HomeMy WebLinkAboutTax Levy - Charter - Parks Funding - Harvey Robers 2nd OP 2-26-13
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Mr. David Lohman, City Attorney, City of Ashland, Oregon
FROM: Harvey W. Rogers, Hawkins Delafield & Wood LLP
DATE: February 26, 2013
RE: Effect of Article XIX of the Ashland City Charter on Use of City Property
Tax Revenues
QUESTION: Does Article XIX, Section 3 of the Charter of the City of Ashland currently
require the City of Ashland to dedicate revenues from levies under the Citys operating tax rate
limit to park purposes in the amounts requested by the Park Commission?
SHORT ANSWER: The enactment of Measure 50 means that Article XIX, Section 3 of the
Charter no longer requires the City to dedicate revenues from levies under the Citys operating
tax rate limit to park purposes in the amounts requested by the Park Commission.
BACKGROUND:
Prior Opinions on Related Issues
On February 12, 1998, the author of this memorandum wrote a letter to Washington and Jackson
Counties and the Cities of Ashland and Lake Oswego describing the effect of Measure 50
(current Article XI, Section 11 of the Oregon Constitution) on levies imposed by those local
governments. The February 12, 1998, letter addressed levies that were approved by voters
before Measure 50; were dedicated to limited purposes by the voters (such as serial levies that
voters approved for street improvements); and were combined and reduced after enactment of
Measure 50 to form operating tax rate limits. The main conclusion of that letter was that the
dedications imposed by voters on those levies did not affect the use of tax revenues from levies
under operating tax rate limits.
Although the February 12, 1998 letter was written relatively soon after Measure 50 was enacted,
and fourteen years have passed since the February 12, 1998 was written, we believe the main
conclusion of that letter remains correct.
The February 12, 1998 letter also noted that the levy imposed by the City of Ashland under
Article XIX of the Ashland City Charter was unique among the levies considered by that letter,
because Article XIX contained language that could be interpreted not only to authorize an
237650.6 036892 FILE
additional levy for park purposes, but to require the City to provide a certain amount of property
tax revenues to the Park Commission for park purposes. The other levies discussed in the
February 12, 1998, were simply authorizations.
The February 12, 1998 letter stated that Article XIX of the City Charter could be interpreted two
different ways: one interpretation would require a specific portion of the Citys general tax
revenues to be used for park purposes, and the other would not.
This memorandum concludes that Article XIX does not require a specific portion of the Citys
general tax revenues to be used for park purposes for the reasons stated below.
History of Article XIX of the City Charter
Article XIX of the City Charter generally dedicates certain lands for park purposes, creates the
Park Commission, provides for the election of park commissioners, grants the Park Commission
control over City park lands and funding for City parks, and authorizes and requires the City to
impose an additional levy and devote tax revenues to park purposes in certain circumstances.
The full text of Article XIX as it currently exists is provided in the attached Exhibit A.
Article XIX of the City Charter was created by a vote held in the City in 1908 and has been
amended several times since then.
The rate of the levy authorized by Article XIX was increased several times; it reached four and
one-half mils when the current form of Article XIX, Section 3 was approved by City voters on
April 23, 1951.
Older Versions of Article XI, Section 11 of the Oregon Constitution
In 1951, Article XI, Section 11 allowed local governments to make continuing general levies, but
prohibited those governments from increasing their continuing, general levies by a dollar amount
of more than six percent, unless the voters approved the additional taxes. The full text of Article
XI, Section 11 as it existed in 1951 is presented in the attached Exhibit B.
The continuing levies that could increase by six percent each year were often called tax base
1
levies
.
In 1951 Article XI, Section 11 allowed voters to authorize levies in addition to tax base levies.
Those additional levies were not included in the amount of the tax base levy that could increase
by six percent, and the additional levies were therefore described as being outside the limitation
on taxation in Article XI, Section 11.
Measure 50 Generally Operating Tax Rate Limits
In 1996 the voters of the State of Oregon approved a citizen initiative called the Cut and Cap
or Measure 47, which replaced Article XI, Section 11 with new provisions. However, in 1997
the Oregon voters approved Measure 50 which replaced then existing Article XI, Section 11
1
The term tax base levy actually began to be used after Article XI, Section 11 was amended in 1952. The 1952 amendments
did not change the fundamental structure of Article XI, Section 11.
