV Fuel Tax 2.35 cents/gal. NRS 365.180, .550 na 1,590,756 (6,7) 512,346 1,078,410 Subtotal, Fuel Taxes 3,490,411 $ 1,681,121 $ 2,134,290 $ Impact of City Incorporation on County Fuel Taxes (includes loss of 1.75 cent tax transfer) (1,681,121) County Budget labels this "1/4 cent Public Transit" (Spec. Rev. Fund 208). Sales tax distributed back to County of collection. County Fund 212. Incorporated cities receive allocation based on a.v./County a.v. ($1,667,106,471/$2,012,794,024) = 82.83 % County Fund 205. City allocation per population/County pop. (38,882/47,370) = 82.08%. County Fund 205. No pass-through's to cities. County allocations weighted by miles and pop, adjusted for "excess" revenues. Pahrump returns funds to County via IGA. Cities and towns receive shares relative to a.v./County a.v. Allocations to cities based on formula weighted 1/4 on Total Area, 1/4 on Population, 1/4 on Road Mileage, 1/4 on Vehicle Miles Traveled; adjusted for "excess" revenues. Distributions reduced by 2% for dealer discounts, other allocations and admin. charges. Distributions reduced by 2.5% for dealer discounts, other allocations and admin. charges. Fuel tax estimate per Town budget; State projections differ Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 69 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 16 2.35 Cent Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax City of Pahrump Incorporation Feasibility Analysis Entity Area (Sq. Mile) Percent of Total Final Population Percent of Total Road and Street Mileage Percent of Total Annual Vehicle Miles Percent of Total Average Percent Projected Revenue for Fiscal Year 2009- 2010 Nye County 17,735 98% 9,370 20% 1,880 70% 70,050,849 83% 68% $1,078,410 Pahrump 365 2% 38,000 80% 795 30% 14,237,270 17% 32% $512,346 Total, County 18,100 100% 47,370 100% 2,675 100% 84,288,119 100% 100% $1,590,756 Swirczek, Jodi, Nevada Dept. of Transportation, 10/21/09. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1/12/2010 P:\19000s\19064pahrump\Model\BudgetModel_12Jan10.xls 70 ---PAGE BREAK--- APPENDIX C: NRS 266 Information Requirements 71 ---PAGE BREAK--- Incorporation Feasibility Analysis for Pahrump, Nevada Draft Report 1/12/10 Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS 266.016 – 266.0285) delineate data requirements and factors to be considered during the incorporation process. Some of this data applies to the incorporation petition, the hearing and review process. If “Option 2” is pursued (the legislative process) some of these items will not apply, however, it will be necessary for the legislature to consider many of the fiscal, social, and economic factors required below. Following is a summary of these requirements. As the process progresses, these items and factors may be updated to reflect more current information. NRS 266.016 Petition Number of qualified electors (NRS 266.016 re: petition requirements; note: one-third is required): 21,207 registered voters (8/11/09); one-third equals 7,069 signators. NRS 266.017 Suitability Real property that has not been subdivided and is 100 acres or more: There are 84 parcels equal to or greater than 100 acres. The assessor’s data does not identify subdivided status. NRS 266.019 Petition Contents The total acreage of the area: Total acreage of the Pahrump Planning Area is approximately 365 square miles. The precise acreage will be determined following the creation of a map of the proposed boundaries. Number of residents: Pahrump’s population on July 1, 2008 totaled 38,882 according to the certified estimate37 produced by the Nevada State Demographer. The population increased 2.5 percent from the prior year, significantly slower because of the recession compared to prior years. Nye County estimates38 that Pahrump’s population declined to 38,275 by the end of the third quarter of 2009. Number of owners of record of real property: There are an estimated 30,075 property owners (based on a count of unique property tax billing addresses), out of 50,325 total parcels. NRS 266.0263 Statement by Dept. of Taxation (current and projected tax burden) Median-priced home: The median resale price for existing homes for 2009 through October was $122,000, down from $182,000 in 2008. The median price for a new home was $153,000 in 2009, down from $200,000 in 2008. (source: MDA Dataquick Information Systems). 37 Nevada County Population Estimates July 1, 1986 to July 1, 2008, Nevada Dept. of Taxation 38 Nye County Population Estimates Through the Third Quarter, 2009, Nye County Department of Planning, 19/20/09 72 ---PAGE BREAK--- Incorporation Feasibility Analysis for Pahrump, Nevada Draft Report 1/12/10 Present tax rate: The Town’s current tax rate (FY10) is 0.2402, and the combined tax rate of all entities is 2.8171. Projected tax rate: Assuming that property tax and CTX are shifted from the County to the new city in the proportions indicated in this feasibility report, the city’s rate would be 0.6177, an increase of 0.3775, and the combined tax rate of all entities would be 2.9181. The County’s current General Fund rate 0.9947 would decline to 0.7182. NRS 266.0285 Factors for