Double “No” to Portland school levies

Oregonian reporter Betsy Hammond’s article “Portland school board will seek two tax hikes in May” reports:

The finance committee of the Portland school board voted unanimously tonight to ask voters to raise property taxes dedicated to paying operating costs of Portland Public Schools by about 60 percent, from $1.25 per $1,000 of assessed property value to $1.99 per $1,000.

That would make for a second school tax hike on the May ballot for voters who live within Portland Public Schools' boundaries. The board already has put a $548 million school construction bond out for a May vote.

Board members said the dire forecasts of having to cut hundreds of teaching jobs to balance the 2011-12 budget drove them to make a second "big ask" from voters.

The average home in the school district is worth about $230,000 and assessed at about $175,000. Currently, that property owner pays no property tax for school construction (the last bond expired in 2006) and pays about $220 in so-called local-option levy taxes to pay for teachers, textbooks and other core costs of running Portland schools.

If voters approve both tax increases, to bolster school operating budgets and to upgrade school buildings, the owner of that average home assessed at $175,000 would see the property tax bill rise by nearly $500 a year -- about $350 a year for the construction bonds and about $130 for the higher operating levy.

I am against them. Unless there are changes, I’ll vote against them. I’m already campaigning against  the construction bond levy – if only a little. I’ll do more near the May vote and also campaign against the operating levy. As I said in November about the construction bond levy (here):

I’m a “no” voter, and possible “vote no”campaigner, until PPS begins creation of a high school study abroad program and until PPS has clear plans to add Mandarin immersion classes to the levels supported by parental demand. I see no good  purpose in investing in an outdated school system that is not moving to meet 21^st century economic and national security needs. The school system needs to change first. 

So, while I’m generally supportive of spending more on education, we have to get what we are paying for right. I hope Portland Public Schools will make some progress on a high school study abroad program and more Mandarin immersion classes before May. Then I could vote for both levies. Otherwise, come May, it's a double "No."

Comments

[oregongrown]

Dave:

In reference to your comments about PPS Bond 26-121, the numbers are based on the MEDIAN assessed value, not the average assessed value. One half of those assessed in Portland are above the median and will pay much more than the numbers given by the O and PPS.

Here is the trend for Portlanders that owe more on their home than it is worth:

~ In February 2010- 17% of Portland homeowners were underwater in their mortgages.
~ In August 2010- 22% of Portland homeowners were underwater in their mortgages.
~ In February 2011, 32% of Portland homeowners are underwater in their mortgages.

And that number nationwide is 27%, so Portland is picking up speed and taking the lead in this measure of instability.

So, the trend is clear.

And in this climate of devastation for thousands, PPS wants to sink all Portland homeowners even further in debt for their two big demands of the biggest bond in Oregon's history, and also to increase the Portland local levy tax, that was supposed to expire in 2012, to the highest maximum, a 60% increase.

Also, what taxpayers need to keep in mind is in addition to PPS new taxes, other new taxes will be on their new bill in November 2011:
1) Portland Fire Bureau
2) Oregon Historical Society
3) Portland Police and Fire Disability fund- going up 15% for one year alone.
4) And the new library district was put in place to give us new taxes as well (not yet voted in).
5) Add this to the automatic 3% tax increase every year, and the numbers are huge.

Many will be forced from their homes.
I think many of us see this as completely out of our control. I am reaching out to my own circle here in Portland, with emails and asking them to forward. It won't be enough.

The last two days the O finally printed two letters to the editor of those saying they are against it. Both letters were from retired homeowners. So, I mailed a letter to each of those couples asking them to talk to neighbors, friends and family.

Vote NO on 26-121. It's not for the children; as Bobbie Regan, one Portland School Board member said, ""We are talking about protecting family-wage jobs in Portland."

Thanks Bobbie. We always knew that was it. We always knew it wasn't "for the children." It has to do with keeping thousands of jobs for PPS, whether we need them or not.

Please contact your circle of influence to help the NO effort.

Thank you.

[Pandora]

Vote NO on 26-121. It's not for the children; as Bobbie Regan, one Portland School Board member said, ""We are talking about protecting family-wage jobs in Portland

[louboutin sale]

26-121. It's not for the children; as Bobbie Regan, one Portland School Board member said, ""We are talking about protecting family-wage jobs in Portlan

[christian louboutin]

"We are talking about protecting family-wage jobs in Portlan

[louboutin uk]

26-121. It's not for the children; as Bobbie Regan, one Portland School Board member said, "

[christian louboutin]

Vote NO on 26-121. It's not for the children; as Bobbie Regan, one Portland School Board member said,