2
237650.6 036892 FILE
with the provisions that exist in Article XI, Section 11 today. This memorandum will refer to
Article XI, Section 11 as it exists today as Measure 50.
Measure 50 was a dramatic change to Oregon property tax law. Paragraph 3 of Measure 50
reduced most of the taxes that local governments would have been able to impose in 1997-98,
and converted those reduced taxes into a tax rate, calculated based on Measure 50s new,
2
reduced assessed values. This rate became each local governments new limit on continuing
property taxes for operating purposes; that limit is called the operating tax rate limit. In effect,
Measure 50 replaced tax base levies with levies under operating tax rate limits.
The taxes that local governments could impose under their operating tax rate limits were
significantly lower than the combination of tax base levies and other operating levies that local
governments could impose for operating purposes in fiscal year 1996-97, reducing the amount of
property tax revenue that was available to fund public services.
Measure 50 prohibits local governments from increasing their operating tax rate limits, and it
also limits the types of property taxes that local governments can impose. Measure 50 allows
local governments to impose new, limited term local option levies, new general obligation
bond levies, and (in limited circumstances that are not relevant here) some grandfathered
levies. However, Measure 50 does not allow local governments to impose other kinds of levies,
including the kind of continuing, dedicated levy that was authorized by Article XIX of the City
Charter.
Allocation of Losses Related to Operating Tax Rate Limits
Paragraph 3(a)(D) of Measure 50 states:
It shall be the policy of this state and the local taxing districts of this state to prioritize
public safety and public education in responding to the reductions caused by this
paragraph while minimizing the loss of decision-making control of local taxing districts.
We find no other guidance in Oregon law relating to the allocation of losses that resulted from
the reduction and combination of existing levies into operating tax rate limits.
Article XIX, Section 3 of the City Charter
Article XIX, Section 3 currently states:
Section 3. Funding.
The said Park Commission shall have control and management of
all the lands here dedicated for park purposes and of all other lands that may hereafter be
acquired by the City for such purposes. They shall have control and management of all
park funds, whether the same is obtained by taxation, donation or otherwise, and shall
expend the same judiciously for beautifying and improving the City's parks.
It shall be the duty of said Commission and they shall, at the beginning of each month,
file with the City Recorder for the information of the City Council and the public, a
2
Before Measure 50 property was assessed at true cash value, which was intended to be the same as market value.
3
237650.6 036892 FILE
report of their doings for the preceding month. Such report shall specify all funds on hand
and the source from whence obtained. It shall carry a clear statement of all monies
expended and for what purpose. All purchases made and all labor performed, together
with the cost thereof, shall be embodied in said report. At the time for making the tax levy
for general City purposes in each year, the said Commission shall cause a careful
estimate to be made of the money required for park purposes for the ensuing year and file
the same with the City Recorder, whereupon there shall be included in said general levy
not to exceed four and one half (4-1/2) mills on the dollar to meet such requirements,
which, when collected, shall be deposited with the City Recorder subject to the order of
said Commission. The levy herein authorized shall be outside the limitation on taxation
3
set forth in Article XI, Section II of the Constitution of Oregon. \[italics added for
emphasis\]
The City asks us whether the italicized sentences require the City to devote a particular portion
of the revenues the City receives from levies under its operating tax rate limit to park purposes, if
the Park Commission complies with Article XIX, Section 3 and files an estimate of the money
required for park purposes with the City Recorder.
The Contribution of the Article XIX levy to the Citys Operating Tax Rate Limit.
In fiscal year 1996-97, the last year before the Measure 50 tax reductions, the Article XIX levy
was the largest single levy imposed by the City. Information provided by the City indicates the
following levies were imposed by the City for operating purposes in fiscal year 1996-97:
Levy Levy Rate% of Total
General Fund Continuing Levy 1.005227.19%
Recreation Serial Levy 0.04981.35%
Youth Activities Levy 0.850923.02%
Cemetery Levy 0.15254.13%
Band Continuing Levy 0.03620.98%
Article XIX Parks Levy 1.601843.33%
Total 3.6964100.00%
ANALYSIS
The Meaning of Article XIX, Section 3 Before Measure 50
Article XIX, Section 3 says:
At the time for making the tax levy for general City purposes in each year, the said
Commission shall cause a careful estimate to be made of the money required for park
purposes for the ensuing year and file the same with the City Recorder, whereupon there
3
We believe the reference to Section II of Article XI of the Oregon Constitution is a typographical error. We can not find that
there has ever been an Article XI, Section II. We therefore assume that the charter intended to refer to Article XI, Section 11 of
the Oregon Constitution, which does have tax limitations.
