Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 01 Temporary SDC Reductions AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: 11/5/2012 Meeting Type:Work Session Staff Contact/Dept.: Len Goodwin/DPW Staff Phone No: (541)726-3685 Estimated Time: 30 minutes S P R I N G F I E L D C I T Y C O U N C I L Council Goals: Provide Financially Responsible and Innovative Government Services ITEM TITLE: TEMPORARY SDC REDUCTIONS ACTION REQUESTED: Provide direction with respect to the current temporary program of reductions in City Systems Development Charges (SDC). ISSUE STATEMENT: On February 6, 2012, the Council, by Resolution 12-02, temporarily adjusted SDCs for the period from February 7, 2012, through and including December 31, 2012. That program, which provides for 100 percent reductions in City SDCs in certain circumstances and 50 percent reductions in other cases, expires December 31, 2012. Absent further action by Council, SDCs will, on January 1, 2013, be collected at the full amounts imposed. (The current rate sheet is attached as Attachment 2). ATTACHMENTS: 1. Council Briefing Memorandum 2. Current SDC rate schedule 3. Communication Packet Memorandum of October 22, 2012 4. Resolution 12-02 5. Oregon Regional Economic Indexes (August 2012) 6. Comparable Levels of Building Activity DISCUSSION/ FINANCIAL IMPACT: During the current temporary reduction program, the City has collected about $441 thousand in local SDCs. All of those were from developments covered by the 50 percent reduction aspect of the current program. During the past nine months no development applications have been submitted which would qualify for either of the 100 percent reductions opportunities. In addition, the Springfield Economic Development Agency has agreed, on a temporary basis, to assume the obligation to pay any SDCs attributable to development in the Downtown Urban Renewal Area which complies with the standards of the approved Downtown Design Plan. After studying the results of the past nine months, staff recommends that while the incentive for large development be continued, the incentives for specific job creation targets, and the incentive for all other development be discontinued. Staff also recommends that the Council consider discussing with SEDA the opportunity to extend the agreement to assume the obligation for SDCs for downtown development that complies with the Downtown Design Plan, and consider expanding that program to include development in Glenwood that conforms to the Approved Glenwood Refinement Plan, Phase 1. Attachment 1 - 1 M E M O R A N D U M City of Springfield Date: 11/1/2012 COUNCIL BRIEFING MEMORANDUM To: Gino Grimaldi From: Len Goodwin, Development and Public Works Subject: TEMPORARY SDC REDUCTIONS ISSUE: On February 6, 2012, the Council, by Resolution 12-02, temporarily adjusted Systems Development Charges (SDC) for the period from February 7, 2012, through and including December 31, 2012. That program, which provides for 100 percent reductions in City SDCs in certain circumstances and 50 percent reductions in other cases, expires December 31, 2012. Absent further action by Council, SDCs will, on January 1, 2013, be collected at the full amounts imposed. (The current rate sheet is Attachment 2). COUNCIL GOALS/ MANDATE: Financially Responsible and Stable Government Services Systems Development Charge revenue is the principal local source of funding for capital improvements to city infrastructure systems. Shortfalls from this revenue source create pressure on user rates imposed on system users and, create challenges to the providing ordinary operations and maintenance of infrastructure systems. BACKGROUND: The reductions program adopted by Council in February was intended to provide a short term stimulus to encourage local development. It was clear at the time that the Council was agreeing to forego revenue in the short term in the interest of long-term improvement in the economic vitality of the City. While it was clear there would be short term loss of revenue, two points were also clear. First, the SDC revenue stream was, and had been since the beginning of the recession, anemic. This tended to minimize the risk to current revenues, since they were near to non-existent. While the risk to revenues would increase as development occurred and took advantage of the reductions, the City was not programming substantial levels of activity funded by SDCs. Second, the capital project lists funded by SDCs were built on a 20 year horizon. While short term loss of revenue would potentially delay the implementation and completion of some capital projects, there was sufficient flexibility in the timing of the capital projects to lead to the conclusion that delays for a brief period of time (under five years) would not seriously impede the ability of the City to meet growth objectives, particularly if the reductions of SDCs accelerated the rate of development, particularly commercial and industrial development creating jobs. The three temporary reductions in local SDCs are laid out in Attachment 4. They involve; 1. 