Tag Archives: oregon

by - 0 comments

Rep. Suzanne Bonamici: No Friend of Working Families

U.S. Rep. Suzanne Bonamici, D-OR, is thrilled with President Biden’s actions cancelling student loan debt. She shouldn’t be. 

Even though she has a bachelor’s degree and a law degree from the University of Oregon, it’s clear she’s no economist. And even though she’s a member of the House Progressive Caucus and tries to package herself as an advocate for the common man (and woman), her support for student loan forgiveness suggests she’s no friend of working families either.  

That’s because, for one, the billions in student debt aren’t, in fact, being cancelled. The loans will still be paid off. The issue is by whom?

“The idea that the government is footing the bill for this policy is a bit misleading,” the American Institute for Economic Research points out.   “The cost of the program does not fall on the government. It falls on those who miss out on expenditures that would have otherwise occurred, those who pay higher taxes as a result of the program, those who pay higher interest rates or are crowded out due to additional government borrowing, or those who see the purchasing power of their dollars reduced more than usual.”

Even though the Supreme Court ruled that the Biden administration overstepped its authority in 2022 when it announced that it would cancel up to $400 billion in student loans, Biden has since been rolling out a series of debt forgiveness alternatives using a variety of executive actions.

Biden’s ingenuity in coming up with more loan repayment exceptions seems to have no bounds.  

On April 8, 2024, the White House announced an initiative that would:

  • forgive interest balances built up to date for 25 million borrowers, with 23 million likely to have all of their balance growth forgiven.
  • automatically cancel debt for borrowers eligible for loan forgiveness under several loan programs.
  • cancel student debt for borrowers who entered repayment over 20 years ago.
  • cancel student debt for loans associated with institutions or programs that lost their eligibility to participate in the Federal student aid program or were denied recertification because they cheated or took advantage of students.
  • cancel student debt for borrowers experiencing hardship paying back their loans.

While there’s no question student debt has become a burden for many Americans, Biden’s escalating efforts to relieve borrowers of obligations to repay student loans will add to the government’s annual deficits and the national debt. In other words, current student loan holders may escape repayment, but future taxpayers will have to pay the bill since Biden isn’t proposing any new revenue collections to cover the cost.

On April 11, the University of Pennsylvania’s Penn Wharton Budget Model estimated that Biden’s April 8 plans, if they are implemented, will cost the government $84 billion, in addition to the $475 billion that Penn Wharton previously estimated for Biden’s plans.

Rep. Bonamici must not care about that.  

Biden’s student debt forgiveness policies also raise serious questions about fairness. For example, according to Penn Wharton, eliminating student debt for borrowers in repayment for more than 20 years (or for more than 25 years with graduate debt) will provide debt relief for about 750,000 individuals residing in households that, on average, earn $312,977 in annual household income.

There’s also inequity in Biden’s plan to cancel up to $20,000 in interest for borrowers who have accrued or capitalized interest on their loans since entering repayment.  Low and middle-income borrowers enrolled in the SAVE Plan or other income-driven repayment (IDR) plans would be eligible for their entire interest balance since entering repayment to be cancelled if they make:

  • $120,000 or less per year individually or as married filing separately
  • $180,000 or less per year as a head of household, or 
  • $240,000 or less per year as married borrowers who file joint taxes.

Real median personal income in the United States was only $40,480 and the national median household income was just $74,580 in 2022. In other words, many college educated borrowers in Bonamici’s district who are eligible for relief under Biden’s plan are hardly struggling. And despite her assertion that she’s “standing up for working families,” many of her constituents with much lower incomes will end up covering the bills of their better-off neighbors.

Then, of course, a lot of Bonamici’s responsible working family constituents have probably made sacrifices to pay down their student loans, foregoing vacations, nice cars and restaurant meals. They will get no benefits at all from Bonamici’s generosity. 

Tough beans for them, I guess.

by - 0 comments

Oregon’s 2024 Pensions Bill Shows Need for New Conflict of Interest Rules

It looks like Oregon’s firefighters got what they paid for in the Oregon Legislature’s 2024 session.

In the last week of the session, the Legislature passed HB 4045, the Public Safety Workforce Stabilization Act, by a vote of 55-2 in the House and  25-5 in the Senate.

The bill, which Governor Kotek has not yet signed, would lower the retirement age with full benefits for firefighters with five years on the job from 60 years to 55, substantially increasing the deficit of the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) and increasing employer costs. 

“…we believe that public servants deserve robust pay and benefits, excellent health care, and solid retirement. However, we are concerned that HB 4045 risks making the entire system insolvent through the unanticipated consequences via well intentioned policy,” commented Hasina Wittenberg, speaking for the Special Districts Association of Oregon & Oregon Fire District Director’s Association.

Left unmentioned in most media coverage of the bill is the name of the legislator behind it, Rep. Dacia Grayber, a Democrat who represents House District 28.

Rep. Dacia Grayber

Grayber’s role is relevant when you consider her occupation and examine contributions to her 2022 election campaign.