4
237650.6 036892 FILE
shall be included in said general levy not to exceed four and one half (4-1/2) mills on the
dollar to meet such requirements The levy herein authorized shall be outside the
limitation on taxation set forth in Article XI, Section II of the Constitution of Oregon.
Before enactment of Measure 50, Oregon law allowed the City to impose a variety of separately
authorized levies, including the Citys tax base levy and the Article XIX park levy. Imposing
4
one of the authorized levies did not conflict with imposing any of the other authorized levies.
The Effect of Measure 50 on Article XIX, Section 3 of the City Charter
In fiscal year 1997-98 the Citys tax base levy, its levy for park purposes under Article XIX of
the City charter, and the other levies for operating purposes that are shown in the preceding table
were all reduced. The tax rate produced by those combined, reduced levies (calculated using
Measure 50s new assessed values) became the Citys operating tax rate limit beginning in fiscal
year 1998-99.
If the City could now impose the Article XIX park levy in addition to the levy under the Citys
operating tax rate limit, we believe Article XIX of the City Charter would clearly obligate the
City to continue to impose the Article XIX park levy in an amount sufficient to raise the amount
identified by the Parks Commission, up to a rate of four and one-half mils, and to transfer to the
Park Commission all revenues produced by that levy.
However, Measure 50 does not allow the parks levy to be imposed in addition to the levy under
the Citys operating tax rate limit. We must therefore attempt to answer a question that did not
need to be asked before Measure 50 was enacted: Does Article XIX require the City to provide
the Park Commission with the amount of property tax revenue that the Park Commission
certifies it needs:
1. From any property tax levy authority that is available to the City; or,
2. Only from the revenue that the City obtains from the additional levy described in
Article XIX.
The Meaning of Article XIX
Article XIX is awkwardly worded. It does not clearly say that the City must provide the Park
Commission with the money it requests from any source, and it does not clearly say that the City
is only obligated to provide the Park Commission with money that the City receives from the
Article XIX levy. Instead, Article XIX says there shall be included in said general levy not
to exceed four and one half (4-1/2) mills on the dollar\[for park purposes\]. The levy herein
5
authorized shall be outside the limitation on taxation set forth in Article XI, Section II
of the
Constitution of Oregon.
4
Except for possible compression after 1990 under Measure 50 (Article XI, Section 11b).
5
We believe the reference to Section II of Article XI of the Oregon Constitution is a typographical error. We can not find that
there has ever been an Article XI, Section II. We therefore assume that the charter intended to refer to Article XI, Section 11 of
the Oregon Constitution, which does have tax limitations.
5
237650.6 036892 FILE
Although the meaning of Article XIX is not clear, we think it is most reasonable to conclude that
that Article XIX was intended to require that City to give the Park Commission money only if
the City is able to collect that money from the Article XIX levy. We believe the following facts
support this conclusion:
1. Article XIX limits the amount the Park Commission can receive to the amount that
can be raised by the Article XIX levy (four and one-half mils). If Article XIX was
written to require that the City use tax revenue from other sources, such as the tax base
levy, for park purposes, this limit may not have been necessary.
2. In 1951 the following sentence was added to Article XIX: The levy herein
6
authorized shall be outside the limitation on taxation set forth in Article XI, Section II of
the Constitution of Oregon. In 1951 the only levy that was inside the limitation in
Article XI, Section 11 was the Citys continuing general levy, or tax base levy.
Specifically stating that the Article XIX levy was outside Article XI, Section 11, makes
is clear that the Article XIX levy was a separate, dedicated levy that was not part of the
Citys general, continuing levy. Since the Article XIX was amended in 1951 to make it
clear that the Article XIX levy was not part of the Citys general, continuing levy, the
addition of this sentence reinforces the conclusion that Article XIX was not intended to
require the City to give revenues from the Citys general, continuing levy to the Park
Commission.
