Multnomah County
Measure No. 26-64
Referred To The Voters of Multnomah County by Initiative Petition
BALLOT TITLE
REPEALS 2004, 2005 COUNTY INCOME TAX FOR SCHOOLS, OTHER SERVICES
QUESTION: Shall Multnomah County’s voter approved three-year 1.25% income tax for schools and services be repealed for 2004 and 2005?
SUMMARY: On May 20, 2003, Multnomah County voters approved Measure 26-48 enacting a three year 1.25% income tax for county schools, health and senior care and public safety. The tax is on income earned in 2003, 2004, and 2005. Law creates citizen’s oversight committee to review how school districts spend county tax revenues and requires independent performance audits. Citizen’s committee issued report and audits are ongoing.
This initiative measure would repeal the county’s temporary income tax for 2004 and 2005, with tax on personal income earned during calendar year 2003 remaining due and payable. Provides no replacement funding.
The major effect of this initiative measure would be
a loss to Multnomah County public schools of about $90 million in 2004-2005 and $90 million in 2005-2006 school years for services such as teachers, programs and instructional days;
a loss of approximately $32 million each year for public safety and health and senior care (including prescription drug benefits for low income seniors, senior and disabled housing and mental health care for low income people).
EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
This initiative measure would repeal the temporary 1.25% personal income tax Multnomah County voters approved in 2003 (Measure 26-48) for county schools, health and senior care and public safety for 2004 and 2005. The county tax on personal income earned during calendar year 2003 would remain due and payable, but no county tax would be assessed on personal income earned during calendar years 2004 and 2005.
Measure 26-48 requires performance audits on how money raised through the county tax is spent. Those audits are ongoing. Measure 26-48 also created a School Efficiency and Quality Advisory Council made up of parents, educators, taxpayers, business, labor and government leaders to review expenditures by county schools districts. The Council reported in March 2004 that Multnomah County school districts received approximately $67 million from the county tax during the 2003-2004 schools years. Those funds were used to restore or maintain over 780 teachers and to restore or maintain a full schools year in all county school districts.
About 70% of the county income tax revenues are used to assist county public schools, including Centennial, Corbett, David Douglas, Gresham-Barlow, Parkrose, Portland, Reynolds, Riverdale Districts, with their funding gaps and restore some local services such as:
- Retaining teacher positions to maintain or improve student-teacher ratios;
- Maintaining instructional days to help ensure a full, 180 day school year;
- Funding programs and services that prepare students for college and the workforce;
- Communicating with citizens about achievement and accounting for the use of these tax dollars.
The measure provides no replacement funding.
As a result of this initiative measure, county schools would lose about $90 million for the 2004-2005 school year and $90 million for the 2005-2006 school year.
About 25% of revenues provide funds for health care, mental health, senior services, and public safety such as:
- Housing and living assistance to seniors and the disabled;
- Prescription drug assistance for low-income seniors;
- Emergency mental health services;
- Health, mental health and addiction treatment for offenders to help reduce recidivism;
- Prosecution of identity theft, stolen vehicles, theft, vandalism, criminal trespass and possession of controlled substances;
- Support for community courts;
- Restoration of jail beds;
- Juvenile justice and gang services - day reporting center, juvenile diversion, skill development, probation, gang outreach, receiving center/homeless youth;
- Community supervision of adult offenders;
- Restore alcohol and drug treatment for repeat offenders.
This initiative measure would also result in a loss of $32 million each year for public safety and health and senior services.
The effects of this initiative measure would be a loss of about $127 million in 2004 and $127 million in 2005. About 5% of revenues are for tax collection.
Submitted by:
Agnes Sowle,
County Attorney
Measure No. 26-64 | Multnomah County
ARGUMENT IN FAVOR
Ron McCarty, a candidate for county commissioner, urges repeal of the Multnomah County income tax.
The Multnomah County income tax is a flawed measure. Here’s why:
1.It hurts low income workers who cant’ afford to pay any more tax.
2.The commissioners rode the back of education to fund their budget for other things, which is incredible.
3.The county should not be in the business of funding education. School funding is the responsibility of the state Legislature and local school districts.
4.If you read the ballot explanation, it did not state how much money was needed for this tax, how it would be spent and for what – very open ended.
5.The commissioners exploited taxpayers by scheduling the election when many voters were away, rather than at the traditional primary or general election dates. Ron favors the repeal of the Multnomah County income tax.
(This information furnished by Ron McCarty )
The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.