consideration Population: Pahrump’s population on July 1, 2008 totaled 38,882 according to the certified estimate39 produced by the Nevada State Demographer. The population increased 2.5 percent from the prior year, significantly slower because of the recession compared to prior years. Nye County estimates40 that Pahrump’s population declined to 38,275 by the end of the third quarter of 2009. For the decade from 1996 through 2006, the Town’s population grew from 17,540 to 36,645 at an average annual rate of 7.6 percent. The rate of growth peaked at 10.2 percent in 2006 before slowing to its current rate. Projections41 published in August 2008 forecast a moderate recovery for the period from 2007 to 2014. The estimates forecast the equivalent of a 4.8 percent annual average growth rate for Nye County; although projections are unavailable by town, Pahrump historically accounts for most of the Nye County growth. The 4.8 percent rate is projected to slow to 2.6 percent between 2014 and 2021. For the entire period 2007 to 2021 the forecasted population grows at a 3.7 percent annual average. At an average growth rate of 3.7 percent, Pahrump’s population would grow by about 1,400 people annually, or 570 units per year assuming 2.5 persons per household (2000 census). The actual rate of development will depend on economic cycles. At some point, buildout may be constrained by the availability of water, which currently is being studied by the County. The estimates described above are lower than the estimates produced in 200542 for the Pahrump Capital Improvement Plans and Impact Fees. That report projected residential unit growth of 750 units to 1,000 units per year through 2015. 39 Nevada County Population Estimates July 1, 1986 to July 1, 2008, Nevada Dept. of Taxation 40 Nye County Population Estimates Through the Third Quarter, 2009, Nye County Department of Planning, 19/20/09 41 Nevada County Population Projections 2008 to 2028, Nevada State Demographer’s Office, August 2008 42 Nye County CIPs and Impact Fee Study, Appendix 8: Land Use Assumptions & Demographics, Consensus Planning and TischlerBise, Draft 7/8/05 73 ---PAGE BREAK--- Incorporation Feasibility Analysis for Pahrump, Nevada Draft Report 1/12/10 Land area: Taxable land area accounts for approximately 293 acres within the total Pahrump Regional Planning District totaling about 365 acres; the balance includes federally owned land. Land uses: The uses within the 293 acre area are shown below: Table P-1 Pahrump Land Uses Units or Acres Bldg. Sq.Ft. Residential Single Family 16,384.0 Multi-Residential 2,908.5 Total 19,292.5 18,205 units Commercial Total 2,443.2 672,131 sq.ft. Industrial Total 446.6 102,739 sq.ft. Rural Agricultural 709.5 Quarries 314.7 Total 1,024.2 Utilities Total 282.8 Vacant Total 164,285.0 TOTAL 187,774.4 293.4 sq.miles Source: Steve Osborne, Nye County Planning Dept. (rec'd by EPS 8/21/09) Housing counts as of 7/20/09. Topography – The city boundaries would fall within the mountain ranges surrounding the Pahrump Valley, and is flat with a slight uphill slope towards the northern end of the Valley. Natural boundaries: The Pahrump Valley and surrounding maintains create a natural geographically distinct area that encompasses the potential boundaries of the city. Drainage basin 74 ---PAGE BREAK--- Incorporation Feasibility Analysis for Pahrump, Nevada Draft Report 1/12/10 Extent of agriculture: As noted in the table above, agricultural land uses account for about 710 acres of the total area, or less than ½ of one percent of the total area. Mineral production: As noted in the table above, quarries account for about 315 acres, or less than ¼ of one percent of the total area. Other uses not requiring significant improvements: as noted, federally owned and managed lands account for a substantial portion of the Pahrump Regional Planning District. These lands are largely undeveloped, and would remain so, except for those lands immediately adjacent to urban uses, which may provide for open space and recreational activities. Extent of commercial and industrial development: As noted in the table above, commercial and industrial development accounts for about 2,900 acres, or less than 2 percent of the total land uses. Extent and age of residential development: More than ½ of the housing stock in Pahrump is less than 15 years old, as a result of the significant growth that has occurred in recent years. Comparative size and assessed value of subdivided land and unsubdivided land. County data does not include a designation for subdivided vs. unsubdivided land. However, based on the review of parcels equal to or greater than 100 acres, these parcels total approximately 116,275 acres, and their assessed value totals $$131.1 million. Current and potential transportation issues: The Pahrump Regional Planning District Master Plan Update identified the need to continue to promote a system of arterial, collector and local streets capable of accommodating anticipated travel demands in a save and efficient manner. The Master Plan indicated implementation actions to prepare a Traffic Study and Transportation