7
3. The historical proceedings that we reviewed relating to amendments to Article XIX
8
characterize the levy described in Article XIX as the tax levy for park purposes and an
9
authorized mil levy for park purposes We did not find anything in the historical
proceedings provided to us by the City that suggests the City has a duty to use any tax
revenues for park purposes except the revenues produced by the dedicated levy
authorized by Article XIX. The historical proceedings we reviewed are therefore
consistent with the conclusion that Article XIX only intended to require the City to
provide the Park Commission with the revenues that the City receives from imposing the
Article XIX levy.
Paragraph 3(a)(D) of Measure 50
Our analysis indicates:
(a) The clause in paragraph 3(a)(D) that says it shall be the policy of the state and local
taxing districts to prioritize public safety and public education in responding to the
reductions caused by this paragraph means that losses related to the creation of
6
We believe the reference to Section II of Article XI of the Oregon Constitution is a typographical error. We can not find that
there has ever been an Article XI, Section II. We therefore assume that the charter intended to refer to Article XI, Section 11 of
the Oregon Constitution, which does have tax limitations.
7
The historical proceedings we reviewed were provided by the City. The City indicated that a complete record of the historical
proceedings relating to Article XIX is not available. The City has also indicated that contemporaneous news reports describing
the adoption of Article XIX and its amendments are not available.
8
From title to City resolution calling an election for November 8, 1938, to increase the park levy from two mils to two and one-
half mils.
9
From the title to the resolution calling an election for April 23, 1951 to amend Article XIX to increase the levy for park
purposes from three and one-half mils to four and one-half mils.
6
237650.6 036892 FILE
operating tax rate limits should not merely be allocated proportionately based on the
levies from which the operating tax rate limits were formed; instead, priority should be
given to public safety and public education. This memorandum refers to the clause that is
discussed in this paragraph as the first clause of paragraph 3(a)(D).
(b) The clause in paragraph 3(a)(D) that says it shall be the policy of the state and local
taxing districts to minimize the loss of decision-making control of local taxing
districts means that the elected officials who make decisions for the entire local taxing
districts should have final responsibility for determining how revenues available under
operating tax rate limits are allocated. This memorandum refers to the clause that is
discussed in this paragraph as the second clause of paragraph 3(a)(D).
When paragraph (3)(a)(D) of Measure 50 is applied to the City of Ashlands levies, and the
Article XIX levies in particular, we conclude:
(i) The Article XIX levy is not likely to be treated as a public safety levy or a public
education levy.
(ii) If the Article XIX levy is not a public safety levy or a public education levy, then:
(a) The Article XIX levy receives no priority under the first clause of paragraph
(3)(a)(D) of Measure 50, and the first clause of first clause of paragraph 3(a)(D)
therefore indicates that the City should allocate losses to the Article XIX levy to
the extent that doing so reduces losses to public safety and public education; and,
(b) The City Council should be able to determine the amount of funding that the
Park Commission receives from revenues of levies under the Citys operating tax
rate limits under the second clause of paragraph (3)(a)(D).
(iii) If the Article XIX levy is treated as having public safety or public education
components, then:
(a) the first clause of paragraph (3)(a)(D) of Measure 50 provides no guidance
about how to allocate tax revenues among competing public safety and public
education needs; and,
(b) in the absence of that guidance, the second clause of paragraph (3)(a)(D)
allows the City Council to determine the amount of funding that the Park
Commission receives from revenues of levies under the Citys operating tax rate
limits.
Paragraph (3)(a)(D) of Measure 50 is strongly worded; it states what the policy of the state and
local taxing districts shall be. Because of this strong statement, we believe a court likely
would consider paragraph (3)(a)(D) of Measure 50 to be the most important legal guidance
affecting the use of revenues collected under operating tax rate limits.
The members of the Park Commission are elected, and we considered whether the members of
the Park Commission should be treated as the decision makers for the City under the second
7
237650.6 036892 FILE
clause of paragraph (3)(a)(D). The responsibilities of the members of the Park Commission are
limited to determining the needs of the city park system. We concluded that the members of the
Park Commission would not be treated as decision makers for the City as a whole under the
second clause of paragraph (3)(a)(D), because the Park Commission is not a taxing district and
the responsibilities of the members of the Park Commission are limited to determining the needs
of the City park system, rather than the City as a whole.
