The Chatham Shagbark

I'm always a bit surprised when a local politician plays the nasty game of divide and conquer, but I suppose that's due to my sheltered, North Carolina upbringing. Anyway, read all about how they are out to get you. And please, no booing, no hissing. It's rude.

And since Wilkie's folks have broached the topic, I thought the Commissioners had been more concerned with rude clapping and cheering, not boos and hisses.

(Note: Sorry for the long pause between posts. I've been busy preparing my presentation for the Briar Chapel public hearings and taking care of some issues at work. Now, my presentation is done, and work pressures are easing up; so, I hope to be a more reliable blogger in the near future.)

On Friday, my wife found a red and white campaign sign for Andy Wilkie in our yard. Boy, was she surprised. Both of us plan to vote for Mike Cross.

Our house sits a bit back from the road, and the sign was placed where it might not have been clear as to who owned that particular plot of land. Hmmm.

As I've driven about the county this weekend, I've noticed more Wilkie signs similarly positioned, by lots with no house or in places where one cannot tell to which home the Wilkie sign belongs.

I suppose papering the county with signs is common to most local elections, but I've seen a lot of Wilkie signs in Chatham. I'm wondering if those signs reflect genuine support for the candidate or if other Chathamites have simply been Wilkied?

(If you've got a few dollars to spare, how about sending them to Mike Cross? I've heard that many of Mary Wallace's supporters have thrown their support behind Mr. Wilkie. This Commissioner's race is going to be very close, and a little extra cash would help Mr. Cross.)

Read Rocha on last night's Booth Mountain public hearing. I wasn't able to attend, but it sounds like our Chatham citizens presented a compelling case for not approving Booth Mountain.

(Update: also, check out Uhde's coverage in today's Herald Sun, and this piece from News 14.)

At the request of reader daggerbox, below is a table listing the cumulative fiscal impact of Briar Chapel on Chatham County. For an average of 3.5 bedrooms per home, Chatham County will see its first dollar in year 41 past buildout; for an average of 4.0 bedrooms per home, that first dollar will show up in year 78.

Chatham County Cumulative Revenue (x $1000) from Briar Chapel: full market value tax rate

Years beyond buildout	3.5 BRs: annual revenue	3.5 BRs: cumulative revenue	4 BRs: annual revenue	4 BRs: cumulative revenue
0	-$2333	-$2333	-$4032	-$4032
1	-2214	-4547	-3885	-7917
2	-2095	-6641	-3737	-11654
3	-1975	-8616	-3589	-15243
4	-1856	-10473	-3441	-18684
5	-1679	-12151	-3221	-21905
6	-1501	-13652	-3001	-24906
7	-1323	-14976	-2781	-27687
8	-1146	-16121	-2561	-30247
9	-968	-17090	-2340	-32588
10	-791	-17880	-2120	-34708
11	-613	-18493	-1900	-36608
12	-478	-18971	-1733	-38341
13	-386	-19357	-1618	-39959
14	-293	-19650	-1503	-41462
15	-201	-19851	-1389	-42851
16	-108	-19959	-1274	-44125
17	-16	-19974	-1160	-45285
18	77	-19898	-1045	-46330
19	169	-19729	-930	-47260
20	262	-19467	-816	-48076
21	354	-19113	-701	-48777
22	425	-18688	-613	-49390
23	475	-18213	-552	-49942
24	524	-17689	-490	-50432
25	574	-17115	-429	-50861
26	623	-16492	-368	-51229
27	673	-15820	-306	-51535
28	722	-15098	-245	-51780
29	772	-14326	-183	-51963
30	821	-13505	-122	-52085
31	871	-12634	-61	-52146
32	950	-11684	38	-52108
33	1059	-10624	173	-51935
34	1169	-9456	309	-51626
35	1278	-8177	445	-51181
36	1388	-6790	580	-50601
37	1497	-5293	716	-49885
38	1606	-3686	851	-49034
39	1716	-1971	987	-48047
40	1825	-146	1123	-46924
41	1934	1789	1258	-45666
42	2007	3796	1349	-44318
43	2044	5840	1394	-42924
44	2081	7921	1439	-41484
45	2117	10038	1485	-39999
46	2154	12192	1530	-38469
47	2191	14383	1576	-36894
48	2227	16610	1621	-35272
49	2264	18874	1666	-33606
50	2300	21174	1712	-31894
51	2337	23511	1757	-30137
52	2293	25804	1703	-28434
53	2169	27974	1549	-26885
54	2045	30019	1395	-25489
55	1921	31940	1241	-24248
56	1797	33736	1087	-23160
57	1797	35533	1087	-22073
58	1797	37330	1087	-20986
59	1797	39127	1087	-19898
60	1797	40923	1087	-18811
61	1797	42720	1087	-17723
62	1797	44517	1087	-16636
63	1797	46314	1087	-15548
64	1797	48111	1087	-14461
65	1797	49907	1087	-13373
66	1797	51704	1087	-12286
67	1797	53501	1087	-11198
68	1797	55298	1087	-10111
69	1797	57094	1087	-9023
70	1797	58891	1087	-7936
71	1797	60688	1087	-6848
72	1797	62485	1087	-5761
73	1797	64282	1087	-4674
74	1797	66078	1087	-3586
75	1797	67875	1087	-2499
76	1797	69672	1087	-1411
77	1797	71469	1087	-324
78	1797	73265	1087	764
79	1797	75062	1087	1851
80	1797	76859	1087	2939
81	1797	78656	1087	4026
82	1797	80453	1087	5114
83	1797	82249	1087	6201
84	1797	84046	1087	7289
85	1797	85843	1087	8376
86	1797	87640	1087	9464
87	1797	89436	1087	10551
88	1797	91233	1087	11638
89	1797	93030	1087	12726
90	1797	94827	1087	13813
91	1797	96624	1087	14901
92	1797	98420	1087	15988
93	1797	100217	1087	17076
94	1797	102014	1087	18163
95	1797	103811	1087	19251
96	1797	105607	1087	20338
97	1797	107404	1087	21426
98	1797	109201	1087	22513

