ARE TO BE UTILIZED IN PART TO PROVIDE FUNDS FOR VARIOUS IMPROVEMENTS TO STATE PARKS THROUGHOUT THE STATE (THE "PROJECT"). "OFFICIAL STATEMENT," PG. 7 (EMPHASIS ADDED)."
THE "IN PART" LANGUAGE NEEDS CLARIFICATION. THE FOLLOWING IS FOUND ON PG. 8 OF THE "OFFICIAL STATEMENT":
(INFORMATION REGARDING ESTIMATED SOURCES AND USES OF FEES)
COST OF ISSUANCE CALLS FOR AN EXPENDITURE OF $110,000. THE BOND RESERVE FUND IS TO BE $500,000. ALL OTHER BOND PROCEEDS AND INTEREST ARE TO BE PLACED IN THE PROJECT FUND. THEREFORE, IF THE BOND RESERVE FUND FALLS BELOW $500,000, THE INTEREST REMAINS IN THAT FUND. IF IT IS AT $500,000 IT WILL BE DISTRIBUTED AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 4.01 C (3). THE EXPENDITURE OF THE INTEREST WOULD BE THE SAME AS THE FUND OR ACCOUNT TO WHICH IT IS DISTRIBUTED. INTEREST, THEREFORE, IS TO BE EXPENDED IN THE SAME MANNER AND PROPORTION AS THE BOND PROCEEDS.
CONCLUSION
IT IS, THEREFORE, MY OPINION THAT:
THE TERM "NEW PARK OPERATIONS" DOES NOT INCLUDE THE EXPANSION OF EXISTING FACILITIES. THE LEGISLATURE INTENDED THAT TWENTY PERCENT (20%) BE SPENT ON NEW PARKS AND EXISTING PARKS WITH LOW REVENUE GENERATION.
2. ADMINISTRATIVE, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COSTS DIRECTLY ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE PROJECT CAN BE PAID WITH BOND PROCEEDS.
3. THE 1990 AMENDMENT OF 74 O.S. 1861 (1989) DID NOT ALTER THE ALLOCATION REQUIREMENTS CONTAINED IN THE OFFICIAL STATEMENT.
4. THERE ARE NO INCONSISTENCIES BETWEEN THE OFFICIAL STATEMENT AND 74 O.S. 1861
(JAMES D. BEDNAR)