|
Population Growth Trends in Cities
<br />0.8
<br />0.7
<br />0.6
<br />0.5
<br />0.4
<br />0.3
<br />0.2
<br />0.1
<br />0
<br />~Projectetl based on current trends
<br />^ City
<br />Unicorporated
<br />New road infrastructure will be required to accomodate this growth and the existing
<br />existing road assets, which will see increasedusage, will require greater maintenance
<br />efforts.
<br />City Efforts to Finance Local Roads
<br />With the passage of Measures 5 and 50 in the 1990s, the primary revenue source for
<br />city services was severely limited. These measures reduced and then permanently
<br />froze city properly tax rates, limited increases in assesed values on which the
<br />taxes are based, and placed strict limitations on future tax levies. Cities reacted by
<br />focusing discretionary general fund revenue on core services such as public safety
<br />and fire protection. In fact, a significant number of cities now spend more than 100
<br />percent of their property taxes to support public safety.
<br />Formost cities, this meant the end of general fund expenditures on road maintenance,
<br />and often a shift of transportation-related expenses (e.g. street lighting, street
<br />sweeping, snow removal). from the general fund to the street fund. In order to
<br />protect their investment in street assets, in the absence of increased state gas tax
<br />revenues, cities have worked hard to identify new funding options for maintenance
<br />and preservation.
<br />With 242 incorporated cities in Oregon, the approaches cities take to raising local
<br />revenues is understandably varied. The "City Transportation Revenue Sources"
<br />table displays the approaches that five selected cities have taken. This table also
<br />.shows the variability between rates of dependence on the state highway fund versus
<br />locally raised revenues.
<br />•~ • ~• ~ ~ ~
<br />Local Fund
<br />Sources
<br />Ashland
<br />Eugene
<br />John. Day North
<br />plains
<br />General Fund
<br />_ $184,850 $262,375
<br />_ _u~__~. ._
<br />Transportation .u~w a ~..~,w
<br />$310
<br />924 ...~
<br />$2
<br />476
<br />362
<br />_.. ~~
<br />n.~~.,
<br />SDC , ,
<br />,
<br />Street User $808,995 ~ ~~ b._x_._
<br />$22
<br />000
<br />Fee ,
<br />Local Gas Tax $3,533,582
<br />
<br />Franchises w_..~_ ~_
<br />$250,000 ___~__~~_..m~__ .~__,_____._~ m. _~_..._~.__...
<br />Local ~~.-~__ ~_. _ ~_~ ~.._.~,_. _.. ~._..w~ ~.~~_~~_~.
<br />Improvement $127,640 $1,401,780
<br />District (LID)
<br />County
<br />Revenue $1,200,000 $519,500 $55,000
<br />State Funds-
<br />Highway Fund $1,006,000 $7,200,000 $89,500 $81,000
<br />Small City
<br />
<br />Grant $25,000
<br />Total Funds $2,788,409 $15,811,724 $634,000 $158,000.
<br />Percent Local
<br />
<br />Funds 64% 54% 82% 49%
<br />Local Gas Taxes
<br />For some communities, local gas taxes are both an economically viable and
<br />politically supportable proposition. This revenue raising tool allows cities to
<br />charge city residents and non-residents alike for the use of city streets. Population,
<br />geography, and economic condition can all make a significant difference in whether
<br />a local gas tax is even feasible. Currently,l2 cities impose a local gas tax. Six of
<br />the 12 assess a 3-cents-per-gallon tax, five charge 2 cents or less, and Eugene has a
<br />5-cents-per-gallon tax. For these communities the gas tax has provided significant
<br />fiscal relief when other revenue sources were not viable-most of these cities are
<br />small, and could not raise the revenues need for road maintenence off of their
<br />relatively low property values.
<br />Transportation Utility Fees
<br />Growing numbers of cities are looking to transportation utility fees to fund street
<br />maintenance-nineteen have implemented them to date. The fee is often set with
<br />a road-use methodology, and many cities use the International Transportation
<br />Engineers' (ITE) trip generation methodology to calculate the fee. Some small
<br />cities, however, have a small flat fee that is applied to all residents.
<br />Property Tax Levies
<br />Some cities have tried to replenish the street fundusing property tax levies designated
<br />for street maintenance. Since 1997, l 1 cities have placedtransportation-related
<br />property tax levies on the ballot, but. only 2 have passed.
<br />City Streets: Investing in a Neglected Asset -Page 8
<br />Transportation SDCs
<br />For rapidly growing areas of cities, the challenge is to fund the construction of new
<br />roads and accommodate growth on the existing road infrastructure. Cities have
<br />adopted systems development charges (SDCs) to fund a variety of growth impacts
<br />on city infrastructure. Transportation SDCs have become an essential tool for cities
<br />in accommodating growth.
<br />City Streets: Investing in a Neglected Asset- Page 9
<br />1990 2000 2005 2020*
<br />
|