fy 2019 budget workshop - charlotte, north carolinacharlottenc.gov/budget/documents1/april 11th...

FY 2019 Budget Workshop

City of Charlotte

April 11, 2018 1:30 p.m Room 267

I. Introduction – Budget Committee ReportPage

Council member Phipps Budget Committee Chair

II. Workshop Overview Sabrina Joy-Hogg Phil Reiger

III. General Fund Update Sabrina Joy-Hogg Phil Reiger

IV. Rate Setting• Charlotte Water• Storm Water Services• Solid Waste Fee

Angela Lee Mike Davis Victoria Johnson

V. Financial Partner Requests 24 Bill Parks Pamela Wideman

VI. Community Safety Chief Kerr Putney

Distribution: Mayor and City Council Marcus Jones, City Manager City Manager's Executive Team City Manager’s Senior Leadership Team Strategy & Budget Staff

717

1

Page Intentionally Left Blank

Charlotte Water

Council Budget Workshop April 11, 2018 Page 1

Charlotte Water FY 2019 Operating Budget &

FY 2019 – FY 2023 CIP

April 11, 2018

Vital Component Of OurCommunity

2

Charlotte Water In The Community Video


CLT Water by the Numbers

3

2

2

3

4

12

8

5

17

80

912

1.5M

Drinking Water Supply Intakes

Wastewater Treatment Plants

Staffed Facilities

Annual hours worked in support of customers

Wastewater Lift Stations

Full‐time Positions

Governments Served (Mecklenburg County, Town of Davidson, Town of Cornelius, Town of Huntersville, City of Charlotte, Town of Mint‐Hill, Town of Matthews, Town of Pineville)

Governments & Authorities Supported

Raw Water Reservoirs

Field Operations Facilities

Drinking Water Treatment Plants

FY 2019 – FY 2023Community Investment Plan

4

Total 5-Year CIP = $1.5 B

$771.44 M

$51.58 M $170.70 M

$466.86 M


FY 2019 Preliminary Budget

5

Environmental Laboratory Services $5.8M

Customer Service $9.0M

Admin, Management, IT & Engineering $13.7M

Water Treatment $15.9M

Department‐Wide Support $26.8 M

Environmental Management $39.3MField Operations $44.6M

Debt Service $158.0MPAYGO $156.0M

| Operating Total $155.1M (33%) | | Capital Total $314.0M (67%) |

Total FY 2019 Budget = $469.1M

How Our FY 2018 RatesCompare

6

$35.06 $46.69 $48.28

$54.53 $61.55 $62.72 $64.92 $65.02 $65.09

$81.20 $86.30 $86.91

$103.95

$0

$20

$40

$60

$80

$100

$120

Mo

nth

ly B

ill

7 Ccf Customer

Southeast Comparison of Water and Sewer Rates

Water Sewer Mean


Estimated Versus ActualFinancial Plan

7

FY 2016 Financial Plan Rates Estimated Versus Actual

FY Original Estimate Adopted Current Projection

2016 $58.45 2.72%

2017 $60.82 4.05% $60.99 4.35%

2018 $63.31 4.09% $62.72 2.84%

2019 $65.91 4.11% $64.61 3.01%

2020 $68.64 4.14% $66.88 3.51%

2021 $71.53 4.21% $69.26 3.56%

2022 $74.43 4.05% $71.76 3.61%

FY 2018 = $62.72FY 2019 (projection) = $64.61

Change = $1.89

Discussion/Next Steps

Provide guidance to City Manager for inclusion in recommended budget


Storm Water Services


Storm Water Services Program

City Council Budget Workshop

April 11, 2018

Overview

Presentation Outline

1) Program Purpose and Goals

2) Recent Environment Committee Recommendation

3) Council Discussion: Provide guidance to the City Manager onPotential FY 2019 Fee Schedule

2


Purpose of a Stormwater Program

Drain runoff from storms safely to streams (Quantity)

Ensure runoff is as clean as possible when it reaches streams (Quality)

3

Overview of Program

• Policy Framework– Program operates under federal Clean Water Act requirements– Interlocal agreement with Mecklenburg-County for operation of single

stormwater utility– Variety of City policies and ordinances

• Program goals– Repair storm drainage infrastructure– Reduce flood risks– Improve surface water quality

• FY2017 Production

4


Program Recognition

Rain Catcher Award 2017

Public Awareness Award2015

First stormwater enterprise to earn Aaa rating

2016

5-year Regional Permit

2017

Community Rating System Class 4

2017

Green Infrastructure

Award2015

5

Storm Water Utility Comparison

Key Findings

• Overall, program is effective andefficient

• Charlotte is generally more suburbanwith more storm water infrastructure percapita

• Insufficient revenue to keep up withincoming requests

• Recommended a 4-tier rate structure

Raftelis Report

• Completed in February 2015

• Provided a review of Storm WaterServices scope and approach to funding

• Compared Charlotte to 13 peer cities

6


Benchmarking with Other Cities

Only 32% of participants indicate funding is adequate for meeting most needs.

2017 Survey by Southeast Stormwater Association (SESWA) (92 participants from 8 southeastern states)

2016 Black & Veatch Survey(74 participants from 24 states)

Only 18% of the participants indicate funding is adequate for meeting most needs.

7

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 FY2017

Requests Qualified Requests Completed

New Repair Requests Qualified vs. Requests Completed

8


Storm Drainage System Priorities

AIFailing drainage infrastructure in publicly maintained streets and the public right-of-way

BOther failing drainage infrastructure, pipe and stream blockages. Also, under certain conditions flooding of driveways, crawlspace and accessory structures

AFailing drainage infrastructure near or flooding of a house or commercial building as well as flooding of a publicly maintained street

9

C Service Request Classification

10

These are no longer qualifying conditions since July 2015

• Lowest priorityrequests

• Most are privateproperty nuisanceconditions

• Makes up over half ofunfunded repair list

• Program fundinginadequate to address


Creating a Pilot Cost Share for‘C’ Projects

Environment Committee Recommendation (3/26/18)

Create a pilot cost-share program for ‘C’ requests (lowest priority requests on private property) funded at $5.0 Million over two years and notify eligible citizens of new program.

11

Impacts to Higher Priority Work

• Funding the cost share pilot at $2.5 Millionper year requires a four percent feeincrease to offset the cost to the StormWater Services program

• $5.0 Million funds approximately 50 A andB requests

12


Cost Sharing Program isThree Percent of the Total

Routine Maintenance5%

Debt Service17%

Major Projects31%

Minor Projects23%

C Cost Share3%

($2.5M)

Water Quality Projects1%

Water QualityIn-Lieu

6%

Administration, Compliance, Technical

14%

13

Debt Service17%

Current (FY 2018) Fee Schedule

Customer Base Median City County Bill Process

Total Fee

Det

ach

ed S

ing

le F

amily

Tier I<2000 sq ft

37,112 accounts (20%)60.5M SF of impervious (10%)

1,673 $5.52 $0.77 $0.95 $7.24

Tier II2000 to 2999 sq ft


2,467 $8.13 $1.20 $0.95 $10.28

Tier III3000 to 4999 sq ft


3,648 $12.04 $1.73 $0.95 $14.72

Tier IV5000 sq ft and up


6,034 $19.91 $2.96 $0.95 $23.82

Multifamily &Commercial21,528 accounts

1.08B SF of impervious

NA$143.73 $20.00 $0.95 $164.68

per impervious acre

Fee appears on monthly water bill

14

Current Rate = $0.0033 per square foot of impervious area


For Discussion: FY 2019 Potential Fee Scenarios

Current Rate 4% 8% 12%

($0.0033/sq. ft.) ($0.003432 / sq. ft.) ($0.003564 / sq. ft.) ($0.003696 / sq. ft.)

Customer Base

City Total City Total City Total City Total

Tier I $5.52 $7.24$5.74

+$0.22$7.46

$5.96+$0.44

$7.68$6.18

+$0.66$7.90

Tier II $8.13 $10.28$8.47

+$0.34$10.62

$8.79+$0.66

$10.94$9.12

+$0.99$11.27

Tier III $12.04 $14.72$12.52+$0.48

$15.20$13.00+$0.96

$15.68$13.48+$1.44

$16.16

Tier IV $19.91 $23.82$20.71+$0.80

$24.62$21.51+$1.60

$25.42$22.30+$2.39

$26.21

Multifamily &Commercial

$143.73 $164.68$149.48+$5.75

$170.43$155.23+$11.50

$176.18$160.98+$17.25

$181.93

Increase in Revenue

$0 $2.5M $5.1M $7.6M

15

Service Requests Addressed under Different Fee Scenarios

0

200

400

600

800

1000

Expected NewQualified

Requests forFY19

0% 4% 8% 12%

FY2019 Projection

16


Conceptual Fee Scenarios

17

0

3,000

6,000

9,000

12,000

15,000

18,000

No Increases

4% Annual Increases

8% & 6% Annual

8% Annual Increases

12% Annual Increases

Ou

tsta

nd

ing

Req

ues

tsImpact to Outstanding Repair Request

Discussion / Next Steps

Provide guidance to City Manager for inclusion in recommended budget

18


Solid Waste Fee


Solid Waste

Council Budget WorkshopApril 11, 2018

Services Provided

• Residential Collection• Garbage

• Recycling

• Yard Waste

• Bulky Waste

2


Services Provided

• Special Services• Small Business Garbage Collection• Special Events Support• CATS Light Rail/Bus Stop/Gold Line Support• Central Business District Cleaning/Maintenance*• Dead Animal Collection from Streets*• Public Receptacles Collection*• Street Sweeping*• Litter Picking*

*Cannot charge fee for community benefit services3

History of Solid Waste Fees

Fiscal Year Single Family Multifamily1997 $38 $232001 $45 $272013 $47 $242016 $25 $252017 $33 $332018 $39 $39

Annual Rates

4


Fee Comparison of Residential Single Family

$0 $0 $0 $0 $39

$108 $152

$187 $192

$315

$395

$514

*Charges $60 for subscription yard waste services**Charges $90 for subscription yard waste services