We also note that, if we had concluded that the Park Commission was entitled to a particular
amount of the revenues from levies under the Citys operating tax rate limit, it would be very
difficult to determine how to calculate that amount, because there would be so many possible
choices.
There are many possible choices because the different City levies that were combined and
reduced to create the Citys operating tax rate limit were calculated on different bases. For
example, the Article XIX levy was a rate levy that was imposed against true cash value, but the
Citys tax base levy was a dollar levy that the City could increase by six percent each year
without regard to changes in property values. Artificial assessed values were imposed by
Measure 50, and those assessed values normally only increase by a maximum of three percent.
Someone would have to make an assumption about how the creation of artificial assessed values
would have affected the Article XIX levy, and different people could make different
assumptions. The Citys tax base levy, on the other hand, was not affected by changes in
property values, and one would have to make an assumption about whether that would have
continued. Finally, if a priority is given to levies used for, or available to pay for, public safety
services, as we believe paragraph (3)(a)(D) of Measure 50 requires, the number of possible
assumptions increases dramatically, because Measure 50 does not provide additional guidance on
how the priority would be determined. We believe a court is likely to interpret paragraph
(3)(a)(D) of Measure 50 to give the City Council discretion to determine how much of the Citys
tax revenues are allocated to the Park Commission because there is no reasonably simple,
objective and uncontroversial method for determining how to allocate a portion of the revenues
from the Citys operating tax rate limit to the Article XIX levy.
CONCLUSION AND SUPPORTING REASONS
We conclude that enactment of Measure 50 means that Article XIX, Section 3 of the Charter no
longer requires the City to dedicate revenues from levies under the Citys operating tax rate limit
to park purposes in the amounts requested by the Park Commission.
We reach this conclusion for the following reasons:
Reason #1. The voters dedication of the Article XIX levy to park purposes does not, by itself,
obligate the City to use a portion of the revenues from the Citys operating tax rate limit for park
purposes.
This was the main conclusion of the February 12, 1998 letter. We believe this conclusion
remains accurate today.
Conclusion #2. The text and history of Article XIX are most consistent with the conclusion that
Article XIX was intended only to require the City to give the Park Commission the revenues from
8
237650.6 036892 FILE
the levy that Article XIX authorized: an additional, dedicated levy for parks that is imposed
outside the limitations of Article XI, Section 11. Since Measure 50 prevents that levy from being
imposed, it is most reasonable to conclude that Article XIX no longer requires the City to
provide tax revenues to the Park Commission in the amounts requested by the Park Commission.
See the discussion above under ANALYSIS - The Effect of Measure 50 on Article XIX, Section
3 of the City Charter.
Reason #3. Measure 50 explicitly indicates that losses resulting from the creation of operating
tax rate limits should not be allocated proportionately, and that the City Council should be
allowed the discretion to determine the services that bear those losses. Article XIX should
therefore not be interpreted to require that the City transfer any particular amount to the Park
Commission from the revenues the City receives under its operating tax rate limit.
See the discussion above under ANALYSIS - Paragraph 3(a)(D) of Measure 50.
Other Conclusions are Possible
The Oregon property tax system worked very differently when Article XIX was first approved
by the Ashland City voters in 1908, that tax system continued to evolve after 1951 when the
Ashland City voters last amended Article XIX.
Measure 50 made a very substantial change to Oregon property tax law. The City has asked us
to analyze how a relatively new law (Measure 50) affects a rather old law (Article XIX) when
neither law clearly says how the two laws are supposed to work together. There is not a clear
and obvious answer to this question; if there were, the City would not be asking us to do this
analysis.
We understand that the answer to this question has very significant consequences for both the
City and the Park Commission. We have therefore made our best, objective judgment about how
an Oregon court would interpret these two potentially conflicting laws without considering the
desires of either the City or the Park Commission. We note that there are no controlling
precedents that directly address these issues, and that other lawyers could reach different
conclusions.
For example, our research led us to conclude that the relative sizes of the Citys tax base levy
and the Article XIX levy were not relevant to this analysis.
This conclusion deprives the Park Commission of what might otherwise be its most powerful
argument: that the largest contributor to the Citys operating tax rate limit was the Article XIX
levy, and not the Citys tax base levy. We can easily understand how this fact may make our
conclusions seem unfair to the Park Commission.
