L. Carson Bise

Experience

fiscal-impact-analysis-bise Carson Bise has twenty years of fiscal, economic and planning experience and has conducted fiscal and infrastructure finance evaluations in twenty-seven states. Mr. Bise has developed and implemented more fiscal impact models than any consultant in the country. The applications which Mr. Bise developed have been used for evaluating multiple land use scenarios, specific development projects, annexations, urban service provision, tax-increment financing, and concurrency/adequate public facilities monitoring. Mr. Bise is also a leading national figure in the calculation of impact fees, having completed over 175 impact fees for the following categories: parks and recreation, open space, police, fire, schools, water, sewer, roads, municipal power, and general government facilities. In his six years as a planner at the local government level, he coordinated capital improvement plans, conducted market analyses and business development strategies, and developed comprehensive plans.

iq-report-bise Mr. Bise has also written and lectured extensively on fiscal impact analysis and infrastructure financing. His most recent publications are Fiscal Impact Analysis: Methodologies for Planners, published by the American Planning Association, a chapter on fiscal impact analysis in the book Planning and Urban Design Standards, also published by the American Planning Association, and the ICMA IQ Report, Fiscal Impact Analysis: How Today’s Decisions Affect Tomorrow’s Budgets. Mr. Bise was also the principal author of the fiscal impact analysis component for the Atlanta Regional Commission’s Smart Growth Toolkit and is featured in the recently released AICP CD-ROM Training Package entitled The Economics of Density. Mr. Bise is currently on the Board of Directors of the Growth and Infrastructure Finance Consortium and recently Chaired the American Planning Association’s Paying for Growth Task Force.

Selected Fiscal Impact Analysis Experience

Anchorage, Alaska – Fiscal Impact Analysis of General Plan Alternatives
Matsu Borough, Alaska – Fiscal Impact Analysis
Town of Sahuarita, Arizona – Fiscal Impact Model
Clovis, California – Fiscal Impact Analysis of Annexation Alternatives
Napa County, California – Fiscal Equity Study
Pasadena, California – Cost of Land Uses Fiscal and Economic Analysis
Imperial County, California – Fiscal and Economic Analysis of Annexation Areas
Mesa County, Colorado – Fiscal Impact Analysis of Growth Scenarios
City of Westminster, Colorado – Fiscal Impact Model
City of Steamboat Springs, Colorado – Cost of Land Uses Study
City of Kissimmee, Florida – Fiscal Impact Analysis of Annexation Areas
Hernando County, Florida – Fiscal Impact Analysis
Hillsborough County, Florida – Fiscal Impact Analysis of Current Land Use Trend
Miami-Dade County, Florida – Fiscal and Economic Analysis of Rural and Agricultural Areas
Sarasota County, Florida – Fiscal and Economic Analysis of Development Prototypes
Columbus Consolidated Government, Georgia – Fiscal Impact Analysis
City of Lawrence, Kansas – Fiscal Impact Analysis of Growth Scenarios; Cost of Land Uses Study
City of Lenexa, Kansas – Fiscal Impact Analysis of Growth Scenarios; Cost of Land Uses Study
City of Olathe, Kansas – Fiscal Impact Analysis of Blue River 12 Plan
Carroll County, Maryland – Fiscal Impact Analysis of Growth Scenarios; Revenue Strategies; Fiscal Model
Calvert County, Maryland – Fiscal Impact Analysis of Growth Scenarios
Charles County, Maryland – Cost of Land Use Study
Howard County, Maryland – Fiscal Impact Analysis of General Plan
Prince George’s County, Maryland – Fiscal Impact Analysis of Growth Scenarios; Revenue Strategies; Fiscal Model
Coon Rapids, Minnesota – Fiscal Impact Analysis of Growth Scenarios (Metro Council Study)
Cottage Grove, Minnesota – Fiscal Impact Analysis of Growth Scenarios (Metro Council Study)
Minneapolis, Minnesota – Fiscal Impact Analysis of Growth Scenarios (Metro Council Study)
St. Paul, Minnesota – Fiscal Impact Analysis of Growth Scenarios (Metro Council Study)
City of Lee’s Summit, Missouri – Long-Term Financial Model
Town of Salem, New Hampshire – Fiscal Impact Model
West Windsor, New Jersey– Fiscal Impact Analysis of T.O.D. Project and TIF Analysis
Edison, New Jersey – Fiscal Impact Analysis of T.O.D. Project and TIF Analysis
Town of Hempstead, New York– Cost of Land Use Analysis
Sterling Forest, New York – Fiscal Impact Model
City of Wilson, North Carolina – Cost of Land Use Analysis and Revenue Strategies
City of Wilmington, North Carolina – Fiscal Impact Analysis of Urban Services Provision
Guilford County, North Carolina – Fiscal Impact Analysis of Growth Scenarios
New Hanover County, North Carolina – Fiscal Impact Analysis of Urban Services Provision
City of Dublin, Ohio – Fiscal Impact Analysis of Land Use Scenarios
City of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma– Fiscal Impact Analysis of Growth Scenarios; Fiscal Impact Model
City of Greeneville, South Carolina – Cost of Land Use Study
Beaufort County, South Carolina – Fiscal Impact Analysis of North Beaufort Plan
Shelby County, Tennessee – Fiscal Equity Study
City of Germantown, Tennessee – Fiscal Impact Analysis of Annexation Alternatives
Knox County, Tennessee – Fiscal Equity Study
City of San Antonio, Texas – Cost of Land Use Study
City of Tyler, Texas – Cost of Land Use Study
City of Draper, Utah – Fiscal Impact Analysis of SunCrest Development Project
City of Chesapeake, Virginia – Fiscal Impact Model
Frederick County, Virginia – Development Impact Model
City of Sun Prairie, Wisconsin – Fiscal Impact Analysis of Three Growth Scenarios

