20080602130705 - Laserfiche WebLink

New Search

Central Services Finance City of Eugene 1;,00 W. 10t" Ave, Suite 1.00 MEMORANDUM Eugene,~Oregon 97401 (541) 682-5021 ' (541) 682-5802 FAX Date: October 25, 2007 To: Mayor and City Council ' From: Dee Ann Raile, Finance Director ~e~~~ys Subject: Potential Funding Sources for Purchase of Bev~een Properties At the City Council meeting on October 22, 2007 Councilor Zelenka asked for a list of funding sources that could be used to purchase the Beverly and Green properties. Chapter V of the City of Eugene PROS Comprehensive Plan provided a broad list of funding options for plan improvements included in that document. Many of the options could be applicable to these purchases and they are presented in Attachment A. Thevalue of the Beverly and Green properties and how the properties will be; used has yet to be determined. Once those answers are .known, some of the potential funding sources contained in Attachment A will be more appropriate than others. As an example, if the purchase price is small, .hypothetically less than $1 million, the issuance fees and interest costs incurred to issue debt would make that option fairly expensive. In addition to the grant programs identified in the attachment, we continually seek other emerging grant opportunities such as: • Forest Legacy Program, administer by the US Department of Forestry • North American Wetlands Conservation Aet, administered through the US Forest Service • Oregon State Parks Local Government Grant Program • Endangered Species/Recovery Land Acquisition Grant, administered: by the US Department of Fish and Wildlife • Meyer Memorial Trust These and other grant opportunities have specific limitations and requirements that may affect their viability for pursuing acquisition of the Beverly and Green properties. They are listed here simply as examples of the types of programs available to local government. Lane Council of Governments is assisting with the ongoing effort to identify potential grant sources. . , If the Mayor and City Council wish to pursue. the use of existing resources to .pay for acquisition of the properties, generally speaking trade-offs will result. As an example, if General Fund reserves are used to purchase the properties, there will be less money available to maintain existing service levels, while we work toward eliminating the structural deficit in the General Fund. If System Development Charges are used; another park project that had been planned would be postponed or canceled. The General Fund portion of other reserves set-aside for purposes such as replacing police or fire vehicles, building a new City Hall or the remaining balance in the PERS. Litigation .Reserve could be redirected for acquisition of these properties. Reducing reserves in the Fleet Fund could mean police and fire vehicles would be operated beyond their useful lives resulting in costly repairs. Drawing down the City Hall Replacement Reserve ° would postpone further into the future, the construction of a new City Hall or increase the amount to be included in a General Obligation Bond measure referred to the voters. Using the General Fund portion of the PERS Litigation Reserve to acquire the properties means the money is not available for other uses including establishing initial funding for Other Post Employment Benefits created when retirees participate in the City-provided health care plan. The City Council specifically asked whether the proceeds from the Parks, Athletic Fields and Open Space Bonds