Master Plan. These tasks would become the responsibility of the new city. Past population trends: See discussion above under “Population”. Past construction trends: See discussion above under “Population”. Growth projections 10 years in “adjacent incorporated and unincorporated areas” : See discussion above under “Population.” Water service, and future needs-present cost, method and adequacy of regulation and service: Currently there is no municipal water system or master plan for Pahrump. Water is provided by wells and private entities serving subdivisions and development in the area. The Pahrump Regional Planning District Master Plan Update recommended development of a water system master plan to provide a guide for the expansion and connection of numerous existing water systems in Pahrump to improve reliability of drinking water supplies and fire protection response. Sewer service, and future needs-present cost, method and adequacy of regulation and service: Currently there is no municipal sewer system or master plan for Pahrump. Private entities provide for sewer collection and treatment. The Pahrump Regional Planning District Master Plan Update recommended consideration of a single municipal sewer 75 ---PAGE BREAK--- Incorporation Feasibility Analysis for Pahrump, Nevada Draft Report 1/12/10 system to assure continuity, provide for future service to smaller lot areas, and to provide proper planning to avoid contamination of groundwater. Fire rating and protection, and future needs-present cost, method and adequacy of regulation and service: Fire protection would continue to be provided as it is currently provided, with no impact on future needs or service provision as a result of incorporation. Police protection, and future needs-present cost, method and adequacy of regulation and service: The feasibility analysis estimates that future revenues, including property taxes and CTX shifted from the County to the new city, should be adequate to continue to fund current levels of service. Growth and development may require increases in services that would be funded by increases in tax revenues. The feasibility analysis assumes that initially the new city would contract with the County Sheriff for police protection services. Improvement and maintenance of streets, and future needs-present cost, method and adequacy of regulation and service: The feasibility analysis estimates that future revenues, including fuel taxes, should be sufficient to fund current levels of service. Road impact fees generated within the area would continue to fund capital improvements. These funds would be managed and prioritized by the city rather than by the County as is currently done. The feasibility analysis assumes that initially the new city would contract with the County for public works services. Administrative services, and future needs-present cost, method and adequacy of regulation and service: The feasibility analysis indicates that incorporation would result in increased local administration of municipal services as a result of a shift from County administration to city administration, and could be funded by existing revenues. Services could be increased to the extent that future development and increases in the tax base occur. Recreational facilities, and future needs-present cost, method and adequacy of regulation and service: Current recreational facilities would continue to be maintained and provided in the same manner as they are currently maintained and provided (see Table 3 in the feasibility analysis). County-present and projected revenues: See Table 2 in the feasibility analysis, and related text, including Chapter 8. Proposed city-present and projected revenues: See Table 1a and 1b in the feasibility analysis, and related text. County revenues and services-probable effects: See Table 2 in the feasibility analysis and related text, including Chapter 8, and Table 3 for a summary of changes in services. Adjacent areas revenues and services-probable effects: No impact is anticipated on adjacent areas, other than the effects on the County as noted in the feasibility report. Social, economic and governmental structure of County and “adjacent areas”-probable effect of incorporation, and any alternatives. 76 ---PAGE BREAK--- Incorporation Feasibility Analysis for Pahrump, Nevada Draft Report 1/12/10 Water availability and other natural resource requirements”-probable effect of incorporation, and any alternatives: Incorporation is not assumed to alter current or future development patterns, and therefore have no effect on water availability or other natural resource requirements. Any determination by a governmental agency that the area is suitable for residential, commercial or industrial development: Nye County has prepared and adopted a Master Plan Update (November 19, 2003) for the Pahrump Regional Planning District that identifies current and proposed land uses, areas suitable for development, and areas requiring further study. It is anticipated that the new city initially would adopt current County planning goals, standards and designations applicable to the area. 77