Item 3: Follow-up on 2009 Legislative Policies

Home Browse Search

City of Eugene Legislative Policies for 2009 Oregon Legislative Session Accordingly, proposals to restructure or change the State's tax system must allow local governments to finance the level of services demanded by their citizens. Cities must maintain local flexibility to initiate revenue sources and to retain local apportionment of revenue from State gas, liquor, beer and wine taxes, and other revenues. B. PROPERTY TAXES B1. Property Taxes for Local Government Services ?Eugene supports easing the constitutional double-majority requirement for general obligation bonds for capital construction. ?Eugene opposes the levying of property taxes by the State to fund State-level services. Property taxes are critically important to local governments and their ability to provide services to citizens. Property taxes are expected to provide $76 million, or 50%, of the resources to the Eugene’s General Fund in fiscal year 2008-09. The State may from time to time use the general obligation pledge, which may include a pledge to levy property taxes, to provide security for bond issues and obtain lower interest rates. The payments on the bond issues should not, however, be made from property taxes. B2. Exemptions ?Eugene supports revisiting all property tax exemptions granted in the past in light of the revenue impact on local government. ?Eugene opposes the granting of new exemptions, deferrals or forgiveness of property taxes by the Legislature without reimbursement of revenue loss to cities. ?Eugene opposes the granting of any exemption from taxation for the intangible personal property of centrally assessed companies. If such an exemption is granted, the State should reimburse cities for lost revenue. Before the passage of Ballot Measure 50 and the resulting introduction of a rate-based tax system, there was little competition between the public-policy goals associated with exemptions and the public-service activities carried out under a local government’s budget. Even if a property was exempted from taxation, the City’s levy remained intact, and the revenue was replaced by shifting the obligation to the remaining taxable properties. This is no longer the case. Now, property tax exemptions reduce revenue to cities. If the amount of assessed value is reduced because a property is exempted, then the amount of tax revenue collected is reduced. Without another form of revenue to replace the property tax loss, the result is fewer city services or reduced service levels. 6