(I assumed full market value assessment rates for all years; using the Chatham County's actual, effective tax rates makes the break even years 47 and 100+, for 3.5 and 4.0 bedroom homes, respectively. Also, I assumed an average age 4 years per home at Briar Chapel's buildout.)

How will a more sound student generation rate (SGR) change the fiscal impact of Briar Chapel on Chatham County?

To answer that question, I used Newland's own numbers to create the following table, modifying only two of their assumptions: (1) I used the SGR values I mentioned in my previous post, and (2) I used an effective tax rate of 0.6111, which is the average effective tax rate for Chatham County for the last four years (Newland incorrectly used a full market value rate of 0.6464). I've also made one assumption of my own, that the average number of bedrooms per Briar Chapel home will be between 3.5 and 4.0.

Annual Fiscal Impact of Briar Chapel on Chatham County

Average Age of Briar Chapel Home	3.5 BR	3.6 BR	3.7 BR	3.8 BR	3.9 BR	4 BR
0-2 yrs	-$4,030,138	-$4,438,873	-$4,847,608	-$5,256,344	-$5,665,079	-$6,073,814
3-5 yrs	-2,595,130	-2,935,057	-3,274,983	-3,614,910	-3,954,837	-4,294,763
5-10 yrs	-2,118,333	-2,435,398	-2,752,462	-3,069,526	-3,386,590	-3,703,655
10-20 yrs	-786,242	-1,039,432	-1,292,622	-1,545,813	-1,799,003	-2,052,194
20-30 yrs	138,441	-70,411	-279,263	-488,115	-696,967	-905,819
30-40 yrs	633,654	448,547	263,441	78,334	-106,772	-291,879
40-50 yrs	1,7274,36	1,594,777	1,462,117	1,329,457	1,196,798	1,064,138
50-60 yrs	2,093,793	1,978,700	1,863,608	1,748,515	1,633,422	1,518,329

My conclusion is that the proposed Briar Chapel development will not begin to "pay for itself" until the age of its average home is between 30 and 35 years.

(Note: I've written some short computer programs to perform the calculations I've used on this website. If you'd like to see the source code for them, send me an email.)

We need a better, projected student generation rate (SGR) for Briar Chapel. Why? The 0.4 SGR proposed by Newland is too low, and results in a gross underestimation of the money Chatham County will spend educating Briar Chapel students.

As I've previously written, Newland's SGR study is flawed for the following reasons:

1. It minimized Chatham County demographics, and focused primarily on Wake County.
   
2. It used data from homes built within the last 50 years, ignoring the fact that newer homes produce more students.
   
3. It failed to account for the above average number of bedrooms in Briar Chapel, whose homes will average 2556 square feet each (weighted average derived from Table A2 of Appendix B of The Fiscal Impact Analysis for The Briar Chapel Development).
   