First, Grayber is a firefighter herself, a member of  Tualatin Valley Firefighters Union – IAFF Local 1660. That means she will benefit from her bill.

Dacia Grayber, firefighter (Source: IAFF.org)  

Second, at least $45,000, a hefty chunk of contributions to her 2022 campaign, came from firefighter-affiliated labor unions: 

Contributor Amount

Oregon State Fire Fighters Council $ 10,000

International Association of Fire Fighters FIREPAC. $ 10,000

Portland Metro Fire Fighters PAC (223) $ 10,000

Professional Firefighters PAC (3219) $ 10,000

Salem Fire PAC (245) $ 5,000

In a March 4, 2024, letter to the Chief Clerk of the House, Grayber declared a potential conflict of interest because she could be impacted by the retirement age change. That’s not enough.

A May 2021 report from the Secretary of State’s Audits Division noted Oregon is one of only two states that require legislators to vote on matters on which they have an actual conflict of interest.

“The vast majority of states…either require or allow legislators to recuse themselves from voting on such matters,” the report said. “Some states go further, barring lawmakers from taking part in any discussion or action on bills in which they have a personal interest.”

The audit declared that such declarations are “a legislative loophole…(that) undermines the idea that public officials should not be involved in decisions that would benefit them, their family, or close associates.” 

The report also cited a recommendation by Santa Clara University’s Markkula Center for Applied Ethics “…that a conflict of interest is not resolved by being transparent about it…”

The audit report called for the Oregon Legislature to “…consider changing statutes and chamber rules to require lawmakers to recuse themselves from any discussions, debates, or votes on such measures.”

It’s way past time for the Legislature to do so. 

by - 3 Comments

The Oregon State Bar Should Be Ashamed

The Oregon State Bar Association is blatantly failing its responsibility to Oregonians.

On Oct. 9, 2023, I filed a complaint with the Oregon State Bar Association asserting that a number of Oregon lawyers are misrepresenting their credentials, that they are acting in an unethical manner by asserting to potential and current clients that their selection as “Lawyers of Distinction” by a Florida-based business is evidence of their legal skills and achievements. I filed a second, more detailed complaint on Feb. 17, 2023 and followed up with an email asking whether the association intends to respond.

Lawyers of Distinction, incorporated in 2014, is in fact just like a diploma mill, an outfit that claims to be a higher education institution, but only provides illegitimate academic degrees and diplomas for a fee.

The Oregon Rules of Professional Conduct (as amended effective January 1, 2024) for Oregon attorneys is explicit about how attorneys must communicate about themselves:

Rule 7.1 A lawyer shall not make a false or misleading communication about the lawyer or the lawyer’s services. A communication is false or misleading if it contains a material representation of fact or law, or omits a fact necessary to make a statement considered as a whole not materially misleading. 

Rule 8.4 It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to…engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s fitness to practice law. 

An Oregon attorney claiming he or she is a exceptional because of membership in “Lawyers of Distinction” is clearly making “a false or misleading communication” and engaging in “professional misconduct” involving “dishonesty” “deceit” and “misrepresentation”.

The Oregon Bar Association’s response to my complaint? Nothing. Nada. Crickets. 

Here are the facts.

According to the Lawyers of Distinction’s website, a Charter Membership, for $475 a year, comes with a Customized 14″ x 11″ genuine rosewood plaque. A Featured Membership, for $575 a year, brings the plaque and inclusion in a membership roster published in USA Today, The New York Times, The American Lawyer and the National Law Journal.

Then there’s the Distinguished Membership, for $775 per year, the most expensive choice (described on the organization’s website as “Most Popular”), which brings the rosewood plaque, the membership roster ads and an 11″tall translucent personalized crystal statue.

The Lawyers of Distinction website describes the application review process as complex and rigorous.

Don’t believe it.

 It’s just pay-for-play. It’s selling badges.  It’s paying for meaningless accolades. Apply, pay the annual membership fee and you’re in. The result? People relying on the Lawyers of Distinction accolade in choosing an attorney are being duped.

According to the Florida Division of Corporations, “Lawyers of Distinction Inc.” is a private for-profit company with a principal address of 4700 Millenia Boulevard, Suite 175, Orlando, FL 32839. Robert B. Baker, at the same address, is listed as the Owner in the company’s 2023 Annual Report. 

But don’t go to the office address expecting to be ushered into a space with a clean, modern aesthetic that communicates success. The address is only a virtual office.

If the Oregon State Bar Association and its 14,000 members are honestly committed to accountability, excellence, fairness, and leadership in the legal profession, as it claims, it should insist that Oregon attorneys immediately halt falsely advertising themselves as Lawyers of Distinction or holders of other unearned accolades.

 To do otherwise diminishes the law. 

11/13/2024 UPDATE: Oregon State Bar Refuses To Prohibit Deceit and Misrepresentation By Its Members

by - 3 Comments

A New I-5 Bridge: A Vital Transit Link or a Corridor for Crime?