Measure No. 26-64 | Multnomah County
ARGUMENT IN FAVOR
Our Politicians’ Foolish Tax:
By misleading and selling voters on establishing the first county income tax west of Indiana, the Multnomah County commissioners caused Multnomah County tax collections to skyrocket to the highest level of income taxes in the nation
Is it any wonder, then, that on April 15th, one-out-of-three taxpayers didn’t pay the tax
It was no big surprise that a lot of ordinary citizens had trouble coming up with the money. After all, county citizens and county small businesses (already the most highly taxed in the state) were already saddled with a very heavy tax burden. Because of the tax, the choice for some was pay the tax, or pay the rent.
A boondoggle of the highest order.
This tax is a colossal failure. It reflects the failure of our elected leaders to properly carry out their fiscal responsibilities. While all the other counties in the state have been able to balance their budgets without new taxes, Portland area politicians busied themselves by giving away our tax dollars for, among other things, unauthorized Snow Day benefits, baseball stadiums and pet political projects.
The county income tax cripples our economy.
Excessive taxes drain citizens buying power, make businesses less competitive, and above all, more taxes do not get us better government. In short, the Multnomah County Income Tax is sending jobs, business and citizens to other counties, other states.
More taxes do not fix reckless government spending, but more taxes absolutely prolong and encourage more wasteful spending. Multnomah County needs more jobs and businesses, not more taxes!
A yes vote to repeal the county income tax is our first step toward our economic recovery.
YES on 26-64
Send a message that we taxpayers have had enough of financial scandals and misappropriations. Measure 26-64 is a demand for immediate fiscal accountability, and for our county leaders to do their job, and balance the budget just like every other county.
(This information furnished by Don McIntire)
The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.
Measure No. 26-64 | Multnomah County
ARGUMENT IN FAVOR
The County is wasting our taxpayer dollars!
Don’t reward wasteful spending with more taxes.
Repeal the County Tax and repeal government waste!
Yes on 26-64
Examples:
-The Taxpayers lost as much as $24 million in financial mismanagement during the constructing of four county buildings (2002 County Audit).
-Unauthorized snow days benefits to government employees
-The astonishing $138,000 County librarian raise, and the county is still considering reducing library hours (Democrat Herald Oct-03)
-$250,000 for 100 tons of dirt to build a garden “green roof” on top of the Multnomah County headquarters building (Portland Tribune June-3-03)
-Offering to pay for Klingon translators (a fictitious alien language) for County Health patients who request the service (Portland Tribune 5-13-03)
-$600,000 lost every year due to poor management of County lease property, despite county auditors warnings since 1993. (County Audit 5-2004)
-Millions of local taxpayer dollars lost to the PERS crisis. The Oregonian said, “The Oregon Public Employees Retirement System, has become a ravenous fiscal monster for state and local government.” (6-27-02)
-The County’s secret meeting scandals and wasteful spending is contributing to a fiscal meltdown. We need leadership and proper money management not more taxes to fix problems the politicians created.
YES ON 26-64!
Things won’t change in Multnomah County until
Taxpayers begin demanding financial accountability!
Send a message to Diane Linn and the County Politicians.
Your have betrayed our trust and misspent our tax dollars.
We reject this income tax and choose to save our economy.
This tax repeal is a public call for the County politicians
To get their fiscal house in order.
Let us show the same fiscal discipline as every other Oregon county did when they balanced their budget without a whopping income tax increase.
For more information on how
Your government is wasting your tax dollars go to
www.oregonwatchdog.com
(503) 603-9009
(This information furnished by Don McIntire, Taxpayer Association of Oregon Repeal The Tax P.A.C.)
The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.
Measure No. 26-64 | Multnomah County
ARGUMENT IN FAVOR
Portland politicians are wasting your tax dollars.
Repeal the tax,
Repeal government waste.
Yes on 26-64
Examples:
-Millions lost in the PGE Baseball Park boondoggle! Why are we paying for a fancy baseball stadium when we can’t fund school sports?
-An estimated $35 million taxpayer dollars lost in the Water Bureau billing crisis.
-$250,000 severance payout to former School Superintendent, Ben Canada (after the board asked him to resign).
-$250,000 severance payout to former Deputy School Superintendent (after working only working seven months!)
-$282,000 consulting for Steve Goldschmidt (while working full-time only 4 of 17 months for our schools).
-$50 million a year the City spends on consultants and contractors, a number criticized by City Auditors!
-$1.2 million spent for light rail art projects
-City Councilors now want to spend millions (yes millions) on public funding of private political campaigns! Why is City Hall considering using taxpayer dollars to subsidize political advertisements when we are in a budget crisis?
Things wont’ change in Portland until
taxpayers begin demanding financial accountability!
Send a message to Portland politicians.
You have betrayed our trust and misspent our tax dollars.
We reject this income tax and choose to save our economy.
This tax repeal is a public call for the City and County politicians
to get their fiscal house in order.
Let us show the same fiscal discipline as the other Oregon local governments did when they balanced their budget without a whopping income tax increase.
