My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item B - Transportation Funding
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2004
>
CCAgenda-10/27/04WS
>
Item B - Transportation Funding
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 1:11:40 PM
Creation date
10/20/2004 3:10:45 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
10/27/2004
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Incidence (who The tax is paid by all property owners within City limits. Property owners include <br />pays?) business and residences. Businesses may choose to pass the tax on to their customers. <br />Fairness/Equity The property tax is a proportional tax on the value of real and personal property for both <br />Issues businesses and residences. It does not take into account the ability of the taxpayer to pay <br /> the tax. There are numerous exemptions from the property tax designed to promote a <br /> variety of policy goals, including some designed to lessen the impact on low-income <br /> owners and tenants. Bond financing is a way to more closely match the users of a capital <br /> project with those that must pay for the project. <br />Assessment of This funding source would generate a lump-sum, which would be spent over a period of <br />Financial several years on various projects. <br />Stability and <br />Political The property tax is understandable to the voters (as opposed to a new form of user fee or <br />Feasibility taxes), making it politically feasible from that standpoint. G.O. bond proposals have had <br /> mixed success in the Eugene area in recent years. There have been six G.O. bond <br /> proposals on the ballot from Eugene 1990, and two of those have passed (Public Safety <br /> and Parks & Open Spaces). Council members have expressed dissatisfaction with heavy <br /> reliance on property taxes in various forums in recent years. <br />Potential This tax would increase the cost of owning a home or business, and potentially increase <br />Economic the cost of leasing or renting a home or business, if the property owner passes on the tax <br />Impacts increase. <br />Consistency with Council has two financial policies around capital funding and debt issuance, both of <br />Council Goals which are consistent with the use of G.O. bonds for funding transportation projects. <br />and Policies Policy C.4 states that the City will secure a dedicated revenue source to fund general <br /> capital projects to the extent possible. Policy D.3 states that the use of G.O. bonds will <br /> be limited to major capital construction or improvements in support of general municipal <br /> services. <br /> Council goals include a desire to foster affordable housing. An additional property tax <br /> levy would be contrary to that goal, as it would raise the cost of housing. <br />Other Several cities had G.O. bond proposals on the November ballot and none of them were <br />Jurisdiction successful. The City of Salem had the largest proposal, at $12 million for restoration and <br />Experiences resurfacing projects. They have been successful in the past in securing voter approval for <br /> $62 million of G.O. bonds for a variety of transportation projects. <br />Subcommittee <br />Conclusions and <br />Recommendation <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.