The I-5 Bridge connecting Oregon and Washington

NOTE: Paul O. Edgar, a retired Business Systems Analyst, submitted a response to this post. It is reprinted at the conclusion of my post.

————————–

Shades of the U.S.-Mexico border conflict.

Stephen F. Austin, the “father of Texas”, had strong opinions about ” invaders”. In a May 4, 1836 letter, appealing for U.S. assistance during Texas’ war of independence, Austin declared “A war of extermination is raging in Texas — a war of barbarism and of despotic principles waged by the mongrel Spanish-Indian and Negro race, against civilization and the Anglo-American race…. Indians, Mexicans, and renegades, all mixed together, and all the natural enemies of white men and civilization.”

It doesn’t look like Republican Joe Kent, who lost his 2022 race in Washington’s in Washington’s Third Congressional District against Democrat Marie Gluesenkamp Perez and is challenging her again in 2024, likes outsiders much either,, especially folks from Oregon.

In mid-January 2024, Kent proclaimed that a replacement for the deteriorating I-5 bridge and a new light rail line “… would be an expressway for Portland’s crime & homeless into Vancouver…”

“…the drug addicts and criminals in their tent colonies that are spreading their crime from Portland into Vancouver…,” are not welcome in his district, he said.

In a Feb. 29, 2024 news release, Kent repeated that allegation. “What we don’t need – and the people of my district agree on this regardless of party – is a toll road that unfairly targets Washingtonians commuting to Portland, or light rail that there is no demand for and would bring Portland’s crime problem further into Clark County.”

Kent has repeated that point of view on Facebook. ““We don’t want the problems of downtown Portland dumped right into our district in Vancouver,” he said. “If you look at the murder rate, the crime rate, that’s the last thing we want in Vancouver.”

The New York Times says the I-5 dispute “… is an example of how Republicans…are seeking to transform even the most basic of local issues into battlegrounds in the nation’s culture wars in elections this year in which control of Congress is at stake. Mr. Kent’s attacks, which rely on buzzwords of the hard right, place the bridge at the center of a national political discussion that vilifies the left and plays on fears of demographic change.”

So I guess we can expect more of this as the Kent-Perez contest heats up.

Response by Paul O. Edgar

The I-5 bridge and light rail issues are about more than crime. 

The most important issue is whether there is a need to have this very expensive TriMet Light Rail Transit (LRT) line extended into Clark County, with an additional $2 billion added into the I-5 Interstate Bridge Replacement (IBR) plan cost. 

TriMet also wants to also get reimbursed for all operating costs. Currently they are estimated to be $21.6 Million dollars per year. 

TriMet already has a huge under-funded earned health and retirement obligation that the citizens of Clark County Washington would become partners in if the I-5 bridge/Light Rail project goes through. TriMet has been working on trying to deal with those obligations, but the limit on payroll tax revenues and other State of Oregon funds already make TriMet look like a Chapter 11 bankrupt organization. 

Reading its performance reports, TriMet ridership has plunged and costs have been understated.  The West-side Commuter Rail System (WES), for example, appears to be losing $1 million dollars per month and TriMet’s LRT may well be losing $10 million dollars per month. Some of that is because of the increase in virtual offices and public concerns about drug addicts and other troubled people on the system.

All this, plus burdensome bridge tolls, will mean added costs for Clark County commuters, 99% of whom will also not be able get directly to their place of work or back home on a Fixed Rail System without even more added costs. 
The cost of what Clark County residents would be the assuming of the costs associate with extending TriMet Light Rail Transit are to far great.

This is important, and you can read TriMet’s performance reports that less than 1% of the incident of travel generated in the TriMet Service are handled by TriMet. Not enough people will use TriMet Light Rail Transit and it would be very hard for people to justify the ongoing cost, including the toll costs that will go on for ever and ever. 

Maybe the answer for many Clark County residents who now travel to Portland will be to find employment and do their shopping elsewhere. 

by - 0 comments

Money Talks: It looks Like a Bynum / McLeod-Skinner Race in the 5th District Democratic Primary

Janelle Bynum and Jamie McLeod-Skinner are running neck-and-neck in the money race in the contentious Democratic primary for the 5th Congressional District seat occupied by Kurt Schrader until replaced by Lori Chavez-DeRemer.

The race is a top target for Democrats trying to flip the U.S. House, which is now narrowly in Republican hands. The district, which voted for Joe Biden in 2020 and has more registered Democrats than Republicans, stretches from Bend to Portland. 

According to campaign finance numbers posted today by the Federal Election Commission (FEC), Bynum and McLeod-Skinner had raised almost equal amounts and had almost equal cash-on-hand as of the end of 2023.  Bynum had raised $439,286.38 and had $233,246.16 cash-on-hand; McLeod-Skinner had raised $438,831.45 and had cash-on-hand of $242,300.59.

Two of the other three other Democrats in the primary race, Kevin Easton and Matthew Davie, haven’t yet filed their campaign finance reports for all of 2023. The third, Metro President Lynn Peterson, had raised $254,603.76, but had just $52,834.13 cash-on-hand, as of the end of 2023.