5

FY 2019 Contractual Increases

Description FY 2019 Increase Impact to FeeRollout Carts $45,926 $0.14Residential Recycling $350,000 $1.02Multi-Family $549,300 $1.60Landfill – Tip Fees $1,174,042 $3.42Compost – Tip Fees $301,178 $0.88

Total $2,420,446 $7.06

6


Next Steps

• Provide guidance to City Manager forinclusion in recommended budget

7


Financial Partner and Outside Agency Funding Requests


FINANCIAL PARTNERS

Table of Contents

Introduction.........................................................................................1

Funding Requests Summary ..................................................................3

General Fund Financial Partner Summaries

Discretionary Arts & Science Council ................................................................5 Charlotte Regional Partnership .....................................................7 Community Building Initiative ......................................................8 Safe Alliance ..............................................................................9 Women’s Business Center of Charlotte ..........................................10

Dedicated Revenue Sources Charlotte Regional Visitors Authority .............................................11

Charlotte Regional Visitors Authority – Film Commission .................12 Charlotte Center City Partners .....................................................13 University City Partners ..............................................................14

Housing & Neighborhood Services Financial Partner Summaries

Crisis Assistance Crisis Assistance Ministry ............................................................15 Carolinas CARE Partnership .........................................................16 Charlotte Family Housing .............................................................17

Housing and Community Development Charlotte-Mecklenburg Housing Partnership-Affordable Housing .......18 Charlotte-Mecklenburg Housing Partnership-HouseCharlotte ...........19

Out-of-School Time Partners ............................................................20


INTRODUCTION

Types of Financial Partners

Financial Partners are contracted by the City of Charlotte to provide specific services. The types of financial partnerships are diverse, including: partnerships that support key strategic priorities for the City, such as Charlotte-Mecklenburg Housing Partnership; partnerships that contribute to community enrichment, such as the Arts & Science Council; and partners that complement departmental service needs, such as Safe Alliance (formerly United Family Services).

There are two primary categories of Financial Partners – General Fund and Housing & Neighborhood Services:

General Fund – this includes direct discretionary allocations from the General Fund as well asformula-driven, dedicated revenue sources, such as Municipal Service District tax revenueo Charlotte Regional Partnership o Arts & Science Councilo Community Building Initiative o Safe Allianceo Charlotte Regional Visitors Authority (CRVA) o CRVA – Film Commissiono Charlotte Center City Partners o University City Partnerso Women’s Business Center of Charlotte *NEW REQUEST*

Housing and Neighborhood Services – funded by the City’s Innovative Housing/PAYGOfunding as well as federal grants for services such as: 1) Housing and CommunityDevelopment, 2) Crisis Assistance, and 3) Out-of-School Time (OST) Partners.o Charlotte-Mecklenburg Housing Partnership, Inc. – Affordable Housingo Charlotte-Mecklenburg Housing Partnership, Inc. – HouseCharlotteo Carolinas Care Partnership o Charlotte Family Housingo Crisis Assistance Ministry o OST – Behailu Academyo OST – Above and Beyond Students o OST – Police Activities Leagueo OST – Arts & Science Council Studio 345 o OST – Greater Enrichment Programo OST – YWCA Central Carolinas

Financial Partner Funding Request Summary pages

Below is a description of the information provided on each of the Financial Partner Summary pages, found in this April 11th Council Budget Workshop packet.

Scope of Services – summarizes the services provided by each agency Performance – a few key indicators from the Financial Partner’s funding application to

evaluate success as it relates to the City Council’s Focus Areas, the agency’s program goalsand the requested funding (this does not include all measures included in the FinancialPartner applications)

Financial Informationo FY 2018 City Funding – amount of funding approved by the City for the current yearo FY 2019 Projected Agency Total Budget – the projected total budget for the upcoming

years, of which the City funding is a component, for each agencyo FY 2019 Projected Agency Program Budget for which City funding is requested – the specific

agency program for the upcoming year that is to be supported by the requested Cityfunding. This designation is only used when a specific program is identified. When nospecific program is identified, the requested City funding is in support of the overall agency.

o FY 2019 City Funding Request – the amount of funding requested from the City Summary/Highlights of Agency Requests – provides a narrative explanation of the requested

funding level

New Financial Partner Funding Requests

Within the General Fund, there was one new request from the Women’s Business Center ofCharlotte for $99,000 to help promote economic self-sufficiency through entrepreneurship for allwomen in Charlotte region empowering women with the tools needed to establish businesses,


stabilize their companies, generate sustainable profits, strategize for future growth, and contribute in the growth and economic development of the community.

Within Housing and Neighborhood Services, FY 2018 was the first year of a bi-annual fundingprocess for Out-of-School Time (OST) Financial Partners. FY 2019 represents the second year ofthe bi-annual funding process for OST Financial Partners; therefore, applications were notaccepted in FY 2019 for new OST Financial Partners.

Additional Financial Partner Documents

Summary information on each agency is included in this notebook (as described earlier). If needed, City staff can provide the following additional information for each agency: Funding application for FY 2019 Scope of services that describes the services the partner provides Program highlights and current status Proposed program objectives and targets Mid-year report (FY 2018) on objectives and targets Financial audits and year-end reports

Out of School Time (OST) Partners Request for Proposal Process

Agencies that deliver after school enrichment activities participated in a Request for Proposal (RFP) process to request financial partner funding in FY 2018. This RFP and the subsequent budget development and adoption process resulted in two-year contracts for six OST Financial Partners. The Arts & Science Council Studio 345 and Police Activities League programs experienced issues complying with the OST grant requirements during the first year of the contract. As a result, funding for those two programs was prorated in FY 2018. Funding decisions about the second year of these contracts will be determined through the FY 2019 budget adoption.

This is the seventh year of the OST RFP process, which includes the Budget Committee and Economic Development Committee recommendations approved by the full City Council on November 26, 2012, with additional modifications recommended by the Economic Development Committee approved by the full City Council on October 28, 2013 and November 10, 2014. Those approved recommendations include: Cap the City’s Innovative Housing (local PAYGO) funding at the FY 2013 level of $590,000. Cap the percentage of an OST program budget that can be funded from the City to 33%. For

existing OST Financial Partners, there was a transition period of no more 66% in FY 2014, 50%in FY 2015, and 33% for all subsequent fiscal years.

Allow City-funded OST programs to charge a nominal fee for participants. Maintain agency eligibility requirements, with the exception of changing the years of OST

experience the agency must have in Charlotte from three years to one year. Modify the RFP review process to include site visits, including a group of external volunteers to

participate in the review process, revising scoring to reflect the City Council priorities, andpublishing the scoring rubric in the RFP.

Continue to use the Housing Trust Fund model for award allocations; basing funding allocationsat the agencies’ total requested amount in priority order, until funds are fully expended.

Reduce the maximum per agency funding allocation from $300,000 to $200,000 in FY 2016 inorder to ensure that more agencies are able to participate and offer programs throughout the City.

Implement a $1,200 cost-per-child award allocation, not to exceed the maximum per agencyfunding amount.

Fund the maximum amount permitted annually for OST programming by the federal CommunityDevelopment Block Grant Program (that amount may change from year to year).

Transition the funding cycle from a one-year to a two-year contract funding cycle starting in FY2016 and FY 2017. This transition creates efficiencies to the RFP process, for both the agenciesseeking funding as well as the review committee. The two-year funding cycle also allowsagencies more time for strategic planning and staffing decisions.


General Fund - Discretionary FY 2018Budget

FY 2019 Request

Change from FY 2018 Budget to FY 2019 Request

Funding Request Explanation

Arts & Science Council $2,940,823 $3,465,823 $525,000

Unrestricted operating funding for the appreciation, participation, and support for arts and culture; additional funding would be for neighborhood programming and cultural sector innovation

Charlotte Regional Partnership 155,111 158,250 3,139

Markets the Charlotte region throughout the world as a superior business location developing business prospects and assets to provide sustainable economic growth for the 16-county, two-state area. Increase is based on $0.15 per capita

Community Building Initiative 50,000 50,000 0

Works for access, inclusion, and equity in Charlotte-Mecklenburg; increase supports growing program, personnel, and operating expenses. City funding helps better equip Community Building Initiative to sponsor community conversations in response to real-time issues, and fully implement efforts around equity education and programming

Safe Alliance 333,977 382,552 48,575

Funds eight positions that work with CMPD to support victims of violent crime and their families by providing court accompaniment, assistance with restraining orders, and victim-focused case management

Women's Business Center of Charlotte (New FY 2019 Request)

0 99,000 99,000

Promotes economic self-sufficiency through entrepreneurship for all women in the Charlotte region empowering women with the tools needed to establish businesses, stabilize their companies, generate sustainable profits, strategize for future growth, and contribute in the growth and economic development of the community.

General Fund - Dedicated Revenue FY 2018Budget

FY 2019 Request



Charlotte Regional Visitors Authority (CRVA)*

$18,896,727 $16,218,480 -$2,678,247

Encourages convention and visitor promotion to the Charlotte region as a travel and tourism destination and for business development activities associated with tourism; City funding derived from portion of proceeds from prepared food and beverage and occupancy taxes

CRVA - Film Commission 150,000 150,000 0

Promotes the Charlotte Region as a location for film and commercial/television productions; through the Charlotte Regional Film Commission, the CRVA provides site location, crew, equipment, stage, and support service information for commercials, independent films, television series, and still photography shoots

Charlotte Center City Partners 4,164,496 4,348,905 184,409

Implements strategies promoting the economic, social, and cultural development of Charlotte's Center City; funding is based on Municipal Service Districts 1-4 tax revenue

University City Partners 743,095 752,149 9,054

Promotes, encourages, and coordinates University City's long-term economic vitality as a regional center for education, commerce, shopping, and entertainment; funding is based on Municipal Service District 5 tax revenue

TOTAL GENERAL FUND $27,434,229 $25,625,159 -$1,809,070

Financial Partner and Outside Agency Summary - General Fund

*FY 2018 CRVA budget includes one-time additional $3.0 million to assist with expanded marketing and outreach.


