[Grovenet] funding fire trucks

[David Morelli]

Thank you.  I expect that it does save us money, lots of money.

Possibly this is less common than it should be because the various  
tax reform ideas that have been voted into law have required public  
agencies to "spend every dime" within the fiscal period or lose the  
money.  "Rainy Day Funds" were misused by some and they are highly  
restricted today.  Oregon cannot establish a serious rainy day fund  
without violating the "Kicker Refund" rules.   And in property taxes  
operating levies and bond levies are treated differently for the tax  
limitation rules.  So, while it would make perfect sense to set aside  
money for capital improvements to save taxpayers money, instead the  
district is required to go with a bond measure.  And then there are  
some spending rules that regulate how long they can accumulate the  
funds before they spend them, otherwise the bond measure could pass  
this year, accumulate funds for two years and save four or five years  
of "pay back" taxes.

Lots of rules.  Lots of problems.  And getting rid of the people who  
actually know how to run the program may not be a rational solution.

David

On Apr 30, 2007, at 2:11 PM, Kevin Van Dyke wrote:

> David Morelli wrote:
>
>   The concept of collecting money in advance for future purchases is
> not that unusual.  There is even an accounting term for it, "sinking
> fund".  Agencies use it to purchase things like fire trucks (snip)
>
> Would taxpayers accept funding future purchases from money collected
> today to avoid the interest charges?  They might. (snip)
>
>    
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> -----------------------------------------
>
>   More than might, they have and I hope they continue to do so.  I  
> am budget officer for Forest Grove Rural Fire Protection District.   
> We have an apparatus reserve fund where we do in fact collect money  
> today for purchases planned in the future.  Fire apparatus cost  
> $500,000-$750,000 each, without this fund we'd be asking voters for  
> levy approval to purchase these pieces of equipment.  The board of  
> directors feels that saving ahead for planned puchases makes more  
> sense.
>
>   Kevin Van Dyke