Going forward, Bynum may have the advantage given that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee announced its support for her on January 29, noting that it had put her on its “Red to Blue” list of key candidates running to replace Republican members as part of the Democrats’ strategy to reclaim the House majority.

Bynum may also have an edge because she’s attracting more out-of-state money. Recent out-of-state contributions include $4,500 from Brian Hairston, owner of Dunham Management Group in Englewood, NJ, $3,300 from James Williams owner of Estel Foods in Saint Louis, MO and $3,300 from Troy A. Carter Sr., a congressman from Louisiana. 

The primary winner will take on Republican U.S. Rep. Lori Chavez-DeRemer, who won her seat in 2020, defeating Democrat McLeod-Skinner 51% – 49%.

Chavez-DeRemer’s end-of-the-year campaign finance report with the FEC shows she had raised $2,529,913.60 and had cash on hand of $1,608,021.56. Her aggressive fundraising is expected to make her a strong candidate in the race against her eventual Democratic opponent. 

Despite the Democratic lead in registrations in the district, the Cook Political Report rates the race as a toss-up. 

by - 0 comments

Oregon Schools Are Fighting Rising Anti-Semitic Denialism

If there was ever a time for Oregon schools to teach about the holocaust, the time is now.

In a December 2023 YouGov/Economist poll, 20% of young American respondents aged 18-29 said the Holocaust is a myth. Another 30% said they don’t know if it’s a myth. And the proportion of respondents who said they believe the Holocaust is a myth was similar across all levels of education.

And now, denial of the well-documented Oct. 7 Hamas terrorist attack on Israel that left about 1,200 people dead is spreading, despite truly massive real-time documentation of the attacks.  

On social media, an expanding group of denialists link Israel itself to the attack, claiming it was a “false flag” event spurred by Israel to cast blame on Hamas. And as the Washington Post has reported, the denialism is “bleeding into the real world.”  

“Demonstrators have shouted the claim at anti-Israel protests and have used it to justify removing posters of hostages in cities like London and Chicago,” the Washington Post reported. “At a November city council meeting in Oakland, Calif., multiple residents disputed the veracity of the attack.”

According to the Post, “researchers are warning that Oct. 7 conspiracy theories may follow a similar trajectory to Holocaust denial, which was waning before social media platforms propelled a resurgence a decade ago.”

Fortunately, Oregon is ahead on educating its public school students on the Holocaust.

Claire Sarnowski, when she was a freshman at Lake Oswego’s Lakeridge High School, came up with the idea of mandating Holocaust instruction at Oregon’s public schools after hearing a Holocaust survivor, Alter Wiener, tell his story. Sarnowski approached state Sen. Rob Wagner, who agreed to introduce a bill, SB 664. 

The bill passed unanimously in the Oregon House and Governor Brown signed it on June 4, 2019. 

The bill required school districts across Oregon to provide instruction about the Holocaust and genocide in social studies classes, starting in the 2020-21 school year, to “enable students to evaluate the morality of the Holocaust, genocide and similar acts of mass violence and to reflect on the causes of related historical events.”

.As so often happens with legislation, the true believers expanded on Sarnowski’s vision and declared that the instruction must also address: the immorality of mass violence; respect for cultural diversity; the obligation to combat wrongdoing through resistance, including protest, and; the value of restorative justice. Like anti-terrorism laws, it was a classic example of mission creep.

But it was at least a start. And now it’s needed more than ever.

The question, of course, is whether schools are aggressively following the law’s mandates and whether students are absorbing the lessons. The State has also mandated drug prevention education in Oregon’s public schools, for example, but an investigative series from the Lund Report, the University of Oregon’s Journalism Project and Oregon Public Broadcasting (OPB) has revealed that what students are being taught varies widely and that many school districts don’t use programs backed by evidence that they are effective at delaying or preventing substance abuse. 

And then there’s the question of whether students are acting on what they are learning about the Holocaust.

Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY) said recently in a Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Sermon at Central Synagogue NYC that when he was asked why he spoke out so frequently and forcefully about anti-Semitism, his answer was, “The question is not why have I chosen to be outspoken. The question is why have others chosen to be silent amidst the deadliest days for Jews since the Holocaust?”

by - 0 comments

Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek’s Housing Production Advisory Council: What Were They Thinking?

Gov. Kotek has apparently decided not to immediately pursue multiple money-raising proposals put forward by her Housing Production Advisory Council to address the affordable housing crisis in Oregon. But you have to wonder, who are these people and what in God’s name were they thinking? How could they have been so oblivious, so tone-deaf to, the public mood?

Oregonians are in no mood for massive tax hikes, particularly to pay for more wasteful programs run by a parasitic government determined to hoover up hard-earned private income .