100% PAYGO Funds FY 2018Budget

FY 2019 Request



Crisis Assistance Ministry $380,000 $543,400 $163,400

Funding for the City Energy Assistance Program and the Emergency Rental Assistance Program; additional funding will increase the amount of financial assistance available to help people experiencing a financial crisis pay their bills. Funding is provided by City Innovative Housing (PAYGO) funding

TOTAL $380,000 $543,400 $163,400

100% Federal Grant Funds FY 2018Budget

FY 2019 Request

Change from FY 2018 Budget to FY

2019 RequestFunding Request Explanation

Carolinas CARE Partnership $2,362,276 $2,362,276 $0Provides housing resources for people living with HIV and AIDS. Funding determined and provided by U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

Charlotte Family Housing 330,000 330,000 0

Provides monthly rental subsidies to participating families in Charlotte Family Housing's permanent housing program. Funding provided by federal HOME Investment Partnership Program

TOTAL $2,692,276 $2,692,276 $0

Shared Federal/PAYGO Funds FY 2018Budget

FY 2019 Request


2019 RequestFunding Request Explanation

Charlotte-Mecklenburg Housing Partnership, Inc. - Affordable Housing

$1,860,000 $1,960,000 $100,000

Supports affordable housing program activities including mortgage delinquency prevention and foreclosure counseling, and the development, financing, and management of affordable apartments. Funding provided by federal HOME Investment Partnership Program and City Innovative Housing funding

Charlotte Mecklenburg Housing Partnership, Inc. - HouseCharlotte

231,000 281,000 50,000

Supports homeownership counseling and down payment assistance. Additional funding is needed to increase the number of families benefitting from HouseCharlotte services. Funding provided by federal HOME Investment Partnership Program and City Innovative Housing funding

TOTAL $2,091,000 $2,241,000 $150,000

Out-of-School Time Partners FY 2018 Budget

FY 2019 Budget


2019 BudgetFunding Request Explanation

Above and Beyond Students $157,934 $157,934 $0

Arts & Science Council Studio 345 200,000 0 -200,000

Behailu Academy 66,000 66,000 0

Greater Enrichment Program 200,000 200,000 0

Police Activities League 156,000 156,000 0

YWCA Central Carolinas After School Enrichment

200,000 200,000 0

TOTAL $979,934 $779,934 -$200,000

FY 2018 was the first year of a biennial funding process for Out of School Time (OST) Financial Partners. FY 2019 represents the second year of the bi-annual funding process for OST Financial Partners; therefore, applications were not accepted in FY 2019 for new OST Financial Partners. Eligible agencies include NC licensed after school providers, non-profit 501(c)(3) organizations, and Local Education Agency or faith-based organizations located in Charlotte. Agencies must have provided a continuous out-of-school program for a minimum of three years with at least one year in Charlotte, must serve at least 50 students, and administer a school-year or year-round out-of-school time program. Funded programs must operate five days a week at a minimum of three hours per day on each Charlotte Mecklenburg Schools (CMS) school day with or without a summer component that operates five days per week. The summer program must operate at a minimum of seven hours per day for at least six weeks during the CMS summer break. Programs which previously provided summer-only services are ineligible for out-of-school funding. Eligible agencies must also maintain a maximum ratio of one adult to 20 students; and services must be accessible to all students regardless of their ability to pay

Financial Partner and Outside Agency Summary - Housing and Community Development and Crisis Assistance

Financial Partner and Outside Agency Summary - Out of School Time Partners


FY 2019 Outside Agency Funding Request Arts & Science Council of Charlotte-Mecklenburg, Inc.

Scope of Service The Arts & Science Council of Charlotte-Mecklenburg, Inc. (ASC) serves as the designated “Office of Cultural Affairs” for Charlotte-Mecklenburg, with responsibility for community-wide cultural planning, grant making, public art, advocacy, government relations, information collection, research and dissemination, and comprehensive oversight of the cultural system. ASC’s strategic goals celebrate and amplify investment in the cultural sector:

• Advocate for all residents to have access to a vibrant cultural life through engagement in excellent and relevant arts, science and history programs and events,

• Invest in long standing and emerging organizations, cultural education experiences, diverse cultural festivals, community and neighborhood-based projects and creative individuals, and

• Serve as a resource hub for strategy and capacity building for the cultural community. Throughout its almost 60-year history, and with support of public and private partnerships, ASC has led the growth of arts and culture in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg community, helping our region become a vibrant community that enhances the quality of life for residents, attracts businesses, and fuels economic development.

Performance

Measure FY 2017 Year-End Actual

FY 2018 Mid-Year Actual FY 2019 Target

Increase the applicant pool for Cultural Vision Grant project investment to include new and emergent community-based arts and culture organizations

7 grant investments have been awarded to first-time applicants to ASC. Another 14 first-time applicants submitted to the program and have been encouraged to further develop their ideas and reapply.

15 of the 40 grantees (38%) are first time applicants/recipients of ASC project grant support. 11 of those 15 are individuals or emerging nonprofits that are led by, with and for communities of color.

At least 20% of funded projects are to first-time ASC grantees

Increase number of grant funded organizations that increase access to African-American, Asian, Latino, and Native American focused arts, science, and history/heritage offerings for the entire community

First time unrestricted support was provided to 4 organizations that represent or create access specifically for African American, Asian, Latino and Native American populations. In addition to these new Operating Support partners, 29% of Project Grants made to date are to programs that represent or create access specifically for African-American, Asian, Latino and Native American populations.

Expect to achieve target of at least 40% of grantees being outside Center City Charlotte and represent or create access specifically for African-American, Asian, Latino, and Native American populations

At least 40% of grantees will be outside Center City Charlotte and will represent of create access specifically for African-American, Asian, Latino, and Native American populations

Increase awareness and visibility for cultural programming through tracking number of visitors to CharlotteCultureGuide.com and number of subscribers to Culture Picks weekly email

1. 392,144 unique visitors as of 6/30/2017 2. 16,374 CulturePicks! subscribers as of 6/30/2017

1. 169,198 sessions from 7/1/2018 – 12/31/2018 2. 19,799 CulturePicks! subscribers as of 12/31/2018

1. 300,000 unique visitors by 6/2019 2. 25,000 subscribers to Culture Picks by 6/2019


Financial Information Funding Source(s): General Fund

FY 2018 City Funding*

FY 2019 Agency Total Budget

FY 2019 Agency Program Budget

(for which City funding is requested)

FY 2019 City Funding Request*

$2,940,823 $16,438,881 $16,438,881 $3,465,823

*Totals do not include City Public Art funding and Out of School Time Partner contributions.

Summary/Highlights of Agency Request

In FY 2018, a one-time funding allocation of $250,000 was provided to expand ASC’s community/neighborhood-based Cultural Vision Grants that align with the recommendations of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Opportunity Task Force. The Task Force singled-out the cultural community and the Cultural Vision Plan recommendations as fundamental to addressing the social capital issues that are critical to increasing upward mobility in Charlotte. The requested FY 2019 increase reflects the continued growth of the City and demands for cultural programming. Specifically, the additional funding would support neighborhood-based project grants that align with the priorities of building community and increasing program relevance and innovation articulated by Charlotte-Mecklenburg residents in the 2014 Cultural Vision Plan and Cultural Life Task Force recommendations for stabilization of cultural funding during a 10-year transition. Funding would also support investment in local cultural organizations through Technical Assistance Grants that support capacity building opportunities. An increase in funding will help expand access to cultural experiences for all residents and visitors to the Charlotte region.


FY 2019 Outside Agency Funding Request Charlotte Regional Partnership

Scope of Service

The Charlotte Regional Partnership markets the Charlotte USA region throughout the world as a superior business location in order to develop short- and long-term business prospects and develop assets required to provide sustainable economic growth for the 16-county, two-state area. Services include site selection assistance, research for clients, corporate intelligence for business development missions, sponsoring trade shows and industry events in key markets, domestic and international awareness of region via marketing and advertising campaigns.

Performance



Generate qualified business recruitment projects for the Charlotte USA region

68 56 80

Increase the annual number of total client visits to the Charlotte USA region

34 33 40

Increase the number of foreign-owned firms considering the region

32 25 36

Financial Information

Funding Source(s): General Fund

FY 2018 City Funding




FY 2019 City Funding Request

$155,111 $2,132,214 $2,132,214 $158,250


The $158,250 request for business development and marketing is based on $0.15 per person in the City of Charlotte using NC State Data Center certified population data. The request represents a $3,139 increase in funding due to an increase in population. Mecklenburg County also contributes funding to the Charlotte Regional Partnership at a rate of $0.15 per person in the County, including City residents (for a total combined City and County contribution of $0.30 per capita). The County’s FY 2018 contribution was $155,111. The requested amount from Mecklenburg County for FY 2019 is also $158,250. Other counties in the Charlotte region contribute $0.30 per person to the Charlotte Regional Partnership to support the organization’s operational budget.


FY 2019 Outside Agency Funding Request Community Building Initiative

Scope of Service

Community Building Initiative (CBI) is a non-profit organization that advances access, inclusion, and equity in Charlotte-Mecklenburg. Founded in 1997 to address the critical issue of race, CBI has integrated additional aspects of diversity and difference into its established and successful programs. The organization also focuses on equity and equity issues, including social mobility and economic opportunity, which impact the quality of life for all in Charlotte-Mecklenburg. Through its programs and partnerships and by involving diverse groups of people, CBI builds the capacity and commitment of individuals, organizations, institutions – and ultimately the broader community – to successfully work towards a more inclusive and equitable community. For CBI – and the future of the community it serves – an ultimate objective is that who you are and where you live in Charlotte should not predict one’s life outcomes. The organization believes that the inclusion and equity values it champions make common sense, business sense, and moral sense, and is committed to these ideals for the benefit of this generation and future generations.

Performance



% of Leadership Development Initiative graduates who rate the program’s effectiveness in increasing their ability to influence for inclusion and equity as good or excellent

100% Results will be reported at year-end

80%

% of Leaders Under 40 participants who indicate they have increased resources for understanding and addressing community issues

95% Results will be reported at year-end

80%

Number of community engagement offerings, including Equity Dialogue Circles

12 12 20-30




FY 2019 Agency Total

Budget




$50,000 $625,000 $625,000 $50,000


The total agency program budget is $625,000. The funding request of $50,000 for FY 2019 supports CBI’s Strategic Development Plan, specifically in the areas of expanded programming and organizational growth –both warranted by community need. Continued City funding will allow CBI to continue serving as an active partner with the City, providing access to its signature leadership programs, sponsoring community conversations in response to real-time issues/events, and fully implementing efforts around equity education and programming.