100 percent reductions in local SDCs for commercial and industrial development that proposes more than 75,000 square feet of new space and creates new employment opportunities 11/1/2012 Page 2 Attachment 1 - 2 nd add a similar arrangement DISCUSSION: 2. 100 percent reduction in local SDCs for commercial and industrial development which proposes more than 50,000 square feet of new space and will create 50 or more new full time jobs; and 3. 50 percent reduction in local SDCs for all other development. A review of the past six months, as documented in Attachment 3, shows mixed results. So far, the program has been ineffective at stimulating commercial and industrial development. No projects have been presented which qualify for the 100 percent reduction, although there continues to be some fairly significant speculative activity on potentially large projects. By contrast, there was clearly a marked increase in the pace of residential development. A comparison of levels of single family residential building activity is attached as Attachment 6. Compared to the same 8 month period (February through September) 2012 saw 66 applications, with a value of over $14 million, compared to only 49 permits, with a value of $8.5 million in 2011. This positive step is consistent with the most recent report from the University of Oregon on the regional economy (see Attachment 5), and suggests that, with respect to residential development, the program has contributed to the desired effect. When Council acted on this reduction program, it directed that staff report back with respect to the impact, so Council could consider the future of the program, which was clearly intended to be temporary. Subsequent to this Council action the Council and the Springfield Economic Development Agency (SEDA) reached agreement on a related effort under which, for the same temporary period ending in December, SEDA would assume the obligation of paying local SDCs for any new development or redevelopment in the downtown Urban Renewal Area which was consistent with the standards set out in the approved Downtown Design Plan. OPTIONS: Council has the following options with respect to the current SDC reduction program: 1. Continue the program as initially enacted for some further period of time. 2. Terminate the program. 3. Terminate one or more aspects of the program and continue the other aspects for some further period of time. unction with any of the listed In conjoptions, the Council may also choose to consider how to deal with the existing arrangement with SEDA. Council may, subject to concurrence by SEDA: 1. Continue the existing arrangement for Downtown. 2. Continue the existing arrangement for Downtown a for the area covered by Phase I of the Glenwood Refinement Plan for development consistent with that plan. 3. Terminate the existing arrangement. 11/1/2012 Page 3 Attachment 1 - 3 adopting this program, Council was understandably concerned that any short time in ith respect to commercial activity, it is likewise clear that the stimulative effect has e e to y for t the portion of the program providing a 50 percent reduction is allowed to expire, the o uction hen that program was implemented, the Glenwood Refinement Plan had yet to be SEDA’s . In stimulus be balanced against the impact on capital program revenue loss. The rebound residential building activity suggests that concern may, in the near future, become real. While month-by-month comparisons are somewhat inconsistent, it is clear that the level of activity has grown in the past year. This suggests that the $414 thousand in foregone revenue for the current year to date is likely to increase in the coming months. In light of the overall improvement, both locally, regionally and nationally in the residential housing sector, it appears that the SDC reductions have produced the desired stimulus and that now may be the time to eliminate that aspect of the program. W been limited to smaller scale developments (such as the expansion of the A3 