The proposals in the Council’s ill-advised 20-page draft report, HPAC Policy Recommendations, all of which would have continued until sunsetting in 2032, include: 

  1. Increase all personal income tax brackets by ½ percentage point
  2. Establish a special $1 per $1,000 real property tax assessment outside of Measure 5.
  3. Implement a 0.5% retail sales tax
  4. Implement a 0.5% payroll tax
  5. Double the current state fuel tax
  6. Targeted Measure 50 Reform:
  7. Increase annual Maximum Assessed Value change from 3% to 5%.
  8. Authorize voters to increase the permanent levy of their local
    jurisdiction.
  9. Exempt cities and counties from compression.
  10. Adopt Land Value Tax
  11. Eliminate Mortgage Interest Deduction for Second Homes (i.e., abolish income tax deduction for interest paid on second homes).
  12. Enact temporary property tax exemption for new housing at 120% AMI or below.
  13. Reduce or Eliminate Tax Expenditures (i.e., tax exemptions) not related to housing.

Total projected ANNUAL new revenue from just the first five proposals would be $2.4 billion. If enacted in 2024, and maintained until sunsetting in 2032, they would would fill state coffers by grabbing almost an astonishing additional $27 billion from taxpayers. Measure 50 reform surely would grab millions more. 

Who came up with this stuff?

The report notes that four lawmakers sat as members on Kotek’s Council:

  • Senator Dick Anderson (R – Lincoln City)
  • Senator Kayse Jama (D – Portland)
  • Representative Vikki Breese-Iverson (R – Prineville)
  • Representative Maxine Dexter (D – Portland)

I can understand the two liberal Democrats, given their party’s predilection for government spending.

Jama represents Oregon’s 24th Senate District, which includes parts of Multnomah and Clackamas Counties. He co-founded the Center for Intercultural Organizing, now Unite Oregon, and served as the director until 2021. He was appointed unanimously by the Clackamas and Multnomah County Boards of Commissioners to replace Shemia Fagan after she was elected Secretary of State.  He won election by 58.7% in 2022. 

Dexter represents Oregon’s 33rd House District, which covers the Northwest District and Northwest Heights of Portland, plus Cedar Mill, Oak Hills and most of Bethany. She was appointed in June 2020 after the death of Democrat Mitch Greenlick. She won election by 84.8% in 2022.

It’s harder to understand why Republicans Dick Anderson of Lincoln City and Vikki Breese-Iverson of Prineville signed on to the Advisory Council’s massive tax proposals, unless you accept the proposition that the two parties are actually a duopoly focused on expanding government through mock competition..

Anderson squeaked into office after the incumbent Democrat decided not to run for re–election. He defeated Democrat Melissa Cribbins in the 2020 general election by just 49.4% to 46.5%.  

Breese-Iverson, who formerly served as minority leader of the Oregon House, is an even more surprising advocate of higher taxes. Her Prineville home is in conservative Sen. Lynn Findley’s district. He’s one of one of six Republican senators who might be unable to run for reelection in 2024 because of his 2023 walkout. If he doesn’t run, Breese-Iverson may run in his place.

Then there are all the gubernatorial appointees to the Council.[1] With broad experience in affordable housing, finance and architecture, and most with a long Oregon presence, you’d think they would be sensitive to the public mood. They weren’t.

The reality is that the optimism and liberal tolerance so long present in Oregon has been degrading for quite a while.

A January 2022 statewide survey conducted by the Oregon Values and Beliefs Center found Oregonians questioning government spending, with half of respondents saying more than 44 cents of every dollar in state spending is wasted. 

“We spent way too much money on programs without any evidence that those programs are SOLVING the problems they are meant to address,” said one male respondent aged 45-54 in Multnomah County. “It seems that spending money is seen as a solution, but it isn’t. I want problems SOLVED and then the program must end. The programs go on forever and accomplish little, if anything.”

Young adults (18-29)—a group likely to exhibit strong support for tax increases to fund social programs—reported the highest perceived waste in the state budget of any demographic group. The median response among young adults was that a whopping 56 cents per dollar of state spending are wasted.

Liberal patience has degraded most noticeably in the Portland Metro area, where about half of Oregon’s population resides.

In a May 2023 poll carried out by GS Strategy Group for People for Portland, 75% of Multnomah County voters said homelessness in the area was “an out-of-control disaster”.

More than half (55%) said “Portland has lost what made it a special place to live”.  And even worse, 65% agreed that elected officials in the Portland area were listening to “a small group of insider political activists” on important issues, rather than the public at large.  

The erosion of once reliable liberal tolerance for the homeless and community crime was also evident in the overwhelming support (67%) for compelling drug addiction and mental health treatment for people in crisis. 

Similar shifts in public mood were evident in a December 2023 survey of Portland voters by DMH Research for the Portland Police Association. About two-thirds of respondents said the city was on “the wrong track” and more than half said they would leave if they could afford to.  Almost 70 percent of those surveyed said the city was “losing what made it special” and only about 20% said the city’s best days lie ahead.

Against this backdrop, the members of the Housing Production Advisory Council were way off track in their revenue-raising proposals. Simply put, they clearly failed to “read the room” .

