New Search
My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
New Search
2004 Parks and Open Space Comprehensive Plan
COE
>
PW
>
Admin
>
Execs
>
Executive non-confidential
>
Historical
>
2004 Parks and Open Space Comprehensive Plan
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/4/2009 12:43:39 PM
Creation date
6/1/2009 12:25:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PW_Exec
PW_Division_Exec
POS
PWA_Project_Area
Miscellaneous
PW_Subject
POS
Document_Date
11/30/2004
External_View
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
152
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
CHAPTER V <br />levies, passage requires a double majority, unless during a <br />general election in even-numbered years. This type of property <br />tax does not affect the overall tax limitation as described <br />previously in Special Serial Levy. One disadvantage of the <br />general obligation bond is the interest costs. <br />In 1998, voters approved a $25:3 million park and open space <br />bond to fund major park improvements and dcquisitions. <br />- Revenue Bonds: These bonds are sold and paid from the <br />" revenue produced from the operation of a facility. <br />Certificates of Participation: This is alease-purchase approach <br />in which the City sells Certificates of Participation (COPS) to a <br />lending institution. The City then pays the loan off from revenue <br />produced by the facility or from its general operating budget. <br />The lending. institution holds title to the property until the COPS <br />are repaid. This procedure does not require a public vote. <br />Public/Government Grant Programs: <br />^ Community Development Block Grants (CDBG): These <br />grants from the Federal Department of Housing and <br />Urban Development are available for a wide variety of <br />projects. CDBG funds have limitations and are generally <br />required to benefit low and moderate income residents. <br />Grants can cover up to 100% of project costs. <br />• Land and Wafter Conservation Fund: This is a federal <br />grant program that receives its money from offshore oil <br />leases. The money is distributed through the National <br />Park Service and is administered locally by the Oregon <br />Parks and Recreation Department. In the past, this was <br />one of the major sources of grant money for local <br />agencies. In the 1990s, funding at the federal level was <br />severely cut, but in recent times more money has <br />become available. For the year 2003, the amount <br />available for local agency projects was $825,722. The <br />funds can be used for acquisition and development of <br />outdoor facilities and require a 50% match. <br />Intermodal Surface Transportation Efificiency Act (ISTEA): <br />Over the years, Oregon has received considerable <br />revenue for trail-related projects. Originally called The <br />Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), <br />it funded a wide variety of transportation-related <br />projects. In 1998, this program was modified and is now <br />referred to as TEA-21. The legislation came up for <br />reauthorization in 2003, but the process was extended <br />because the U.S. House and Senate could not agree on <br />City of Eugene PROS Comprehensive Plan 8$ <br />Draft <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.