school, th Planktown Brew Pub and the expansion of Tom & Johnny’s, all downtown). But it is also true that large scale commercial and industrial development operates on much longer time frames than does residential development, so it is probably inappropriat conclude not that the program has failed to produce the desired result, but that the program has not been available long enough to generate tangible results. In fact, the increasing level of speculative interest which is now evident suggests that a brief continuation of the program, for say 6 months, may present more of an opportunit these longer term developments to come to the point of fruition. In addition, unlike the case with residential development, the absence of actual development activity somewha reduces the risk of unintentionally foregoing large amounts of revenue that are needed to fund infrastructure construction. If Council must consider whether or not to take further action with respect to downtown SDCs. In Resolution 10-19 the Council adopted a special program offering a declining range of SDC reductions for downtown development. The program was superseded by the current temporary program. As a result, should the Council decide to allow the 50 percent discount to expire, small scale redevelopment in Downtown would be subject t the full SDCs. For that reason, the Council may wish to consider extending the arrangement with SEDA, under which SEDA assumes the obligation of local SDCs on developments that conform to the Downtown Design Plan. That would preserve downtown discounts at the same level as existed before the current temporary red was enacted. W approved by the county. For that reason, there was no effort made to extend a similar discount program in Glenwood, since there was no approved Plan against which a development could be tested. Now that Phase I of the Glenwood Plan has been approved, the Council may wish to consider whether or not similarly to extend willingness to assume the burden of local SDCs to the area covered by Phase I of the Glenwood Refinement plan for developments conforming to the conditions in the Plan 11/1/2012 Page 4 Attachment 1 - 4 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Direct staff to prepare a resolution extending the 100 percent reduction in SDCs for development of more than 50,000 square feet, and producing new jobs, and the 100 percent reduction for development producing 50 or more new jobs, regardless of size, and allowing the 50 percent reduction for all other development to expire on December 31, 2012. Direct staff to facilitate conversations between the Council and SEDA with respect to an extension and possible expansion of the current program under which SEDA assumes the obligation of local SDCs, where development conforms to the adopted Plan. CITY OF SPRINGFIELD SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGES – FACT SHEET Rates Effective: January 1, 2012 BACKGROUND System Development Charges (SDC) are fees that are collected when new development occurs in the City and are used to fund a portion of the construction of streets, storm drainage, and sanitary sewers (required as a result of increased development and to maintain the health and safety standards of the community). Adequate funding for growth-related capital improvements is vital to maintaining the City's level of service in transportation, sanitary sewers, and storm sewers. STATE REQUIRED PROGRAM - ORS 223.297 to 223.314 The Oregon State Legislature in 1989 adopted a state law that required cities in Oregon that collect an SDC, including the City of Springfield, to revise their SDC ordinances by July 1991. The legislation provided a uniform framework that all local governments must follow to collect and expend SDC fees. Methodology for establishing SDC rates as set forth in the City of Springfield ordinance reflects the growth- related impacts of new development on three system: transportation, sanitary sewer, and storm drainage. The amount of each SDC is based on the amount of impact the development will have on a particular system. Charges are computed separately for each system, and separate funds are used to track receipts and expenditures. SDC-eligible projects are identified in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), the Springfield System Development Charges project list, and any other long range plans as approved by the City Council. DETERMINING SDC RATES The following assumptions are used to develop SDC rates: • The level of service used to set the SDC rates cannot be higher