FY 2019 Outside Agency Funding Request Safe Alliance

Scope of Service

Victim Assistance is a program of Safe Alliance, a non-profit agency that has been serving the Charlotte community since 1909. Since 1978 Victim Assistance has partnered with the City of Charlotte, specifically the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department, to support victims of violent crime and their families by providing court accompaniment, assistance with restraining orders, and victim-focused case management. Safe Alliance manages three programs: Victim Assistance and the Legal Representation Program, Sexual Trauma Resource Center, and the Domestic Violence Shelter. Victim Assistance operates the only Rape Crisis service in Charlotte-Mecklenburg, providing 24-hour service to victims of sexual assault via a telephone hotline and hospital emergency rooms. By training and maintaining a dedicated group of volunteers, in addition to the professional staff, Victim Assistance is able to offer crisis intervention services to victims of sexual assault, domestic violence, child abuse, families of homicide victims, and other violent crimes 24-hours a day, 365 days a year. As an active team member in the community effort to end these violent crimes, Victim Assistance trains many professionals in the health and social service fields to be more aware and responsive to the issues. Victim Assistance is the only agency in Mecklenburg County whose primary focus is to provide crisis intervention and counseling to victims of any violent crime.

Performance



Development of safety plans 3,593 2,157 90% of 3,500 victims will develop safety plans

Positive response from clients on outreach surveys regarding their personal safety

97% 85% 90% of clients will indicate an increase in their personal safety after receiving services

Percentage of victims seen at area hospitals that acknowledge the support provided to them by trained staff or volunteer companions

97.7% 95.4% 95% of victims report that Companions were helpful





FY 2018 Agency Program Budget (for which City funding is requested)


$333,977 $4,704,245 $1,120,678 $382,552


The FY 2019 request of $382,522 is to support Victim Assistance. Currently, the City of Charlotte provides approximately 38% of funding to support the Victim Assistance program. The City’s support has allowed Safe Alliance to continue operating the Victim Assistance’s program, working closely with the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department to collaboratively manage resources.


FY 2019 Outside Agency Funding Request Women’s Business Center of Charlotte

*New Request*

Scope of Service

The NC Institute’s Women’s Business Center of Charlotte (WBCC) promotes economic self-sufficiency through entrepreneurship for all women in the Charlotte, North Carolina region through entrepreneurship and providing opportunities to assist women entrepreneurs achieve business goals through “in-depth, substantive outcome-oriented business services”. The WBCC empowers women with the tools needed to establish businesses, stabilize their companies, generate sustainable profits, strategize for future growth, and contribute in the growth and economic development of the community.

Performance



Provide Business Development Training for small, veteran, women and minority-owned startups and existing businesses

New Program New Program Host 30 to 35 trainings

Provide Financial Development and Financial Management Training for startups and existing businesses

New Program New Program Host 23 trainings








$0 $2,504,101 $256,500 $99,000


The WBCC intends to use this potential funding source from the City of Charlotte as a means to reduce the cost of professional development sessions by 30% to 40%, enabling more aspiring entrepreneurs to attend these sessions. The professional development sessions provide training for entrepreneurs ready to gain capital, thereby affecting economic mobility within our community.


FY 2019 Outside Agency Funding Request Charlotte Regional Visitors Authority

Scope of Service

The Charlotte Regional Visitors Authority (CRVA) manages and promotes Charlotte’s publicly-owned assembly facilities, which include the Charlotte Convention Center, Bojangles’ Coliseum, Ovens Auditorium, the NASCAR Hall of Fame, and specific contracted services with Spectrum Center and Charlotte Douglas International Airport. CRVA engages in new or expanded activities and programs aiding and encouraging convention and visitor promotion to the Charlotte region as a travel and tourism destination and in business development activities associated with tourism and organizations that sponsor or hold events, meetings, or conventions in the Charlotte area.

Performance



Improve Charlotte’s Image and Perception

New measure for FY 2018 This metric is updated annually during July

Grow Charlotte’s overall perception greater than 34.2%

Increase Number of Visitors to Charlotte


Grow Visitor Volume to destination faster than Mecklenburg County GDP

Increase Tax Collections related to Hotel Bookings

New measure for FY 2018 Booked 195 events and 194,579 hotel rooms from July – December, 2017

≥ 340,000 room nights

Maintain favorable Partnership Perception Survey Results


≥ 92.7 Partnership Perception Rating


Funding Source(s): City funding derived from a portion of the proceeds of the prepared food and beverage tax and a portion of the countywide occupancy tax.






*$18,896,727 $71,532,281 $17,372,195 $16,218,480 *FY 2018 CRVA funding includes a one-time additional $3.0 million to assist with expanded marketing and outreach.


Final FY 2019 funding will depend on the distribution of the occupancy tax and prepared food and beverage tax proceeds. This provision does not affect either the City’s General Fund funding commitment of $300,000 per year for six years for Central Intercollegiate Athletic Association (CIAA) basketball tournaments support or the funding commitment of $150,000 for the film division.


FY 2019 Outside Agency Funding Request Charlotte Regional Visitors Authority Charlotte Regional Film Commission

Scope of Service

The Charlotte Regional Visitors Authority (CRVA) manages and promotes Charlotte’s publicly-owned assembly facilities. CRVA engages in new or expanded activities and programs aiding and encouraging convention and visitor promotion to the Charlotte region as a travel and tourism destination and in business development activities associated with tourism and organizations that sponsor or hold events, meetings, or conventions in the Charlotte area. CRVA also promotes the Charlotte Region as a location for film and commercial/television productions. Through the Charlotte Regional Film Commission, the CRVA provides site location, crew, equipment, stage, and support service information for commercials, independent films, television series, and still photography shoots.

Performance



Number of qualified film/TV prospects/leads generated

167 96 130

Increase the number of feature film/TV prospects/leads generated for the Charlotte Region

13 10 10

Total budget for films/TV projects produced

$43,816,959 $4,506,250 $40 million

Number of film crew positions filled locally

2,097 925 1,500








$150,000 $71,532,281 $456,451 $150,000


CRVA will spend the requested $150,000 to promote the Charlotte Region as a location for film and commercial/television productions. Mecklenburg County’s FY 2018 contribution was $150,000. The requested amount from Mecklenburg County for FY 2019 is also $150,000.


FY 2019 Outside Agency Funding Request Charlotte Center City Partners

Scope of Service

Charlotte Center City Partners’ (CCCP) mission is to provide a platform for city-wide community-building arts, education, sustainability, health, and wellness initiatives and implement strategies facilitating and promoting the economic, social, and cultural development of Charlotte’s Center City to help create a viable, livable, memorable, and sustainable Center City with modern infrastructure, a tapestry of great urban neighborhoods, and a diversity of thriving businesses.

Performance



Facilitate recruitment of new/expanded business and retail in Uptown and Historic South End

Approximately 669,606 square feet of new/expanded business and 142,000 square feet of new retail establishments in Uptown and Historic South End including 41 new leases

Well over 500,000 square feet of new/expanded business and 35,000 square feet of new retail establishments in Uptown and Historic South End including 7 new leases Recruited 7 new businesses in uptown and 9 new retail establishments

≥ 250,000 square feet of new/expanded business and/or 1,000 new employees including ≥5 new employers

Identify more partners to create and produce new and existing “annual” events

Partnerships on track Successful production of partner events well executed without issues

Limited reported problems Partnering with all listed events, including Christmas Village

Successful production of partner events with increased attendance and fewer reported problems

Produce annual Thanksgiving Day Parade as a Super Regional event with a focus on building audience experience while building sponsor support establishing Charlotte as the Southeastern US holiday destination

Quality of parade units increased and more sponsors secured. Parade successfully executed with few problems and excellent media coverage.

Additional sponsor secured. Very successful Novant Health Thanksgiving Day Parade with high quality units and performers.

Increase in quality of parade units. Expand parade into ≥ 1 additional TV market and secure 3 additional sponsors


Funding Source(s): City funding provided from tax revenue of Municipal Service Districts 1, 2, 3, and 4.






$4,164,496 $5,312,288 $5,312,288 $4,348,905


Final FY 2019 funding will depend on revised Municipal Service District property tax revenue projections. An updated City revenue projection will be reflected in the City Manager’s recommended budget. Mecklenburg County does not provide funding for this program. Total Agency Budget request for FY2019 also includes $563,750 from various event and meeting sponsors including the Knight Foundation Grant for West End, Bank of America, Novant Health Medical Center, Wells Fargo, Duke Energy, Truliant, and others.


FY 2019 Outside Agency Funding Request University City Partners

Scope of Service

University City Partners (UCP) works to promote, encourage, and coordinate the University City region’s long-term economic vitality as a center for education, commerce, shopping, and entertainment. University City Partners enhances communication to build community visibility for the area and is engaged in ensuring the continuing economic viability of University City by promoting it as an excellent place to live, work, learn, and play; by advocating on behalf of the area’s infrastructure needs; by preparing the area for multimodal transportation; by emphasizing University City’s role as the heart of the larger two-county area; by encouraging economic development and smart growth through regional planning; and by identifying and facilitating cross-jurisdictional planning to enhance the area.

Performance



Support the Regional Transit Plan and encourage improved transportation choices for University City by monitoring progress and being a voice in meetings

Active voice and attended 100% of the University City station area and corridor improvement meetings

Active voice and attended 100% of the University City station area and corridor improvement meetings to date

Active voice and 100% attendance at key meetings with CATS, CDOT, E&PM, CMPD, and UNCC in advancing BLE opportunities

Sustain economic development of University City by tracking economic development trends in University City

100% successfully tracked and reported quarterly to the board the economic development trends in University City

75% to date Annual Economic Development report scheduled for release during February, 2018

Report quarterly to board all shifts in retail, office, hospitality, and multifamily vacancies and/or ownership changes

Enhance perception of safety for University City and support community and trust building efforts among community constituents and CMPD

Attended 100% of the University City police district’s quarterly public safety meetings

Attended 100% of the University City police district’s quarterly public safety meetings to date

Attend 100% of the University City police district’s quarterly public safety meetings


Funding Source(s): City funding provided from tax revenue of Municipal Service District 5.