Selected Impact Fee & Infrastructure Funding Strategy Experience

City of Daphne, Alabama – Impact Fee Study
City of Gulf Shores, Alabama – Impact Fee Study
City of Orange Beach, Alabama – Impact Fee Study
Town of Camp Verde, Arizona – Impact Fee Study
City of Eloy, Arizona – Impact Fee Study
City of Siloam Springs, Arkansas – Impact Fee Study
City of National City, California – Impact Fee Study
City of Avenal, California – Impact Fee Study
City of Banning, California – Impact Fee Study
City of Temecula, California – Impact Fee Study
City of Tulare, California – Impact Fee Study
City of Boulder, Colorado – Impact Fee/Excise Tax Study
Town of Castle Rock, Colorado – Impact Fee Study
City of Greeley, Colorado – Impact Fee Study
City of Steamboat Springs, Colorado – Impact Fee Study
Town of Vail, Colorado – Impact Fee Study
City of North Miami, Florida– Impact Fee Study
City of Punta Gorda, Florida– Impact Fee Study
DeSoto County, Florida– Impact Fee Study
Manatee County, Florida– Impact Fee Study
Pasco County, Florida – School Impact Fee Study
Polk County, Florida – Impact Fee Study
Seminole County, Florida – School Impact Fee and Infrastructure Financing Study
Anne Arundel County, Maryland – Revenue Strategies
Calvert County, Maryland – Impact Fee Study
Caroline County, Maryland – Schools Excise Tax Study
Carroll County, Maryland – Impact Fee Study
Charles County, Maryland – Impact Fee Study
Dorchester County, Maryland – Impact Fee Study
Hagerstown, Maryland – Impact Fee Study
City of Salisbury, Maryland – Impact Fee Study
Town of Easton, Maryland – Impact Fee Study
Town of Hampstead, Maryland – Impact Fee Study
Talbot County, Maryland – Impact Fee Study
Washington County, Maryland – Impact Fee Study
Wicomico County, Maryland – Impact Fee Study
Worcester County, Maryland – Impact Fee Study
Broadwater County, Montana – Impact Fee Feasibility Study
Flathead County, Montana – Impact Fee Feasibility Study and Impact Fee Study
City of Missoula/Missoula County, Montana – Impact Fee Study and Capital Facility Plan
City of Laurel, Montana – Impact Fee Feasibility Study
City of Great Falls, Montana – Impact Fee Feasibility Study
Florence-Carlton School District, Montana – Impact Fee Study
Gallatin Canyon/Big Sky, Montana – Capital Improvement and Funding Plan
City of North Las Vegas, Nevada – Impact Fee Study
Nye County/Town of Pahrump, Nevada – Impact Fee Study
City of Las Cruces, New Mexico – Water and Sewer Impact Fee Study
Cabarrus County, North Carolina – Voluntary Mitigation Payment Studies (Two School Districts)
City of Greenville, North Carolina – Impact Fee Study
Abbeville County, South Carolina – Infrastructure Funding Strategy
Beaufort County, South Carolina – Infrastructure Funding Strategy
Clinton City, Utah – Impact Fee Study
Draper City, Utah – Impact Fee Study
Logan City, Utah – Impact Fee Study
Goochland County, Virginia – Cash Proffer Study
Henrico County, Virginia – Impact Fee Study; Cash Proffer Study
Prince George County, Virginia – Cash Proffer Study
Prince William County, Virginia – Impact Fee Study
Spotsylvania County, Virginia – Impact Fee Study
Stafford County, Virginia – Impact Fee Study
Sussex County, Virginia – Cash Proffer Study

Education

M.B.A., Economics, Shenandoah University
B.S. Geography/Urban Planning, East Tennessee State University
B.S. Political Science/Urban Studies, East Tennessee State University

Speaking Engagements

Fiscal Impact Assessment, AICP Training Workshop, American Planning Association National Planning Conference
Dealing with the Cost of Growth: From Soup to Nuts, International City/County Management Association National Conference
Demand Numbers for Impact Analysis, National Impact Fee Roundtable
Calculating Infrastructure Needs with Fiscal Impact Models, Florida Chapter of the American Planning Association Conference
Economic Impact of Home Building, National Impact Fee Roundtable
Annexation and Economic Development, American Planning Association National Conference
Economics of Density, American Planning Association National Conference
The Cost/Benefit of Compact Development Patterns, American Planning Association National Conference
Fiscal Impact Modeling: A Tool for Local Government Decision Making, International City/County Management Association National Conference
Fiscal Assessments, American Planning Association National Conference
From Soup to Nuts: Paying for Growth, American Planning Association National Conference
Growing Pains, International City/County Management Association National Conference
Mitigating the Impacts of Development in Urban Areas, Florida Chapter of the American Planning Association
Impact Fee Basics, National Impact Fee Roundtable
Fiscal Impact Analysis and Impact Fees, National Impact Fee Roundtable
Are Subsidies Worth It?, American Planning Association National Conference

Publications