than that currently provided to existing users of the service. • Costs used in the SDC rates reflect the City's current costs for constructing capital improvements. • The fee reflects a developer's equitable share or use of the particular system for which the fee is set. • Credit will be given for certain improvements that reduce a development's impact on the system capacity. CALCULATING THE SDC The Storm Sewer SDC is based on Square Feet of Impervious Surface Area. The Sanitary Sewer SDC is based on Drainage Fixture Units as defined by the April 2000 Oregon Amendments to the 1997 Uniform Plumbing Code. The Transportation SDC is based on Average Weekday Trip Generation rates as published in the latest edition of the Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual. More detailed information on calculating the fees for each system is shown below: • STORM DRAINAGE - The storm drainage SDC is paid by all new residential, commercial, and industrial development. The charge is based on the square footage of the impervious surface area of the development. Impervious surfaces typically consist of concrete, asphalt, and roofing. The cost per square foot of impervious surface area is 0.583. In applying the SDC, the cost per square foot is applied to the amount of impervious surface area measured at the time the building permit is issued. STORM DRAINAGE SDC = IMPERVIOUS SQUARE FEET x $0.583/SQUARE FOOT A 50% credit will be given for the portion of impervious area served by a drywell sized and constructed to City of Springfield Standard Construction Specifications. A SDC credit will also be give for peak ten- year runoff reduction based on documentation provided by the developer and approved by the City. Page 1 of 2 January 1, 2012 • SANITARY SEWER - CITY - The charge is paid by all new commercial, industrial, and residential development. To calculate the impact of new development on the sanitary sewer system, the City uses the number of drainage fixture units (DFU) as the basis of the charge. The City sanitary charge is $201.50 per DFU. Residential rate increases to $201.50. The City sanitary charge for Commercial/Industrial is $201.50 per DFU. Attachment 2 - 1 Page 2 of 2 January 1, 2012 RESIDENTIAL CITY SANITARY SEWER SDC = NUMBER OF DFU x $201.50 COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL CITY SANITARY SEWER SDC = NUMBER OF DFU x $201.50 A ‘drainage fixture unit’ is a way of expressing various sorts of plumbing fixtures (such as sinks, toilets, commercial dishwashers, etc.) in terms of water usage. A Fixture Unit Calculation Table is part of the System Development Charges Worksheet, Attachment A. • TRANSPORTATION - This SDC is charged on new commercial, industrial, professional, and residential development or change of use. It helps support expansion of arterial and collector roads, traffic signals, and street lighting. The SDC is based on the trip rate of the specific type of development and the cost per trip. The cost per trip is $247.98 for all use types. A new trip factor is applied to omit short pass-by trips, diverted trips, and other linked trips. Trip rates for developments are based on the current Institute for Transportation Engineers' (ITE's) Trip Generation Manual, or the developer can submit a trip generation study outlined and approved by the City of Springfield. A partial list of trip rates is in Attachment D. Transportation SDC = Number of Trips X Unit X $247.98 X New Trip Factor • SANITARY SEWER (MWMC) - The Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) Facility Equalization Charge is a reimbursement fee for the reserve capacity that was constructed to serve new growth. This fee is designed to reimburse the community for its equity in the treatment plant's reserve capacity. Newly developed properties, change of use, or other properties that are connecting to the wastewater treatment system for the first time will pay the equalization charge. New development receives credit for past bond payments on existing debt and for contributions to qualified offsite public improvements. See Attachments B and C. The Flow Estimation Units (FEU) is used for the MWMC Facility Equalization Charge. MWMC SANITARY SEWER SDC = NUMBER OF FEU X COST PER FEU + $10 ADMIN. FEE ADMINISTRATIVE COST The SDC legislation allows the City to recover its costs for complying with the required changes. A five percent (5%) administrative fee will be added to cover the cost of developing the SDC, establishing accounting mechanisms and administering the ongoing program. CREDITS There are