OTHER OPTIONS
The history of Article XIX provided to us by the City indicates that the voters of the City of
Ashland care greatly about their City parks, want them to be adequately funded, and want the
Park Commission to control the funding that is provided for parks. We assume these facts will
9
237650.6 036892 FILE
influence the City Councils determination of how much to provide the Park Commission in
future years.
Although Oregon law no longer permits the City to impose the Article XIX parks levy, if the
City or the Park Commission wanted to authorize an additional levy for park purposes, they
would have two principle options under Measure 50:
1. The City could spin off a park and recreation district, which would be governed by separate
elected officials and for which the voters could approve a separate operating tax rate limit.
2. The City could approve a local option levy for park purposes. If any portion of the local
option levy is used for operations, the term of the local option levy would be limited to five
years.
Local option levies are limited in term, currently are subject to special compression under
Measure 5 (Article XI, Section 11b), and are compressed before other levies. A local option
levy therefore provides a less reliable source of tax revenues than a new district could obtain
from a new operating tax rate limit.
FORMAL MATTERS
You requested that we draft this memorandum for the City and the Park Commission. We
understand that the answer to the question addressed in this memorandum is vitally important to
both the City generally and to the Park Commission, and that an answer that benefits one
disadvantages the other. We also understand that both the City and the Park Commission hope
to reach an amicable resolution of their competing needs for tax revenues with the help of this
memorandum. As we indicated when we were given this assignment, we have tried to approach
this question without bias, and to provide the most objective answer we could based on our
analysis of Oregon law and Article XIX.
We have reviewed only the information that the City has provided to us, current statutes and
some historical information that we obtained from the Oregon State Archives Division relating to
provisions of Article XI, Section 11 that were in effect before Measure 50 was adopted.
This memorandum describes legal conclusions that we believe a competent Oregon court would
reach if it were properly briefed on the legal issues. This memorandum is not a guarantee or
warranty that a court will agree with us.
This memorandum describes legal conclusions based on the laws in effect on the date this
memorandum was written. Subsequent changes in law, including court decisions, could change
the conclusions we reached in this memorandum.
- end of memorandum -
10
237650.6 036892 FILE
Exhibit A
Full Text of Article XIX
ARTICLE XIX - Park Commission
Section 1.
Dedication. All those lands specified by the Charter Amendment of December 15,
1908 and May 13, 1912, are hereby reserved and forever dedicated to the people of the City for
park purposes and shall never be sold, leased, encumbered or used for any purpose inconsistent
therewith; provided, however, that such public buildings as may enhance the beauty of said park,
or that shall not detract therefrom, may be constructed if so directed by a majority vote of the
electors of said City; and provided further, that nothing contained in this act shall be construed so
as to impair or interfere with proper construction or operation of the City's light, power or water
system.
Section 1-C.
That the Ashland Park Commission, with the consent of the Common Council,
shall have the authority to lease to the Oregon Shakespearean Festival Association, a non-profit
corporation of the State of Oregon, any portion of Lithia Park described as follows, to-wit: That
certain property commencing at the northeast corner of the Chamber of Commerce building;
thence, southerly along the base of the hill to southern side of pond in lower park; thence, east to
ditch carrying water to waterfall; thence, southerly along ditch 150 feet; thence, east 110 feet to
west side of Hargadine Street; thence, northerly on west line of Hargadine Street to northeast
corner of park property; thence, following the meandering north line of park property to place of
beginning, containing approximately two acres for the purpose of remodeling and expanding the
present Festival theatre and the construction of additional buildings which are hereby designated
as public buildings for use by the Oregon Shakespearean Festival Association for any of the
purposes authorized by the corporate charter of said association, said use to be on such terms and
conditions as the Ashland Park Commission, with the consent of the Common Council, deems in
the best interests of the City; provided, however, that any lease shall not exceed a period of
ninety-nine (99) years.
Section 2. Park Commission.
The certain board created by a vote of the qualified electors of the
City of Ashland, Oregon, at a special election held on the 15th day of December, 1908, which
became effective by the proclamation of the Mayor published on the 17th day of December,
1908, and known and designated as the "Ashland Park Commission", be and the same, as
constituted and created by said Charter amendment, and as now existing, is hereby perpetuated
and continued as five (5) members with all the powers conferred and duties imposed by said
Charter amendment and ordinances of the City of Ashland.
