“At the end of the day with the city fairly built out the budget is actually $6 million better off under these growth scenarios,” Dorfman said.
Dorfman worked with the city’s planning staff to consider the implications of different types of growth – residential, commercial and office space for example – and what money the city could expect to gain and spend on these areas.
“These scenarios were built in conjunction with your planning staff and roughly match up to things they had already run as part of their long-range planning and the update you’re doing to a number of your development ordinances,” he said.
The outlook is good, Dorfman said, and he equipped Milton city staff with the tools to project different scenarios as the years change.
“Here in Milton, because you have such a high average assess value for your residential, you’re under much less pressure than most places to make sure you balance the residential and commercial,” he said.
Councilman Matt Kunz asked where most cities and counties fall when it comes to money problems, and Dorfman said the problems usually stem from taking on too much debt and relying on permit revenue.
“[Cities in the second group] were doing okay because they were approving projects that in the long run they lost money every year, but in year one or year two when they collected that permit revenue they were making money,” he said. “So as long as there was new growth, it hid the fact that the growth they were getting wouldn’t really pay for itself.”