no exemptions from SDC. Government and non-profit agencies also will pay an SDC based on the amount of impact they create on the system. Credit may be given for on-site improvements that reduce a development's demand on capital facilities that would otherwise have to be constructed at the City's expense. When development occurs that modifies the existing use of a property, the System Development Charge will be calculated based on the difference between the proposed use and the existing use. If the change-in-use results in the SDC for the proposed use being less than the SDC for the existing use, no SDC shall be required. However, no refund or credit shall be forthcoming to the developer. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AREA DISCOUNT City Sanitary Sewer, Storm Drainage and Transportation SDC’s will be reduced by 50% until December 2012, in the Downtown Development Area as shown on the attached map. NOTE: Attached to this fact sheet are examples of SDC for various developments, worksheets and the necessary tables for computing System Development Charges. For more information on System Development Charges, contact City of Springfield Public Works Department at (541) 726-3753. Attachment 2 - 2 M E M O R A N D U M City of Springfield 11/1/2012 Page 1 M E M O R A N D U M City of Springfield Date: 10/8/2012 COMMUNICATION PACKET MEMORANDUM To: Gino Grimaldi From: Len Goodwin, Development and Public Works Director Matt Stouder, Managing Civil Engineer Subject: Update on Amendments to Systems Development Charges This memorandum summarizes the financial impact of Council’s decision to temporarily amend the rate structure for System’s Development Charges (SDC’s) through the 2012 calendar year. If appropriate you may wish to share this information with Council by including a copy of this memorandum in the Communication Packet. On February 6, 2012, the City Council, in an effort to provide a local development stimulus in response to the slow pace of economic recovery, passed Resolution 12-02 (attachment 1), amending the City’s rate structure for local SDC’s. The amendment was set up such that SDC’s would be: • Reduced by 100% for all commercial and industrial development which proposed new or net useable space in excess of 75,000 square feet and created new employment opportunity • Reduced by 100% for all commercial and industrial development which proposed new net useable space in excess of 50,000 square feet and committed to create not less than 50 full time employees within one year of occupancy • Reduced by 50% for all other development The table below shows the number of permits and amount of local SDC’s collected during the time period from 2/6/12 through 8/31/12. During that time, the City received a total of 195 permits, of which 98 permits were residential and 97 were commercial/industrial. None of the permits met the threshold for 100% reduction (square footage or employment), thus all local SDC’s were collected at a rate of 50%. Since all SDC’s were reduced by 50%, the amount of revenue not collected by the City totals the same as the amount collected – $414,841.91. Permit Type  Number  of  Permits Stormwater  Local  Wastewater Transportation Admin Total  Residential 98 $52,853.00$182,523.75$79,393.73$16,525.47 $330,509.31 Commercial 97 $4,182.68$17,815.83$54,680.79$7,653.30 $84,332.60 Total 195 $57,035.68$200,339.58$134,074.52$24,178.77 $414,841.91 It is worth noting that the majority of the revenue collected since the Council amended the SDC rate structure resulted from new residential development. This was due, in large part, to the fact that most of the commercial and industrial work was minor in nature and did not result in assessment of SDC’s. Examples of this include minor change in use types for an existing building, cell tower co-locates, minor interior tenant improvements, etc. Of the 97 commercial and industrial permits processed between 2/6/12 and 8/31/12, only 15 were assessed SDC’s for a total of $84,332.60. As directed by Council in Resolution 12-02, staff has scheduled time on the November 26, 2012 work session to discuss the impact of SDC reductions on development within the City and on SDC revenues, as well as providing a staff recommendation on whether or not to extend the reductions beyond December 31, 2012. Attachment 3 RESOLUTION12 - 02 ARESOLUTIONOFTHECOUNCILOFTHECITYOFSPRINGFIELDAMENDING THERATESTRUCTUREFORSYSTEMSDEVELOPMENTCHARGESAS ESTABLISHEDINTHESPRINGFIELDMUNICIPALCODE, SECTION1406, AND SPECIFYINGANEFFECTIVEDATE