Provided, that at the general biennial election to be held on the first Tuesday after the first
Monday in November, 1920, two commissioners shall be elected to serve for the term of four (4)
years from the first day of January, 1921, and that at the general biennial election to be held in
November, 1922, three commissioners shall be elected to serve for the term of four (4) years
from the first day of January, 1923, and that the term of office for each succeeding commissioner
shall be four (4) years unless elected to fill a vacancy, in which event he/she shall be elected to
serve until the first day of January following the next succeeding biennial election after any such
Page 1 - Exhibit A: Full Text of Article XIX
237650.6 036892 FILE
vacancy. Provided, further, that each of the commissioners now constituting the present Ashland
Park Commission shall hold office for the term for which he/she was elected, and until his/her
successor is elected and qualified.
Section 3. Funding.
The said Park Commission shall have control and management of all the
lands here dedicated for park purposes and of all other lands that may hereafter be acquired by
the City for such purposes. They shall have control and management of all park funds, whether
the same is obtained by taxation, donation or otherwise, and shall expend the same judiciously
for beautifying and improving the City's parks.
It shall be the duty of said Commission and they shall, at the beginning of each month, file with
the City Recorder for the information of the City Council and the public, a report of their doings
for the preceding month. Such report shall specify all funds on hand and the source from whence
obtained. It shall carry a clear statement of all monies expended and for what purpose. All
purchases made and all labor performed, together with the cost thereof, shall be embodied in said
report. At the time for making the tax levy for general City purposes in each year, the said
Commission shall cause a careful estimate to be made of the money required for park purposes
for the ensuing year and file the same with the City Recorder, whereupon there shall be included
in said general levy not to exceed four and one half (4-1/2) mills on the dollar to meet such
requirements, which, when collected, shall be deposited with the City Recorder subject to the
order of said Commission. The levy herein authorized shall be outside the limitation on taxation
set forth in Article XI, Section II of the Constitution of Oregon.
Section 4. Salary; Government.
The said Commission shall serve without pay and shall have
power to formulate and adopt rules and regulations for their government and for the purpose of
carrying into effect the purposes of their creation as Park Commission. They shall enter upon the
discharge of their duties immediately upon their organization and shall, as soon as may be
expedient, cause a map or maps to be made of the lands herein dedicated, and shall make the
same conform to the descriptions contained in the instruments by which said City obtained title
thereto; which said instruments shall be considered as carrying a more specific description of
said lands.
Page 2 - Exhibit A: Full Text of Article XIX
237650.6 036892 FILE
Exhibit B
Article XI, Section 11 of the Oregon Constitution as it existed in 1951
In 1951, when Article XIX was last amended by City voters, Article XI, Section 11 of the
Oregon Constitution read as follows:
11. Tax and Indebtedness Limitation. Unless specifically authorized by a majority
of the legal voters voting upon the question neither the state nor any county, municipality,
district or body to which the power to levy a tax shall have been delegated shall in any
year so exercise that power as to raise a greater amount of revenue for purposes other
than the payment of bonded indebtedness or interest thereon than the total amount levied
by it in any one of the three years immediately preceding for purposes other than the
payment of bonded indebtedness or interest thereon plus 6 per centum thereof; provided,
whenever any new county, municipality or other taxing district shall be created and shall
include in whole or in any part property theretofore included in another county, like
municipality or other taxing district, no greater amount of taxes shall be levied in the first
year by either the old or the new county, municipality or other taxing district upon any
property included therein than the amount levied thereon in any one of the three years,
immediately preceding, by the county, municipality or district in which it was then
included plus 6 per centum thereof; provided further, that the amount of any increase in
levy specifically authorized by the legal voters of the state, or of the county, municipality,
or other district, shall be excluded in determining the amount of taxes which may be
levied in any subsequent year. The prohibition against the creation of debts by counties
prescribed in section 10 of article XI of this constitution shall apply and extend to debts
hereafter created in the performance of any duties or obligations imposed upon counties
by the constitution or laws of the state, and any indebtedness created by any county in
violation of such prohibition and any warrants for or other evidences of any such
indebtedness and any part of any levy of taxes made by the state or any county,
municipality or other taxing district or body which shall exceed the limitations fixed
hereby shall be void. \[italics added for emphasis\]
Exhibit B: Article XI, Section 11 of the Oregon Constitution as it existing in 1951
237650.6 036892 FILE