$743,095 $889,297 $889,297 $752,149


Final FY 2019 funding will depend on revised Municipal Service District property tax revenue projections. An updated City revenue projection will be reflected in the City Manager’s recommended budget. Mecklenburg County does not provide funding for this program. The “Total Agency Budget” request for FY 2019 also includes $110,000 from various donor contributions.


FY2019 Outside Agency Funding Request Crisis Assistance Ministry

Scope of Service

The City Energy Assistance (CEA) program provides direct payments to utility companies on behalf of low-income households residing in Charlotte who are unable to pay their utility bills during times of financial crisis. For FY2019, it is estimated that 1,300 families will receive utility assistance. The average CEA amount for FY2018 is $173 per household.

The Emergency Rental Assistance (ERA) program provides emergency rental assistance for low-income households residing in designated areas by the City who are unable to pay their rent during times of financial crisis. For FY2018, more people in crisis have approached the agency for assistance before they owed more than one-month’s rent, thereby restricting the amount of City funds used to an average ERA amount of $211 per household.

Although, the CEA and ERA programs help prevent homelessness, the number of individuals and families served varies from year to year, depending upon clients energy and rental demands.

Performance

Measure FY2017 Year-End Actual

FY2018 Mid-Year Actual FY2019 Target

Number of households receiving energy assistance

979 1,045* 1,101

Number of households receiving rental assistance

708 651 652

*As of 11/30/2017, all utility funds were expensed. The FY 2018 target of 1,101 households to be served will not be reached. Clients presented larger utility bills than projected and the utility company required larger payments to keep service connected.


Funding Source(s): LOCAL

FY2018 City Funding

FY2019 Agency Total

Budget

FY2019 Agency Program Budget


FY2019 City Funding Request

$380,000 $15,728,658 $10,322,333 $543,400

Energy Assistance = $247,160 Rental Assistance = $296,240


Staff conducted 23,203 assessments in fiscal year 2017 and distributed $7.7 million in aid to property owners and utility vendors on behalf of families facing housing and financial crisis. These programs directly support the long-term stabilization of financially fragile families and impact factors that inhibit economic opportunity in Charlotte’s high-poverty neighborhoods. The emergency rent and utility assistance funding strengthens the community by bringing greater financial stability to low-income households and sustainability to low-income neighborhoods.


FY2019 Outside Agency Funding Request Carolina CARE Partnership

Scope of Service

Carolinas CARE Partnership is dedicated to coordinating, developing and providing care, service, training, prevention and housing programs that address the complex issues of HIV/AIDS, and those persons directly affected by the epidemic, in the Charlotte metropolitan statistical area (MSA). Carolinas CARE Partnership has been the regional administrative agent for Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) programs for the MSA since 1998. The intended use of these funds is to provide supportive services to people living with HIV and AIDS who are at risk of becoming homeless in the ten-county MSA. Carolinas CARE Partnership provides a wide array of housing resources in the ten-county MSA that includes: Anson, Cabarrus, Chester, Gaston, Iredell, Lancaster, Mecklenburg, Rowan, Union and York (South Carolina). The following housing and supportive services are provided: short-term assistance for rent, utilities and mortgages; housing information services, tenant-based rental vouchers, small rehab projects, residential substance abuse treatment, transitional housing, and hospice care for people living with HIV and AIDS. In 2018, Carolinas CARE Partnership also awarded grant funding to 11 agencies for the development, enhancement, and advancement of housing programs for people living with HIV and AIDS. These resources prevent homelessness and allow people living with HIV-AIDS the ability to secure more stable housing situations that help to improve their overall health and well-being.

Performance



Increase the number of households in the MSA assisted with HOPWA funding

731 599 645


Funding Source(s): HOPWA (Federal)

FY2018 City Funding

FY2019 Agency Total

Budget

FY2019 Agency Program Budget (for which City funding is requested)

FY2019 City Funding

Request $2,362,276 $2,872,072 $2,362,276 $2,362,276


The funding for this program is determined and provided by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.


FY2019 Outside Agency Funding Request Charlotte Family Housing

Scope of Service

Charlotte Family Housing (CFH) is an innovative solution for family homelessness in the Charlotte community. CFH works through three program areas to address homelessness: housing families, building partnerships, and empowering change. The agency operates three (3) temporary/transitional shelters for clients as permanent housing options are found. In FY2017, CFH placed 120 families in permanent housing. CFH collaborates with individuals, faith groups, businesses, and agencies in the areas of financial, careers, education, support networks and health and wellness. CFH empower homeless families to achieve long-term self-sufficiency through shelter, housing, support services, and advocacy. Goals in five different areas; financial self-reliance, career advancement, education, support networks, and wellness, are set for the clients to support the long-term of housing sustainability.

Performance

*Numbers reported include new, renewed, and continuing clients receiving monthly subsidies.


Funding Source(s): HOME (Federal)

FY2018 City Funding

FY2019 Agency Total

Budget



FY2019 City Funding

Request

$330,000 $3,111,601 $1,244,641 $330,000


This request is to continue to provide monthly rental subsidies to participating families in Charlotte Family Housing’s permanent housing program. Eligible households served must be 60% or less of the Area Medium Income (AMI), with priority given to households 30% of AMI currently living in area homeless shelters and/or substandard, overcrowded, or unaffordable housing.



Number of families receiving monthly subsidies*

95 54 75


FY2019 Outside Agency Funding Request Charlotte-Mecklenburg Housing Partnership

(Affordable Housing Contract) Scope of Service

Charlotte-Mecklenburg Housing Partnership, Inc. (CMHP) is a nonprofit agency that provides affordable housing by administering comprehensive services that include: pre and post homeownership counseling, delinquency prevention counseling, sale of houses, affordable mortgages, and construction and renovation of for sale and rental housing. In addition, CMHP owns or is the general partner of 2,700 rental units. CMHP assists other affordable housing providers through collaboration of resources and affordable financing. CMHP primarily serves families earning up to 80% of annual median income (AMI). Average income of CMHP homeowners is 60% or less of AMI.

In revitalized areas, CMHP can assist customers who earn more than 80% of AMI in order to promote mixed income neighborhoods. Rental units are leased to families earning 60% or less of AMI and some are restricted to families earning 30% or less of AMI.

Performance



Number of families assisted with home purchases

122 70 100


Funding Source(s): Community Development Block Grant (Federal) and LOCAL

FY2018 City Funding

FY2019 Agency Total

Budget

FY2019 Agency Program Budget (for which City funding is requested)


$1,860,000 $7,827,509 $7,417,741 $1,960,000

CDBG - $1,470,000 Local (PAYGO) - $490,000


Since its inception, CHMP has developed and/or financed 2,700 rental units and manages and/or owns 1,600 affordable apartments. CHMP has provided homebuyer counseling and training and mortgage delinquency prevention and/or foreclosure counseling to more than 24,000 families and created 3,500 new homeowners.


FY2019 Outside Agency Funding Request

Charlotte-Mecklenburg Housing Partnership (HouseCharlotte)

Scope of Service

Charlotte-Mecklenburg Housing Partnership, Inc. (CMHP) is a nonprofit agency that provides affordable

housing by administering comprehensive services that include pre and post homeownership counseling,

delinquency prevention counseling, sale of houses, affordable mortgages and construction, and renovation of

for sale and rental housing. In addition, CMHP owns or is the general partner of 2,700 rental units. CMHP

assists other affordable housing providers through collaboration of resources and affordable financing. CMHP

primarily serves families earning up to 80% of annual median income (AMI). Average income of CMHP

homeowners is 60% or less of AMI.

CMHP has developed a number seminars/informational sessions: “Homeownership 101”, training for mortgage

loan officers, and attorneys, to advertise the program and to learn how to assist HouseCharlotte participants.

Performance

Measure FY2017 Year-End Actual FY2018 Mid-Year

Actual FY2019 Target

Increase number of families receiving

HouseCharlotte assistance

327

AMI of < 80% - 254 AMI of >80 to <110% - 73

141

AMI of < 80% - 112 AMI of >80 to <110% - 29

231


Funding Source(s): HOME (Federal) and LOCAL


CMHP has provided homebuyer counseling, training, and mortgage delinquency prevention and/or foreclosure counseling to more than 24,000 families and 3,500 families became new homeowners. CMHP has developed

and/or financed 2,700 rental units, totaling more than $550,000 in total investment of affordable housing and

manages and/or owns 1,600 affordable apartments.

FY2018 City Funding

FY2019

Agency Total Budget




$231,000 $7,827,509 $409,768 $281,000

HOME - $173,250

Local (PAYGO) - $107,750


FY 2019 Outside Agency Funding Request Out of School Time Partners

Scope of Service Agencies that deliver after school enrichment activities participated in a Request for Proposal (RFP) process to request financial partner funding in FY 2018. This RFP and the subsequent budget development and adoption process resulted in two-year contracts for six out of school time financial partners. FY 2019 begins the second year of those contracts.

Summary

FY 2018 FY 2019

Out of School Time Partners Budget

Year-End Projected Funding

Year-End Projected

Participants Served

Budget Participants to be served

Difference between

FY 2018 Budget and

FY 2019 Budget Above and Beyond Students 157,934 157,934 167 157,934 167 0

Arts & Science Council Studio 345 200,000 95,700 80 0 0 -200,000

Behailu Academy 66,000 66,000 55 66,000 55 0 Greater Enrichment Program 200,000 200,000 170 200,000 170 0

Police Activities League 156,000 53,275 35 156,000 130 0

YWCA Central Carolinas After School Enrichment

200,000 200,000 270 200,000 270 0

TOTAL $979,934 $772,909 992 $779,934 792 -$200,000


Review of Questions & Answers from March 21st Budget Workshop


Becoming an Employer of Choice, Compensation and Benefits Question 1: Explain the City’s compensation strategy of using the 50th percentile as the benchmark for determining the City’s market rates.