WHEREAS, theOregoneconomycontinuestostrugglewithanumberofissues, includinghigh unemploymentandlackofinvestment; and WHEREAS, aneffectofthecontinuedstruggleswithintheOregoneconomyisalackofnew developmentwhichwillgeneraterevenuestofundessentialserviceforOregonians; and WHEREAS, inparticular, theabsenceoflargecommercialandindustrialdevelopment, which wouldprovidefamilywagejobsforOregonians, ischallengingtheabilityofSpringfieldto provideadequatelevelsofserviceforitscitizens; and WHEREAS, thecostsofdevelopmentincludeSystemsDevelopmentChargesimposedbythe Cityforthepurposesoffundingfutureinfrastructurethatwillberequiredtomeettheneedsof communitygrowth; and WHEREAS, onApril19, 2010, theCounciladoptedResolution10 -19, amendingandadopting theratestructureforSystemsDevelopmentCharges; and WHEREAS, theCouncilfindsanddeterminesthatatemporaryreductioninsuchchargesmay provideanincentivetoencouragedevelopmentwithintheCity; and WHEREAS, whiletheprincipalinterestoftheCouncilistostimulatelargescalecommercial andindustrialdevelopmentthatwillprovideadditionalfamilywagejobs, thereisalsovaluein stimulatingallformsofdevelopment, includingresidentialdevelopment; and WHEREAS, theCouncilfindsanddeterminesthatsuchareductionwillreducetheamountof fundingavailabletofundfutureinfrastructurerequirementsandthatsuchshortfallmayresultin thedelayofconstructionofsuchinfrastructureprojects; and WHEREAS, theCouncilfindsanddeterminesthatsuchdelaywillbeconsistentwiththedelay inreachingthelevelsofgrowthcontemplatedbytheseveralfacilitiesplansuponwhichthe SystemsDevelopmentChargeCapitalprojectlistarebased; and WHEREAS, theCouncilfindsanddeterminesthatanysuchreductionshouldbeenactedonly foralimitedperiodoftime, andthatitmay, ifconditionswarrant, beextendedbysubsequent actionoftheCouncil; NOW, THEREFORE, BEITRESOLVEDBYTHECOUNCILOFTHECITYOF SPRINGFIELD, thatforaperiodbeginningonFebruary7, 2012, andendingonDecember31, 2012, unlessfurtherextendedbyCouncilResolution, allSystemsDevelopmentChargesimposed bytheCityshallbeadjustedasfollows: 1. Forallcommercialandindustrialdevelopmentwhichproposesnewnetuseablespacein excessof75,000squarefeet, creatingnewemploymentopportunities, suchchargesshall bereducedby100percent; 2. Forallcommercialandindustrialdevelopmentwhichproposesnewnetuseable. spacein excess. of50,000squarefeettobeoccupiedbyanemployeroremployerswhowill committoemploynotlessthan50fulltimeemployees, withinoneyearofoccupancy, suchchargesshallbereducedby100percent; and 3. Forallotherdevelopment, suchchargesshallbereducedby50percent; and BEITFURTHERRESOLVED, thatthereductionsprovidedhereinshallbeinlieuofanyand allreductionswhichmightbeavailableintheDowntownDevelopmentarea, asdescribedin Resolution10 -19; and BEITFURTHERRESOLVED, thattheCityManagerisdirectedtoreporttotheCouncilon orbeforeNovember26, 2012, withrespecttotheimpactofthesereductionsbothon developmentwithintheCityandtheimpactonSystemsDevelopmentChargerevenues, andto recommendwhetherornottoextendthisprogramofreductions; and BEITFURTHERRESOLVED, thatthisResolutionshalltakeeffectuponadoptionbythe CouncilandapprovalbytheMayor. AdoptedbytheCommonCounciloftheCityofSpringfield, Oregon, byavoteof 6forand 0against, this 6thdayof February , 2012. ATTEST: an-lt - ( City ecorder C Mayor EVIEn "O & APPROVED ATOFORM DATE: ? OFFICEOFCITYATTORNEY RESOLUTIONNO. 12 -02 August 2012 A program of the College of Arts and Sciences and its Department of Economics © 2012 University of Oregon. All rights reserved. Released: October 18 , 2012. Review August measures of economic activity indicated growth at or above the average rate over the 1998–2012 period in all covered regions with the exception of the Rogue Valley. That said, it remains important to pay attention to the moving average measure, which smooths out the month-to-month variability. On that basis, only the Portland and Eugene-Springfeld areas have returned to their respective average growth rates. The Eugene-Springfeld measure jumped into response to strong residential building permits and manufacturing and construction employment. Residential housing sales bolstered the Central Oregon measure. A bump in manufacturing hiring supported the Salem measure, but the volatility of the recent employment data suggests this improvement is temporary; the moving average measure continues to track well below zero. The Rogue Valley area continues to underperform, with only gradual improvement in the past year. High unemployment continues to weigh on the Central Oregon, Rogue Valley, and Salem regions. In contrast, the Portland area is now experiencing minimal drag from the unemployment