_____________ 

  1. Gubernatorial appointees to the Housing Production Advisory Council

Ernesto Fonseca is the CEO of Hacienda Community Development Corp., which provides affordable housing, homeownership support, economic advancement and educational opportunities.

Elissa Gertler, former executive director of the Northwest Oregon Housing Authority, is Clatsop County Housing Manager, leading the county’s efforts in developing more affordable housing.

Riley Hill is a longtime local contractor in Eastern Oregon and former Ontario mayor from 2019 to 2022.

Natalie Janney is Vice President at Multi/Tech Engineering, which designs subdivision and multi-family projects throughout Oregon.

Robert Justus was co-founder of housing company Home First.  With its development partners, the company has built 1,425 units of affordable housing with a development cost of more than $381 million. Justus stepped away from the company at the end of 2023. 

Joel Madsen is Executive Director at Mid-Columbia Housing Authority and Columbia Cascade Housing Corporation. Both work towards promoting and administering affordable housing in the Columbia River Gorge.

Ivory Justice was selected as Executive Director of Home Forward, Oregon’s largest provider of low-income housing, in January 2023. She previously worked as Chief Executive Officer for Columbia Housing and Cayce Housing in South Carolina.

Erica Mills is Chief Executive Officer at NeighborWorks Umpqua in Roseburg. The private non-profit works with residents in Coos, Curry, Douglas, Jackson and Josephine Counties on affordable housing development, education, training, and homeowner assistance as well as lending, loan servicing and other financial services.

Eric Olsen is the owner of Monmouth-based Olsen Design and Development, Inc., a design-build land development company focusing on small to midsize projects with emphasis on residential.

Gauri Rajbaidya is a principal at Portland-based SERA Architects.

Karen Rockwell has been Executive Director with the Housing Authority of Lincoln County since late 2022. She served previously as Executive Director of Benton Habitat for Humanity in Corvallis, a commissioner on the Linn Benton Housing Authority and as vice chair of the Corvallis Housing and Community Development Advisory Board.

Margaret Van Vliet is a Portland-based consultant focusing on strategy development, organizational improvement and project management. Her specialties are housing homelessness and wildfire recovery. 

Justin Wood is a Portland developer and vice president of Fish Construction NW Inc.

by - 1 Comment

Affordable Housing Push Spawns Money-Raising Frenzy in Oregon 

Government just can’t seem to stop wanting more money.

In a strange twist, now there’s a move to make life less affordable for many Oregonians in order to promote affordable housing.

Oregon Governor Tina Kotek’s Housing Production Advisory Council has just submitted a 20-page draft report, HPAC Policy Recommendations, on ideas on how to address the affordable housing crisis. And, of course, the ideas include raising more money. The Taxpayer Association of Oregon revealed the report on Jan. 10, 2024.

Remember when voters passed Measure 50 in 1997? It introduced maximum assessed value (MAV), which acts as a “cap” on the growth of taxable (assessed) value for most property. MAV growth is limited to 3 percent per year. Combined with permanent tax rates, Measure 50 effectively limited tax increases, except under specific circumstances. Kotek’s Housing Production Advisory Council is proposing raising that to 5%.

Own a vacation property in Bend?  Kotek’s Housing Production Advisory Council is proposing eliminating the Mortgage Interest Deduction for Second Homes (i.e., abolishing the income tax deduction for interest paid on second homes).

Drive a gas car?   Kotek’s Housing Production Advisory Council is proposing doubling fuel taxes.

On section 7 (Page 16/17) it lists 5 suggestions to raise new revenue (as shown below):

  1. Generate new, state-level revenue to fund critical local infrastructure.
    a. New revenue generation to be limited to duration of HPAC Timeline (i.e., sunset in 2032)
    and in support of the related work plan topics described below. Potential sources
    include:

i. Revenue Source and Annual Revenue Generated (Legislative Revenue Office,
2023, p. B7, FY 23-24 dollars).

  1. Increase all personal income tax brackets by ½ percentage point.
    a. $699 Million
  2. Establish Special $1 per $1,000 real property tax assessment outside of
    Measure 5.
    a. $504 Million
  3. Implement 0.5% Retail Sales Tax.
    a. $501 Million
  4. Implement 0.5% Payroll Tax.
    a. $620 Million
  5. Double Fuel Tax.
    a. $686 Million

The report also proposes: 

Reform Oregon’s tax system to encourage development of needed housing and provide
adequate revenue for local governments to support housing production.
a. Taxes are both a tool to raise revenue for government and to shape taxpayer behavior.
Attaining the Governor’s desired housing production goals will require significant new
revenue; this recommendation highlights actions that can address revenue shortfalls and
encourage a shift in taxpayer behavior to support housing production.
b. Potential actions include (but are not limited to):
i. Targeted Measure 50 Reform:

  1. Increase annual Maximum Assessed Value change to 5%.
  2. Authorize voters to increase the permanent levy of their local
    jurisdiction.
  3. Exempt Cites and Counties from compression.
    ii. Adopt Land Value Tax
    iii. Eliminate Mortgage Interest Deduction for Second Homes (i.e., abolish income
    tax deduction for interest paid on second homes).
    iv. Enact temporary property tax exemption for new housing at 120% AMI or below.
    v. Reduce or Eliminate Tax Expenditures (i.e., tax exemptions) not related to
    housing.