The City benchmarks competitiveness for a specific job based on the median of actual salaries paid in the applicable recruitment area for jobs of a similar nature. The median is the middle salary in a list of salaries arranged from high to low and may also be referred to as the 50th percentile. Maintaining market competitiveness results in 50 percent of comparable employers paying more and 50 percent paying less. This measurement is used by the vast majority of private and public sector employers. Organizations that cannot afford to use the 50th percentile may use the 25th percentile. High tech companies and rapidly growing companies, having variable pay and/or lay-offs potential, may use the higher 75th percentile. Table 1 below shows the majority of organizations surveyed tend to be in the 50th percentile. Table 1

Survey of Pay Practices in Public and Private Sector

Number of employers

Percentile 25th Above 25th,

below 50th 50th,

or median Above 50th, below 75th

75th or above

Base Salary Target (or goal) 560 0% 4% 89% 6% 1%

World at Work Bi-Annual Pay Practices Survey (Underwritten by AON Hewitt) released August 2016

Question 2: Is the $15.00 an hour adjustment for the city’s living wage, made in Fiscal Year 2018, based on the most current information available and is it the most currently accepted living wage rate in the nation? In addition, review the research conducted by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology?

The Fiscal Year 2018 budget approved increasing the City of Charlotte’s minimum wage to $15 an hour. In February 2018, 120 employees benefitted from this increased adjustment. Prior to implementing the $15.00 minimum ($31,200 annually), the lowest annual salary was $28,260, or $13.59 per hour. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) defines a living wage as the minimum hourly wage needed to cover basic family expenses and all relevant taxes. These basic expenses include food, childcare, health care, housing, transportation, and other necessities. When looking at the individual employee (single-household) MIT finds that for the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia metro region and Mecklenburg County the living wage is $11.65 per hour and $11.78 per hour respectively. Table 2 on the following page describes the relationship between wages and household in the Charlotte area. Further detail regarding the MIT living wage can be found in Attachment 1.


Table 2 Charlotte-Concord Gastonia Metro Region, Hourly Wages Per Adult

Types of Wages

1 Working Adult

1 Working Adult, 1 Child

2 Adults (1 Working)

2 Working Adults

2 Working Adults,

2 Children Living Wage $11.65 $23.96 $19.03 $9.27 $15.24

Mecklenburg County, NC, Hourly Wages Per Adult

Types of Wages

1 Working Adult

1 Working Adult, 1 Child

2 Adults (1 Working)

2 Working Adults

2 Working Adults,

2 Children Living Wage $11.78 $24.13 $19.21 $9.61 $15.33

Source: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Question 3: What housing programs are available for city employees? Are there any rental programs available to city employees such as a preferred employer program?

All residents with eligible income levels are able to receive housing program assistance (including rental programs) provided by the city, including city employees. The HouseCharlotte program is the only housing program offered by the city that includes an added benefit specifically targeted to city employees. HouseCharlotte provides up to $17,000 in down payment and closing cost assistance for home purchases. The funds can be used for principle reduction, closing costs, or rate buy downs, and employees are also eligible for a faster loan forgiveness period. Households between zero and 80 percent of the area median income are eligible for this program with a primary loan from an approved lender. Additionally, the city recently began offering two classes to employees related to housing: Homeownership 101 and Tenant/Landlord Rights. These classes are offered through The Department of Human Resources. Employees are also able to access additional financial counseling through the Employee Assistance Program.


Question 4: When comparing the City of Charlotte to others for benchmarking salaries, with whom does the City compare?

Table 3 below lists the municipalities used for comparative purposes. These cities have populations between 400,000 and 1,600,000 people. Table 3

Municipality State Municipality State Albuquerque New Mexico Mecklenburg County North Carolina Atlanta Georgia Memphis Tennessee Austin Texas Mesa Arizona Baltimore Maryland Miami Florida Boston Massachusetts Milwaukee Wisconsin Colorado Springs Colorado Minneapolis Minnesota Columbus Ohio Nashville-Davidson metro Tennessee Dallas Texas Oklahoma City Oklahoma Denver Colorado Omaha Nebraska Detroit Michigan Philadelphia Pennsylvania El Paso Texas Phoenix Arizona Fort Worth Texas Raleigh North Carolina Indianapolis Indiana San Antonio Texas Jacksonville Florida Tucson Arizona Kansas City Missouri Virginia Beach Virginia Las Vegas Nevada Washington District of Columbia Louisville/Jefferson County metro Kentucky

Question 5: What options are available to allow employees to buy into the City’s existing healthcare plan for retirees? Also, can the retiree healthcare plan be offered to a certain segment of the employee population?

Background: Current Retiree Health Care Eligibility

Prior to 1994 – Retirees and employees eligible to retire at this time must be offered retiree health care if they meet the service requirements.

January 1, 2002 – Employees hired on or after this date and who subsequently retire will be required to pay full cost of dependent’s coverage upon their retirement.

July 1, 2003 – Currently covered retirees and future eligible retires may opt-out of insurance and re-enroll at a later date.

July 1, 2009 - Retiree health insurance not offered to new employees hired on or after this date.


Employee Healthcare Options in Retirement Option 1: Affordable Healthcare Act Health Insurance Marketplace

Prior to implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), employer-sponsored retiree health plans, such as the ones offered by the City of Charlotte, were one of the few available options. With implementation of the ACA, employees have additional options for health care coverage in retirement. Some of these plans can be less expensive than the ones offered by the City due to the subsidies. The ACA Health Insurance Marketplace offers such health plans. There are various coverage options available as well as subsidies to offset premium costs, based on income thresholds. For example, a retiree and family of four with an average income of $78,000 dollars can qualify for health coverage through the Health Insurance Marketplace with a monthly premium of $0.00 dollars. This is a savings compared to similar coverage offered through the City of Charlotte at a monthly premium rate of $815.00 for Plan A Blue Options HSA or $1,260.00 for Plan B Blue Options HSA. The Health Insurance Marketplace also offers competitive PPO healthcare plans for a family of four compared to the City of Charlotte with savings between $300.00-$600.00 dollars. Option 2: In addition, in FY 2018, the City began offering two Health Savings Account (HSA) plans that employees can use to save towards current and future healthcare needs. The city provides a monetary HSA contribution to employees participating in these plans and the money belongs to the employee. Employees may also contribute to their HSA account. HSA plans also offer three tax benefits:

1. Contributions made through payroll deduction are pre-taxed (If made with after-tax dollars, contributions are tax-deductible);

2. The interest earned is tax-free account; and 3. Owners may make tax-free withdrawals for qualified medical expenses.

Option 3: New employees pay into a fund now and have access to the plan later. The City currently offers this type of defined benefit plan to employees hired before July 1, 2009. This plan provides employees access to the City’s health plan in retirement. The retiree pays a portion of the premium and the City pays a portion of the premium. Once the retiree pays the out of pocket expense maximum, the City pays 100 percent of all costs. The liability to the City still exists in this type of arrangement. For employees hired after July 1, 2009, a potential option would be to provide access to the retiree health plan. Since this plan is self-insured, the City is responsible for the total cost of the plan. The retiree in this situation would be paying 100% of the premium, but not 100% of the costs; it increases the long term financial impact to the city. Under this option, the overall cash and accrued liability impact would continue to increase as the plan covers the new retirees. The plan’s costs contribute to the city’s cash flow and liability accruals. For example, the retiree would pay 100% of the premium, which is $10,000 for that plan year, but if the retiree incurred $500,000 in costs during that year, the City would be responsible for the $490,000.


Option 4: Provide a Retiree Reimbursement Account (RRA). This is a defined contribution plan versus a defined benefit plan. These accounts are employer funded only, the employee cannot contribute. For an RRA plan:

The City would set up and pay into a RRA fund based on age and years of service criteria. The City would determine the amount to contribute to the account.

The Retiree uses the fund after retirement to get reimbursed for qualified health care costs that she/he has paid.

Consideration – This type of benefit does not provide access to the City’s retiree health plan, meaning

the retiree will have to get their own coverage. Also, if the retiree goes to the ACA Health Insurance Marketplace for health plan coverage, they will not be eligible for a subsidy. The current threshold for a subsidy is 400 percent of the federal poverty limit.

The alternative to this approach is to continue to support the Health Savings Account plans that currently allow for employees and the City to contribute to employees’ current and retiree healthcare expenses, thus increasing the money available in retirement for healthcare expenses. Offering retiree health care to a certain segment of employee population: Reinstate retiree healthcare for certain employees, such as public safety at the current eligibility requirements. Re-opening retiree healthcare will increase the city’s cash outlay and liability. The specific amounts are determined by an actuarial evaluation. An evaluation has been requested is anticipated to be completed and evaluated in the next two months.


Public Safety Question 6: For each Public Safety Pay Plan Step, what is the trend for voluntary turnover, and what are the reasons for leaving given by officers?

A comprehensive review of Police turnover was conducted to identify both the steps and tenure of public safety employees who voluntarily resign (all separations except retirement and termination). This review identified 194 police officers who voluntarily left public service with the City of Charlotte between 2013 to 2017, as well as where the police officer was in years of service. When looking at the trend from 2013 to 2017, Chart 1 below depicts voluntary turnover for police officers by step. The single largest loss of officers occurred in Step 4, where 47 out of 194, or 24 percent, of officers resigned. Chart 1

Exit interview information collected in 2016 and 2017 shows that 17 percent (or 21 officers) of the voluntary resignations were cited as a change in career (to include Federal employment), 34 percent (or 41 officers) cited various reasons including family commitments. Five percent (or 6 officers) of voluntarily resignations cited compensation and benefits as the reason or a reason for leaving. When compared to retirements over the same time span, voluntary resignations make up 48 percent but retirements have more than doubled in the prior two years, as shown in Chart 2. Chart 2


Question 7: What is the per officer cost of training that a police officer receives?

The total cost of training per Trainee for a Police Recruit is estimated at $38,400, which includes allocated costs for employee compensation for 26 weeks at the academy, instruction, state mandates, uniforms, firearms, and various trainings with materials.

