Fixing a high coupon rate to engineer a sale at a premium seems like an accounting scam to me. That aside, I can't imagine why anyone woudl expect to build a new bridge without incurring some debt. The Sellwood Bridge has been a high priority, no less than a new courthouse. These things have to be paid for, one way or another.

First off, congratulations on nailing down the numbers.
I'm sad to admit that in reading your initial post about this, one of the first thoughts that ran through my mind was, "Wow, they're only going 16 percent beyond the budget figure? That's pretty good these days."

I wish they would have budgeted for the replacement a lot sooner and more responsibly than this. They're doubling down on debt service, essentially just to maintain one working asset.

And people are going to die in that courthouse when the big quake comes.

"the county will never be able to build a new courthouse"

I thought that was the back-up for Inverness?

So I guess these are gen obligation bonds after all. So when they don't get the tax receipts expected, I wonder how many mentally ill will be walking across that bridge to make the payments.

"I can't imagine why anyone woudl expect to build a new bridge without incurring some debt."

Why the heck did this take 10 years before we decided we needed to fix the bridge. It sure didn't take us that long to decide to build the no-car bridge up river.

Didn't Adams use Sellwood Bridge funds to the "needy" Milwaukie Light Rail project?
Let's not forget Jeff Cogen came out of Saltzman's office.
A cozy network.

Steve, what's even worse concerning the MLR's no"-car bridge" it was less than a year before that decision was made that lightrail/streetcars were to go across the newly refurbished, re-engineered Hawthorne Bridge. So much for that $78 Million bill that was to accommodate lightrail.

When the pols/bureaucrats want to make a quick decision they can.

What's the toll going to be for Clackamas County residents crossing the bridge?

There's a slight difference between general obligation bonds and "full faith and credit" bonds, which is what these are. As I understand it, in both cases, the banks can take property taxes to pay the principal and interest. With general obligation bonds, the county promises to levy however much tax it takes to pay off the bonds. With "full faith and credit," the county doesn't promise that, but the bondholders can attach property tax receipts to get paid.

"There's a slight difference between general obligation bonds and "full faith and credit" bonds"

Interesting, I guess in any case that recourse can include any income stream to Mult County beyond the bridge itself?

I guess I need to educate myself better since I am curious now that you mentioned it.

I'm with Allan, the bridge has needed replacement for nearly a decade now, if ever there was infrastructure the county should be spending money on, this is it.

I'm with Allan and Nobody. Something I also haven't seen here is that these bonds are being paid back with dedicated funding from the vehicle registration tax I just paid when I re-upped my tags. Doesn't that cover the full annual cost of repayment?

these bonds are being paid back with dedicated funding from the vehicle registration tax I just paid when I re-upped my tags. Doesn't that cover the full annual cost of repayment?

That's a lovely fantasy, but the holders of the bonds can collect the money from any available funds of the county. That includes property taxes, and trust me, that's what the bondholders are looking to for repayment.

"if ever there was infrastructure the county should be spending money on"

Again, we've had money for:
- A no-car bridge
- $35M-$45M to put into PGE Park
- $10M to give to G-E/Vestas
- God knows how much into the CC Hotel
- $160M just to PLAN the CRC
- $5M to ReVolt and more for other "green" energy shysters
- $1.1B extra at the state level last biennium for PERS contributions

All without a bond or raising taxes. It only seems that to fix something people need like a Sellwood bridge, we need to raise fees.

Think about where that money comes from. The entire cabal of ppols in this state uses projects like this to hold us hostage so they can piss away money on their stuff.

In 2014, the county-imposed vehicle registration fee in the Tri-county area can rise to as much as, but not more than the then-current state registration fee. If the state charges $40 per year for registration, WA, MO and CL counties can levy up to $40 themselves but will have to share 40% with the cities from where the money came. If you recall, the legislature kindly allowed the residents of each county to vote on their VRF, but in the Tri-county area, our commissioners do this for us. Thanks. It will take another citizen revolt to undo this one because every jurisdiction with a pot hole will want their share. Only charter amendments in each county to require a vote or the repeal of the state law would stop this new tax. When they start including bicycles, I might feel better about it.

http://www.leg.state.or.us/11orlaws/sess0100.dir/0145.html

Steve: I don't have the time to figure out how many of the projects you listed were paid for by Multnomah County, but I know at least some (PGE Park, and certainly not all $160M of the CRC planning money). We're talking about the county's budget, not the state or the city.