The report notes that four lawmakers, from both parties, sit as members on Kotek’s Council.   They are:

  • Senator Dick Anderson (R – Lincoln City)
  • Senator Kayse Jama (D – Portland)
  • Representative Vikki Breese Iverson (R – Prineville)
  • Representative Maxine Dexter (D – Portland)

There are also a number of community members appointed to theCouncil by Governor Kotek.

They need to hear from taxpayers.

_______________________________________

Gubernatorial Appointments:
  • Co-chair J.D. Tovey – rural Oregon and an enrolled member of the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation – land use, building codes and housing development 
  • Co-chair Damien Hall – Metro- land use, and affordable and market housing development 
  • Daniel Bunn– Southern Oregon – land use and financing market housing 
  • Thomas Cody– Metro area – affordable and market housing development 
  • Deborah Flagan – Central Oregon – market housing development and construction
  • Ernesto Fonseca– Metro area – affordable and market housing development and financing affordable housing 
  • Elissa Gertler– Oregon Coast – land use and financing affordable housing 
  • Riley Hill– rural Oregon – land use and market housing development 
  • Natalie Janney– Willamette Valley area – land use, market housing development 
  • Robert Justus – Metro area – affordable and market housing development 
  • Joel Madsen– Columbia Gorge – affordable housing development and financing 
  • Ivory Mathews – Metro area – affordable housing development and financing
  • Erica Mills– Southern Oregon – financing affordable and market housing 
  • Eric Olsen– Willamette Valley area – construction, market housing development 
  • Gauri Rajbaidya– Metro area – affordable and market housing development 
  • Karen Rockwell – Oregon Coast – affordable and market housing development 
  • Margaret Van Vliet – Metro area – financing market and affordable housing, and affordable housing development 
  • Justin Wood – Metro – construction and market housing development 

by - 0 comments

No new taxes or fees in Portland: Don’t Believe It!

No new taxes or fees!

That was one of the recommendations of Gov. Tina Kotek’s Portland Central City Task Force convened to consider the city’s most challenging problems and recommend ways to address them. 

“Declare a moratorium on new taxes…” urges the Task Force report. “…elected officials should consider a three-year pause, through 2026, on new taxes and fees…”

Oh well, so much for that.

Your Portland property taxes, which were due Nov. 15, probably already went up and will likely go up again in 2024. According to the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy and the Minnesota Center for Fiscal Excellence, Portland ranked fifth highest nationally for effective property tax rate — a homeowner’s tax bill as a percentage of a property’s value — on a median-value home in 2022.

And Portland Commissioners Dan Ryan and Rene Gonzalez are already floating a November 2024 ballot measure that would raise property taxes to cover a $800 million bond for maintenance and new construction projects for the city’s parks and fire departments. 

Oregonians are also already paying higher gas taxes. Oregon’s gas tax increased to 40 cents as of Jan. 1, 2024. That’s an increase of two cents per gallon from last year. The new rate keeps Oregon among the ten states in the U.S. with the highest gas taxes. Propane and Natural Gas Flat Fee increases also went into effect for qualified vehicles on Jan. 1.

Portlanders (and many more folks) are also facing increases in electricity rates. PGE customers can expect to pay 18% more on their power bills starting Jan. 1. The 2024 rate increase will cost the average single-family household an extra $24.59 each month.

And then there are all the taxes and fees the 2003 Legislature gleefully enacted. 

According to the Taxpayer Association of Oregon, Oregon lawmakers passed 185 fee increases (increasing existing fees and establishing new fees) in 2023 that will mean $47 million in higher costs.

Of those, 77 new or increased fees will directly impact the cost of medicine, hospitals and health care, which are all already straining the budgets of Oregonians.  Another 47 fee increases will impact Oregon’s agriculture industry and consumers.

A list of 2024 fee increases by agency is below: 

And then there are the new fees the 2023 Legislature created:

Portlanders and almost all Oregonians are also going to be paying a new cell phone tax this year. Starting January 1, 2024, a 988 Coordinated Crisis Services Tax will be added to the existing Oregon Emergency Communications (911) Tax. The new tax was implemented by the Oregon Legislature with the passage of House Bill 2757. The $50 million a biennium tax is slated to fund the state’s new 9-8-8 suicide prevention hotline.  

DMV fees have gone up, too, touching just about everybody with a vehicle. For example:

  • Class C driver license or restricted Class C driver license, increased from $54 to $58
  • Commercial driver license, increased from $75 to $160
  • Instruction driver permit, increased from $23 to $30
  • Commercial learner driver permit, increased from $23 to $40
  • Hardship driver permit application, increased from $50 to $75
  • Fee for renewal of a commercial driver license, increased from $55 to $98
  • Fee for knowledge test for a motorcycle endorsement, increased from $5 to $7
  • Fee for a skills test for any commercial driver license, increased from $70 to $145

And the list of fee increases goes on, nickeling and diming Oregonians.  