Question 8: Are there opportunities to house other entities in the police divisions for a true Community-oriented Policing Model?

The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department is partnering with Mecklenburg County and Safe Alliance to make significant progress in the effort to support child and adult victims of interpersonal violence by utilizing the Family Justice Centers model. This model uses co-located centers that provide coordinated services to survivors of interpersonal violence. Both public and private sector partner agencies provide coordinated services from one location for safety, hope, healing, and justice by serving victims, reducing the number of times survivors share their story, reducing the number of places survivors must go to seek assistance, and ensuring the system works effectively for those in need. Partnerships, locations, and deployment are currently being evaluated for specifics. CMPD also partners with the City’s Housing and Neighborhood Services Department to co-locate Code Enforcement Teams within selected Police Stations. Current and planned Police stations with Code Enforcement Teams include Eastway, Westover, and the South Area near Ballantyne. Additional opportunities to co-locate other non-CMPD entities within Police stations would need to consider the impact to safety and security of the facility, Police staff, the co-locating entity, and the general public.


LIVING WAGE CALCULATOR User’s Guide / Technical Notes

2017 Update

Prepared for Amy K. Glasmeier, Ph.D.

By Carey Anne Nadeau, Consultant, Open Data Nation

Department of Urban Studies and Planning Massachusetts Institute of Technology 77 Massachusetts Ave., Room 7-346

Cambridge, MA 02139


TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION TO LIVING WAGE MODEL ……………………………… 2 FAMILY COMPOSITIONS ………...…………………………………………... 2 GEOGRAPHIC DEFINITIONS ..………………………………………………. 3 DATA SOURCES AND CALCULATIONS……………………………………. 3

FOOD……………………………………………………………………. 3 CHILDCARE……………………………………………………………. 4 HEALTH…………………………………………………………………. 4 HOUSING……………………………………………………………….. 5 TRANSPORTATION……………………………………………………. 6 OTHER NECESSITIES………………………………………………….. 6 TAXES…………………………………………………………………… 6

COMPARISONS TO THE MINIMUM WAGE, POVERTY THRESHOLD, AND WAGES BY OCCUPATION……………………………………………… 7 APPENDIX I: Data Dictionary of Files Used to Calculate the Living Wage. … 8

1


Introduction to living wage model Analysts and policy makers often compare income to the federal poverty threshold in order to determine an individual’s ability to live within a certain standard of living. However, poverty thresholds do not account for living costs beyond a very basic food budget. The federal poverty measure does not take into consideration costs like childcare and health care that not only draw from one’s income, but also are determining factors in one’s ability to work and to endure the potential hardships associated with balancing employment and other aspects of everyday life. Further, poverty thresholds do not account for geographic variation in the cost of essential household expenses. The living wage model is an alternative measure of basic needs. It is a market-based approach that draws upon geographically specific expenditure data related to a family’s likely minimum food, childcare, health insurance, housing, transportation, and other basic necessities (e.g. clothing, personal care items, etc.) costs. The living wage draws on these cost elements and the rough effects of income and payroll taxes to determine the minimum employment earnings necessary to meet a family’s basic needs while also maintaining self-sufficiency. The living wage model is a ‘step up’ from poverty as measured by the poverty thresholds but it is a small ‘step up’, one that accounts for only the basic needs of a family. The living wage model does not allow for what many consider the basic necessities enjoyed by many Americans. It does not budget funds for pre-prepared meals or those eaten in restaurants. It does not include money for entertainment nor does it does not allocate leisure time for unpaid vacations or holidays. Lastly, it does not provide a financial means for planning for the future through savings and investment or for the purchase of capital assets (e.g. provisions for retirement or home purchases). The living wage is the minimum income standard that, if met, draws a very fine line between the financial independence of the working poor and the need to seek out public assistance or suffer consistent and severe housing and food insecurity. In light of this fact, the living wage is perhaps better defined as a minimum subsistence wage for persons living in the United States. Family Compositions The living wage calculator estimates the living wage needed to support families of twelve different compositions: one adult families with 0, 1, 2, or 3 dependent children, two adult families where both adults are in the labor force with 0, 1, 2, or 3 dependent children, and two adult families where one adult is not in the labor force with 0, 1, 2, or 3 dependent children. For single adult families, the adult is assumed to be employed full-time. For two adult families where both adults are in the labor force, both adults are assumed to be employed full-time. For two adult families where one adult is not in the labor force, one of the adults is assumed to be employed full-time while the other non-wage-earning adult provides full-time childcare for the family’s children. Full-time work is assumed to be year-round, 40 hours per week for 52 weeks, per adult.

2


Families with one child are assumed to have a ‘young child’ (4 years old). Families with two children are assumed to have a ‘young child’ and a ‘child’ (9 years old). Families with three children are assumed to have a ‘young child’, a ‘child’, and a ‘teenager’ (15 years old).

3


Geographic Definitions The living wage is calculated at the county, metropolitan area, state, regional, and national level. Unless otherwise noted, geographic definitions are consistent with those published by the Office of Management and Budget, last updated in 2013. 1

The living wage is calculated for 381 metropolitan areas and all 50 states and the District of Columbia. It is not calculated for those who reside in Puerto Rico, Guam, or the Virgin Islands. Regional assignments are made by state according to Census definitions. Reported national values are calculated as the average values of the 50 states and Washington DC. 2

Data Sources and Calculations The living wage is defined as the wage needed to cover basic family expenses (basic needs budget) plus all relevant taxes. Values are reported in 2015 dollars. To convert values from annual to hourly, a work-year of 2,080 hours (40 hours per week for 52 weeks) per adult is assumed. The basic needs budget and living wage are calculated as follows:

Basic needs budget = Food cost + childcare cost + (insurance premiums +

health care costs) + housing cost + transportation cost + other necessities cost

Living wage = Basic needs budget + (basic needs budget*tax rate)

The following is an explanation of data sources for each component of the living wage:

1 Geographic boundaries for American Community Survey 2015 5 year estimates are available at https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/geography-acs/geography-boundaries-by-year.2015.html. 2 The data was not skewed to justify the use of the median, instead of the mean.

4


https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/geography-acs/geography-boundaries-by-year.2015.html

Food. The food component of the basic needs budget was compiled using the USDA’s low-cost food plan national average in June 2016. The low-cost plan is the second least expensive food 3 4

plan offered from a set of four food plans that provide nutritionally adequate food budgets at various price points. The low-cost plan assumes that families select lower cost foods and that all 5

meals (including snacks) are prepared in the home. The food component’s value varies by family size and the ages of individual family members. Adult food consumption costs are estimated by averaging the low-cost plan food costs for males and females between 19 and 50. Child food consumption costs are estimated using the various categories in the low-cost food plan based on the child age assumptions detailed in the section Assumptions about Family Composition. The regional adjustment factor is a based on estimated regional differences in raw and unprepared food prices. The regional adjustment factors by region are as follows: East (1.08), Midwest (0.95), South (0.93), and West (1.11). 6

Childcare. The childcare component is constructed from state-level estimates published by the National Association of Child Care Resource and Referral Agencies in 2015. We assume that 7

low-income families will select the lowest cost childcare option available; therefore we used the lowest cost option (family childcare or child are center). In instances where only one type of childcare cost for a specific age group was available, that childcare cost was used. In the instance that neither childcare type for a specific age group had an estimate (only occurs for school age care), we calculated the average percent difference between infant and school age care cost (for the cheapest care available) for all states with data by region. We then multiplied the appropriate average percent difference in infant care and school age care for the region in which the state is located by the cost to provide the cheapest type of infant care available the state to obtain an estimate for the cost of childcare for the missing age group. Values were inflated from 2014 to 2016 dollars using the Consumer Price Index inflation multiplier from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. 8

3 The USDA food plans are available at http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/USDAFoodCost-Home.htm. 4 The USDA low-cost food plan for June 2016 is available at https://www.cnpp.usda.gov/sites/default/files/CostofFoodJun2016.pdf. June costs for each year are used to represent the annual average. 5 The Census Bureau uses the lowest cost food plan published by the USDA, the thrifty plan, in calculating the federal poverty thresholds. The use of the thrifty plan is a highly criticized because it does not provide a nutritious diet and it is only meant for temporary or emergency use (see e.g. Natale & Super, 1991). Such critiques provide compelling arguments against the use of the thrifty food plan in the living wage calculator. 6 USDA Economic Research Service: Liebtag, E. S. (2007). Stretching the food stamp dollar: regional price differences affect affordability of food. Economic Information Bulletin Number 29-2. 7 State-level estimates for childcare costs are available at http://usa.childcareaware.org/advocacy-public-policy/resources/reports-and-research/statefactsheets/. We chose to inflate values from 2015, rather than use published estimates for 2016 because the 2016 estimates did not have a clearly defined or consistent methodology across states and nearly one-quarter of all states were missing data. 8 BLS inflation calculator is available at http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm.