measure. Contact Timothy A. Duy Director, Oregon Economic Forum Department of Economics, University of Oregon 541-346-4660 · duy@uoregon.edu econforum.uoregon.edu How can I interpret the measures? A reading of “zero” corresponds to the average growth rate for that particular region. In other words, the measures identify periods of fast or slow growth relative to trend. What is the signifcance of the moving-average measures? The monthly measures can be very volatile, and volatility will increase for smaller regions or those with less data included in the estimation process. To reduce the noise, it is helpful to focus on the average of the most recent data. For the areas with more indicators available, Portland, Eugene–Springfeld, and Bend, a three-month moving average is suffcient to remove the noise. For Rogue Valley and Salem, a six- month moving average is required. Is this approach used elsewhere? Yes, the Chicago Federal Reserve Bank uses the same basic approach to measure both national and regional economic activity. Contributions to Regional Indexes – August 2012 Portland-Vancouver- Beaverton Eugene-Springfield Central Oregon Rogue Valley Salem New Private Housing Units Authorized by Permits -0.04 0.16 -0.17 -0.37 -0.07 Educational and Health Services Employment -0.01 -0.04 -0.04 0.08 0.00 Financial Activities Employment 0.16 -0.01 0.12 -0.02 0.05 Government Employment 0.00 -0.02 0.00 0.05 0.06 Information Employment 0.09 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 0.00 Leisure and Hospitality Employment 0.04 0.01 -0.02 0.00 -0.05 Manufacturing Employment 0.08 0.17 0.02 -0.05 0.33 Construction Employment 0.04 0.35 0.10 -0.05 -0.25 Professional and Business Services Employment -0.06 0.17 0.00 -0.03 0.04 Other Services Employment 0.03 0.00 -0.01 -0.03 0.18 Trade, Transportation, and Utilities Employment -0.09 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.03 Civilian Labor Force -0.05 -0.01 -0.02 -0.30 0.06 Unemployment Rate -0.06 -0.12 -0.20 -0.34 -0.28 Lodging Revenue, Inflation Adjusted 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.00 Airport Passengers 0.00 0.00 -0.01 0.00 Initial Unemployment Claims -0.02 0.06 -0.05 Residential Units Sold 0.01 -0.02 0.14 -0.13 Municipal Waste -0.13 -0.01 -0.06 Home Price Index -0.03 Total -0.04 0.74 -0.15 -1.05 -0.03 Moving Average of Recent Observations -0.02 -0.08 -0.86 -0.70 -0.95 sponsored by OregOn regiOnal ecOnOmic indexesTm oregoneconomic forum © 2012 University of Oregon. All rights reserved. Released: October 18, 2012. August 2012 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 Jan-99 Oct-99 Jul-00 Apr-01 Jan-02 Oct-02 Jul-03 Apr-04 Jan-05 Oct-05 Jul-06 Apr-07 Jan-08 Oct-08 Jul-09 Apr-10 Jan-11 Oct-11 Jul-12 Central Oregon Index of Economic Activity Three-month moving average in black -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 Jan-99 Oct-99 Jul-00 Apr-01 Jan-02 Oct-02 Jul-03 Apr-04 Jan-05 Oct-05 Jul-06 Apr-07 Jan-08 Oct-08 Jul-09 Apr-10 Jan-11 Oct-11 Jul-12 Rogue Valley Index of Economic Activity Six-month moving average in black -3 -2.5 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 Aug-99 May-00 Feb-01 Nov-01 Aug-02 May-03 Feb-04 Nov-04 Aug-05 May-06 Feb-07 Nov-07 Aug-08 May-09 Feb-10 Nov-10 Aug-11 May-12 Salem Index of Economic Activity Six-month moving average in black -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 Jan-99 Oct-99 Jul-00 Apr-01 Jan-02 Oct-02 Jul-03 Apr-04 Jan-05 Oct-05 Jul-06 Apr-07 Jan-08 Oct-08 Jul-09 Apr-10 Jan-11 Oct-11 Jul-12 Eugene-Springfield Index of Economic Activity Three-month moving average in black -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 Jan-99 Oct-99 Jul-00 Apr-01 Jan-02 Oct-02 Jul-03 Apr-04 Jan-05 Oct-05 Jul-06 Apr-07 Jan-08 Oct-08 Jul-09 Apr-10 Jan-11 Oct-11 Jul-12 Portland Metro Index of Economic Activity Three-month moving average in black OregOn regiOnal ecOnOmic indexesTm Table 1 Comparative Levels of Single Family Residential Building Activity 2011 # of  New  SFR Value of SFR2012 # of  New  SFR Value of SFR YTY  Change February5784,682.00$        February4647,091.00$        ‐20.00% March4654,147.00$        March61,290,308.00$    50.00% April4727,160.00$        April111,877,822.00$    175.00% May61,091,368.00$     May163,051,070.00$    166.67% June71,185,095.00$     June122,369,352.00$    71.43% July122,141,704.00$     July61,178,784.00$    ‐50.00% August71,345,324.00$     August3715,324.00$        ‐57.14% September4622,187.00$        September81,316,257.00$    100.00% TOTALS498,551,667.00$    TOTALS6612,446,008.00$  34.69%