So, Newland's SGR projection is too low. What is a more appropriate SGR? Using 2000 Census data for Chatham County, I've created the following table, which clearly demonstrates that newer homes produce more students, as do larger homes with more bedrooms.

Public School SGRs by Age of Home and Number of Bedrooms

derived from 2000 Census data for Chatham County

Age of Home	0 BRs	1 BR	2 BRs	3 BRs	4 BRs	5+ BRs	All BRs
0-2 years	0.48	0.33	0.38	0.67	1.10	1.42	0.62
3-5 years	0.40	0.27	0.32	0.56	0.91	1.18	0.51
6-10 years	0.37	0.26	0.30	0.52	0.85	1.10	0.48
11-20 years	0.30	0.20	0.24	0.42	0.68	0.88	0.38
21-30 years	0.24	0.17	0.20	0.34	0.56	0.73	0.31
31-40 years	0.22	0.15	0.17	0.30	0.50	0.64	0.28
41-50 years	0.16	0.11	0.12	0.22	0.36	0.46	0.20
51 - 60 years	0.13	0.09	0.11	0.19	0.31	0.40	0.17
61+ years	0.17	0.11	0.13	0.23	0.38	0.49	0.21
All Years	0.28	0.19	0.22	0.39	0.64	0.83	0.36

If we assume Briar Chapel's 2556 square foot homes will have, on average, 3.5 to 4.0 bedrooms each, they won't reach Newland's projected SGR of 0.4 for at least 40 years. Yikes! Do our Commissioners know about this?

Mike Cross fundraiser, today from 4-7 pm. Also, check out his website.

Booth Mountain public hearing, Monday, October 4. The hearing will be at 6pm in the Superior Courtroom in Pittsboro.

Briar Chapel public hearing, Thursday, October 7.

Last day to register to vote, Friday, October 8.

Newland's projected student generation rate (SGR) for Briar Chapel is dominated by homes outside of Chatham County, and that's a problem. In fact, most of the homes used in Briar Chapel's fiscal analysis were from Wake County, where market values and demographic trends may lead to dramatically different SGRs than in Chatham Country.

Even Dr. Miley, Newland's consultant and author of their fiscal impact analysis, warns against using data from neighboring counties when deterinimg SGR values. What's strange though, is that he issues that warning in that same Briar Chapel fiscal impact study, just prior to making his own SGR projections from nine different counties.

When criticizing Tischler's 1996 study of Chatham County's SGRs, Miley warns that Tischler's study is comprised of homes in two counties, Chatham and Orange:

Although Chatham and Orange counties are contiguous, there are many differences in the two counties, and caution should be used when relying on SGRs generated from these combined counties to estimate impacts for specific counties.
(pg 2, Appendix A of Fiscal Impact Analysis of The Briar Chapel Development)

Caution, indeed, Dr. Miley, for you made a much graver mistake in your own study. If you warn us not to use data from two counties, what shall we make of your own nine county study?

In Appendix A of the Fiscal Impact Study, wherein Miley describes his methodology for determining an SGR for Briar Chapel, we find five different tables of data. Each table determines an SGR based upon different Census Block Groups in a nine county area, and each table uses Census block groups with different ranges of median housing values. The following table details the number of Census block groups from each county for each table of Miley's data.

County	Table 2 ($250K - $340K)	Table 3 ($200K - $249K)	Table 4 ($250K - 299K)	Table 5 ($300K - $350K)	Table 6 ($350K - $770K)
Alamance	1	1	1	0	0
Chatham	0	1	0	0	1
Durham	1	5	1	0	1
Harnett	0	0	0	0	0
Lee	0	0	0	0	0
Moore	2	2	2	0	0
Orange	8	8	5	3	0
Randolph	0	0	0	0	0
Wake	15	27	10	9	11
Total	27	44	19	12	11

Note that Chatham County accounts for a measly two census tracts (2.3%) out of the 86 used in the study, while 55 tracts (64%) are located in Wake County. So, I suggest we best heed Dr. Miley's advice and use caution when relying on Newland's projected SGR for Briar Chapel.

Chathamites were angry the last time their property taxes increased. During the April 16, 2001 Commissioner's meeting, one gentleman said "that he is getting tired of making payments; that there is only one County Commissioner who is trying to help the citizens of the County; that the rest have their heads in their rears and that their brains go numb when making decisions."