5


http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/USDAFoodCost-Home.htm

https://www.cnpp.usda.gov/sites/default/files/CostofFoodJun2016.pdf

http://usa.childcareaware.org/advocacy-public-policy/resources/reports-and-research/statefactsheets/

http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm

Health. Typical health-related expenses are difficult to estimate due to the multitude of variables that potentially impact health care expenditures, such as the relative health of household members and the range of coverage and affiliated costs under alternative medical plans. The health component of the basic needs budget includes: (1) health insurance costs for employer sponsored plans, (3) medical services, (3) drugs, and (4) medical supplies. Costs for medical 9

services, drugs and medical supplies were derived from 2015 national expenditure estimates by household size provided in the 2015 Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Expenditure Survey. 10

These estimates were further adjusted for regional differences using annual income expenditure shares reported by region. Values were inflated from 2015 to 2016 dollars using the Consumer 11

Price Index inflation multiplier from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. 12

Health insurance costs were calculated using the Health Insurance Component Analytical Tool (MEPSnet/IC) provided online by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. This tool 13

provides state-level estimates derived from the insurance component of the 2015 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. The criteria for cost estimation using MEPSnet/IC tool were: “Private-Sector Establishments: State Specific Data for Private-Sector Establishments”, for each individual state, “Annual Premiums and Contributions per Enrolled Employee at Private-Sector Establishments”, All Employees Combined, either (1) “Single Plans”, (2) “Employee-plus-one Plans” or (3) “Family Plans.” We assumed that a single adult family uses a “Single Plan”, a two adult family uses an “Employee-Plus-One Plan,” and all other family types use a “Family Plan. 14

Values were inflated from 2015 to 2016 dollars using the Consumer Price Index inflation multiplier from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. 15

Housing. The housing component captures the likely cost of rental housing in a given area in 2016 using HUD Fair Market Rents (FMR) estimates. The FMR estimates are produced at the

9 For many low-income families, the assumption that their employer provides health insurance may be overly optimistic. Indeed and as documented by the Employee Benefit Research Institute, the offer rates of health insurance vary substantially by gender, level of education, and income (Available at http://www.ebri.org/pdf/briefspdf/EBRI_IB_04-2012_No370_HI-Trends.pdf). However, we felt comfortable with the assumption that the employer subsidizes coverage because our optimism likely produces living wage estimates that are below the living wage needed. Considering all factors and the unavoidable granularity of any living wage estimator, we felt that this decision was justified. 10 2015 Consumer Expenditure Survey, Table 1400, available at https://www.bls.gov/cex/2015/combined/cusize.pdf. 11 2015 Consumer Expenditure Survey, Table 1800, available at https://www.bls.gov/cex/2015/combined/region.pdf. 12 BLS inflation calculator is available at http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm. 13 Available at http://meps.ahrq.gov/mepsweb/data_stats/MEPSnetIC.jsp. 14 An alternate method using the MEPS query tool is simply to extract the data from the appropriate ‘quick’ tables available on the MEPS website. To obtain the mean employee contribution for a single plan by state we used Table X.C.1(2015), available at https://meps.ahrq.gov/data_stats/summ_tables/insr/state/series_10/2015/txc1.htm. To obtain the mean employee contribution for a plus-one plan by state, we used Table X.D.1(2015), available at https://meps.ahrq.gov/data_stats/summ_tables/insr/state/series_10/2015/txd1.htm. To obtain the mean employee contribution for a family plan by state, we used Table X.E.1(2015), available at https://meps.ahrq.gov/data_stats/summ_tables/insr/state/series_10/2015/txe1.htm. 15 BLS inflation calculator is available at http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm.

6


http://www.ebri.org/pdf/briefspdf/EBRI_IB_04-2012_No370_HI-Trends.pdf

https://www.bls.gov/cex/2015/combined/cusize.pdf

https://www.bls.gov/cex/2015/combined/region.pdf


http://meps.ahrq.gov/mepsweb/data_stats/MEPSnetIC.jsp

https://meps.ahrq.gov/data_stats/summ_tables/insr/state/series_10/2015/txc1.htm

https://meps.ahrq.gov/data_stats/summ_tables/insr/state/series_10/2015/txd1.htm

https://meps.ahrq.gov/data_stats/summ_tables/insr/state/series_10/2015/txe1.htm


sub-county and county levels. County FMRs were obtained by aggregating sub-county 16

estimates (where sub-county estimates existed) using a population-weighted average using population estimates from the 2015 5-year estimates American Community Survey published by the Census Bureau. State and metropolitan area FMRs were also obtained by population 17

weighting county FMRs. The FMR estimates include utility costs and vary depending on the number of bedrooms in each unit, from zero to four bedrooms. We assumed that a one adult family would rent a single occupancy unit (zero bedrooms) for an individual adult household, that a two adult family would rent a one bedroom apartment, and that two adult and one or two child families would rent a two bedroom apartment. We further assumed that families with three children would rent a three bedroom apartment (the adults are allocated one bedroom and the children two bedrooms). Transportation. The transportation component is constructed using 2015 national expenditure data by household size from the 2015 Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Expenditure Survey including: (1) Cars and trucks (used), (2) gasoline and motor oil, (3) other vehicle expenses, and (4) public transportation. Transportation costs cover operational expenses such as fuel and routine maintenance as well as vehicle financing and vehicle insurance but do not include the costs of purchasing a new automobile. These costs were further adjusted for regional 18

differences using annual expenditure shares reported by region. Expenditures were selected by 19

household size, instead of as a share of household income because transportation cost (i.e. gas, repairs, etc.) are roughly the same for all persons regardless of income. Values were inflated from 2015 to 2016 dollars using the Consumer Price Index inflation multiplier from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. 20

Other necessities. The basic needs budget includes cost estimates for items not otherwise included in the major budget components such as clothing, personal care items, and housekeeping supplies. Expenditures for other necessities are based on 2015 data by household size from the 2015 Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Expenditure Survey including: (1) Apparel and services, (2) Housekeeping supplies, (3) Personal care products and services, (4) Reading, and (5) Miscellaneous. These costs were further adjusted for regional differences 21

16 HUD provides sub-county data and defines the corresponding metropolitan area for sub-county data as a “HUD Metro Fair Market Rent Areas,” (HMFAs) when revised OMB definitions encompass area that is larger than HUD's definitions of housing market areas. More information can be found in HUD’s Fair Market Rent Overview documentation http://www.huduser.org/portal/datasets/fmr.html. 17 The 2015 American Community Survey is available at http://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/technical-documentation/table-and-geography-changes/2015/5-year.html. 18 2015 Consumer Expenditure Survey, Table 1400, available at https://www.bls.gov/cex/2015/combined/cusize.pdf. 19 2015 Consumer Expenditure Survey, Table 1800, available at https://www.bls.gov/cex/2015/combined/region.pdf. 20 BLS inflation calculator is available at http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm 21 2015 Consumer Expenditure Survey, Table 1400, available at https://www.bls.gov/cex/2015/combined/cusize.pdf.

7


http://www.huduser.org/portal/datasets/fmr.html

http://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/technical-documentation/table-and-geography-changes/2015/5-year.html

http://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/technical-documentation/table-and-geography-changes/2015/5-year.html





using annual expenditure shares reported by region. Values were inflated from 2015 to 2016 22

dollars using the Consumer Price Index inflation multiplier from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. 23

Taxes. Estimates for federal and state taxes are included in the calculation of a living wage. Property taxes and sales taxes are already represented in the budget estimates through the cost of rent and other necessities. Federal taxes are taken from the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center Microsimulation Model (version 0515-1) and include: individual income taxes (after tax credits including the 24

refundable portion of earned income and child tax credits), payroll taxes (including both the employee and employer portion of social security and medicare taxes), corporate income tax, 25

estate tax, and excise tax. The federal tax rate for the middle quintile was 13.7% in 2016. The state tax rate is taken from the state income tax rate, as reported by the CCH State Tax Handbook in 2015. The tax rate tier applied is determined by the pre-tax living wage, and 26

includes deductions. 27

Comparisons to the Minimum Wage, Poverty Threshold, and Wages by Occupation Minimum Wage: The minimum wage estimates the lowest threshold an employer can legally pay employees for certain types of work. For comparison, we used state minimum wage data was obtained from the United States Department of Labor as of January 1, 2016. The federal 28

minimum wage is used for states where the state minimum wage is less than the federal minimum. The average minimum wage of all fifty states and the District of Columbia is used to estimate the national minimum wage. Poverty Wage: The poverty threshold is defined by the Department of Health and Human Services. It is an administrative threshold to determine eligibility for financial assistance from the federal government. For comparison, we use the poverty thresholds for the 48 contiguous

22 2015 Consumer Expenditure Survey, Table 1800, available at https://www.bls.gov/cex/2015/combined/region.pdf. 23 BLS inflation calculator is available at http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm 24 Federal tax data are available at http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/model-estimates/baseline-distribution-tables-version-0515-1-model/effective-federal-tax-rates-all-1 25 In 2016, the payroll tax was included in the federal tax estimate, whereas in 2015, a flat payroll tax was applied separately from the federal income tax. This change in methodology had no impact on the payroll tax rate however. In 2015 and 2016, the payroll tax portion of federal taxes for the middle quintile was the same, 7.85%. 26 The CCH State Tax handbook is available at https://www.cchgroup.com/media/wk/taa/pdfs/landing-pages/national-accounts/statetax_handbook_2015-product-brochure.pdf. While 2016 values were not yet available at the time of publication. 27 For example, if the living wage before taxes is $25,000 and the second tier rate is for incomes $10,000 to $20,000 and the third tier rate is for incomes $20,001 and $30,000, the third tier is applied. 28 Minimum wage data is available at https://www.dol.gov/whd/minwage/america.htm.

8





http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/model-estimates/baseline-distribution-tables-version-0515-1-model/effective-federal-tax-rates-all-1

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/model-estimates/baseline-distribution-tables-version-0515-1-model/effective-federal-tax-rates-all-1

https://www.cchgroup.com/media/wk/taa/pdfs/landing-pages/national-accounts/statetax_handbook_2015-product-brochure.pdf

https://www.cchgroup.com/media/wk/taa/pdfs/landing-pages/national-accounts/statetax_handbook_2015-product-brochure.pdf

https://www.dol.gov/whd/minwage/america.htm

states, Washington DC, Alaska, and Hawaii, as of 2016. The average poverty wage of all 50 29

states and the District of Columbia is used to estimate the national poverty wage. Wages by Occupational Group: For comparison, we use the median hourly wage rates for 22 major occupations in the nation, all 50 states and Washington DC, and 381 metropolitan areas, as defined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics as of 2015. Values were inflated to from 2015 to 2016 30

dollars using the Consumer Price Index inflation multiplier from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. 31

29 Poverty data is available at https://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty-guidelines. The 2016 values are published in the Federal Register https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/01/25/2016-01450/annual-update-of-the-hhs-poverty-guidelines 30 BLS publishes state and metropolitan level occupational employment and wage estimates based on data collected from employers in all industry divisions for two digit Standard Occupational Coded occupations. These estimates are available at http://www.bls.gov/bls/blswage.htm. 31 BLS inflation calculator is available at http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm.

9


https://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty-guidelines

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/01/25/2016-01450/annual-update-of-the-hhs-poverty-guidelines

http://www.bls.gov/bls/blswage.htm