And of course legislators are busy thinking of new taxes.

For example, because the Oregon Department of Forestry wants more money to fight wildfires, Sen. Elizabeth Steiner, D-Portland, wants to charge every property owner in the state an annual fee to pay for what she perceives as a statewide issue.

And then, of course, there’s always inflation. It has been pushed down by aggressive Federal Reserve action, but in its long-term economic projections from December, the Federal Open Market Committee forecasted core Personal Consumption Expenditures Price Index inflation will drop from 3.2% in 2023 to 2.4% in 2024 and 2.2% in 2025.

But, still, hold on to your wallet. The state is considering tolls on I-205, I-5, U.S. 26 and Highway 217.

And the beat goes on.

by - 0 comments

Are Oregon Teachers Underpaid ?

When educators from across the Portland Public Schools (PPS) district’s 81 schools began their strike on Nov. 1, they had a lengthy list of demands, with a focus on teacher salaries.

“As costs have risen here, teachers’ salaries haven’t kept up,” the National Education Association asserted in a news release supporting the PPS strike.

Data suggests, however, that Portland’s teachers were actually doing fairly well in comparison with other teachers across the country, though there is no question inflation has eroded their financial position. The same is true of Oregon teachers in general.

During the strike, PPS said the average salary for a Portland teacher was $87,000; the Portland Association of Teachers (PAT) union said it was about $83,000.  Pay can vary widely depending on multiple factors, including amount of education, certifications, additional skills, and the number of years spent in the profession.

PAT also raised concerns about pay for new teachers, with the lowest annual base salary in the district for a teacher with a BA starting at $50,020.

When the strike began, PAT wanted a 23% cost-of-living adjustment over three years; PPS offered about 11%. In the new contract, educators will receive a 14.4% compounded increase over the next three years (6.25% the first year, 4.5% the second and 3% the third) and about half of all educators will also earn a 10.6% bump from yearly step increases.

To get a handle on how all this translates into actual dollars, I asked PPS and PAT for their numbers on the current average and median salaries of educators in the district and what they expect the average and median salaries of teachers will be in the first year of the new contract?

PAT never responded. PPS responded to an initial request with a commitment to provide the data. Repeated follow-ups, however, brought nothing but excuses for the delay. Eventually my entreaties just went into a black hole. So much for public accountability.

In 2018, The Oregonian reported that in 2016-17, the average Oregon teacher made nearly $61,900 a year, higher than the national average of $59,700. Oregon ranked 13th highest for average teacher pay among the 50 states. “Oregon teachers have long been better compensated than most of their peers around the country,” the paper reported. 

In 2023, according to the National Education Association (NEA), the average Oregon teacher made $70,402 a year, higher than the national average of $66,745, and again Oregon ranked 13th highest for average teacher pay among the 50 states.

In other words, Oregon has actually been holding its own in average salaries, although the numbers for starting teacher pay are not as favorable for Oregon.

In 2023, the average salary for a starting teacher in Oregon with a bachelor’s degree and no experience was $40,374 (31st in the US, where the average was $42,844). Under the PPS contract with PAT, the salary for a starting teacher with a bachelor’s degree and no experience in 2023 was $50,020.

Averages, however, can be deceiving. Very high or very low salaries can skew the numbers. Median compensation represents a more accurate picture of how much Portland’s teachers are being paid, but neither PPS nor PAT agreed to provide median salary numbers.

The Oregon Center for Public Policy, a progressive economic research organization, argues that Oregon public school teachers are underpaid by about 22%. Even after accounting for the more generous benefits earned by public school teachers, the Center claims Oregon public school teachers are underpaid by about 9%. 

But the analysis is not based on compensation for other teachers. Rather, the Center claims Oregon teachers are underpaid “relative to comparable private-sector workers (in Oregon)…with similar levels of education and experience”.  The claim that public-school teachers endure a salary penalty with this comparison is dubious.

Less dubious was PAT’s assertion before the strike that recent inflation has eroded teachers’ wage gains over time. 

In an annual report that ranked and analyzed teacher salaries by state, the NEA estimated that the national average teacher salary for the 2021-22 school year was $66,397 — a 1.7 percent increase from the previous year. But when adjusted for inflation, the average teacher salary actually decreased by an estimated 3.9 percent over the last decade. 

In other words, teachers were making $2,179 less, on average, than they did 10 years earlier when the salaries are adjusted for inflation. A similar NEA report issued in 2023 concluded that teachers made on average $3,644 less than they did 10 years ago, adjusted for inflation.

However, comparing over a longer period, the average Oregon teacher’s salary in 1970 was $8,818. Inflation adjusted, that figure would have been $66,509.99 in 2022. In other words, although there has been a decrease in inflation-adjusted pay in recent years, average teacher salaries in Oregon have kept up with inflation over the long term.