For more information on how the city is wasting your tax dollars go to:
www.oregonwatchdog.com
(503) 603-9009
Sources: Portland Tribune 1/7/03. Willamette Week 10-03-01. Severance 2/11/2003, Portland City Audit 12-01 The Oregonian 10-5-01. The Oregonian 4-8-04
(This information furnished by Don McIntire, Taxpayer Association of Oregon Repeal The Tax P.A.C.)
The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.
Measure No. 26-64 | Multnomah County
ARGUMENT IN FAVOR
Multnomah’s high taxes
and a business hostile environment
are driving businesses out of Oregon!
-K-line container shipping, leaving for Tacoma 2004
-Hyundai Merchant Marine, Leaving 2004
-Albertson’s NW Headquarters left for Idaho, 2004
-Wells Fargo Financial left for Vancouver: 2003
-Kuni Automotive left for Vancouver: 2003
-Albina Fuel left for Vancouver: 2003
-Gardenburger left for Utah: 2003
-Louisiana Pacific left to Nashville: 2003
-Meier & Frank left to Los Angeles: 2002
-Willamette Industries (bought) left to Washington: 2002
“Portland essentially is shedding jobs,
and the rest of the state, on net, is flat.
Portland, for the most part, is dragging everyone else down”
Eric Moore, Oregon Employment Department,
(Eugene Register Guard 12-29-03).
“Nationally, the number of bankruptcies fell 7.8%.
but Oregon is running counter to that trend.
The number of Oregon businesses filing bankruptcy in the
last fiscal year reached 1,714, up 19% from the previous earlier”
(The Register Guard 11-15-03)
REPEAL THE TAX! YES on 26-64!
Send a message that business is welcome again in Oregon.
Repeal the County Tax.
Let’s raise revenue for schools by expanding the tax base
--as opposed to chasing the tax base away with high taxes!
For more information on Oregon high taxes go to
www.oregonwatchdog.com
(503) 603-9009
(Note: business list above = notice of, or in the process of leaving)
(This information furnished by Jason Williams, Taxpayer Association of Oregon Repeal The Tax P.A.C.)
The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.
Measure No. 26-64 | Multnomah County
ARGUMENT IN FAVOR
“THE ENDS DO NOT JUSTIFY THE MEANS’
The ends which may be noble (increased funding of education) do not justify means which are not appropriate (using a county-wide income tax).
DID NOT PAY ANY MC INCOME TAX
I am one of the three chief petitioners advocating its immediate repeal even though, as a PERS retiree, I did not owe a single dollar of this county income tax in 2003. It’s probably that I won’t every have to pay this tax.
WHY ADVOACTE IMMEDIATE REPEAL?
The funding of K-12 education by the state of Oregon has traditionally been augmented by voter controlled local district property taxes. Following this model, K-12 education is usually funded by state income taxes and local district property taxes which are determined on a district by district basis.
LOCAL VOTERS SAID NO, BUT MUST PAY TAX
The voters in six of the seven school districts in Multnomah County (Corbett, Gresham-Barlow, Reynolds, Centennial, Parkrose and David Douglas) voted NO on the county income tax. I believe that as far as funding education is concerned the vote of those local district citizens should prevail. Therefore, I support immediate REPEAL.
MISUSE OF TAXING AUTHORITY
Voters in one of Multnomah County’s seven school districts (Portland) voted YES overwhelmingly. This created what certainly is an unusual use of taxing authority in the other six school districts when compared to Oregon’s traditional standards. While it is true that about 30 percent of the tax is used to fund what are the normal and proper function of Multnomah County, about 70 percent goes to education, which is NOT the normal and proper function of county government.
REPEAL THE MULTNOMAH COUNTY INCOME TAX.
A county income tax which is levied to provide additional money to school districts is an iniquity. Let’s close the door on future and present use of this type of mischief. PLEASE VOTE YES FOR IMMEDIATE REPEAL.
Roger McDowell, 8/25/04
(This information furnished by Roger McDowell)
The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.
Measure No. 26-64 | Multnomah County
ARGUMENT IN FAVOR
I DON’T HAVE TO PAY IT
(That’s why I’m against it.)
There are a number of good reasons to repeal the Multnomah County income tax. In fact, the text of Measure 26-64 contains three of them. Those are the reasons I voted against the tax and will vote for its repeal by voting yes on 26-64.
However, there is something not mentioned in measure but is still another very good reason to throw out the tax. It is the reason I volunteered to help gather the signatures needed to put this measure on the ballot.
Guess who’s off the hook?
Last Spring, when most working people in Multnomah County got whacked with the new tax, there was a goodly number who didn’t have to pay it, including me.
If you are wondering why some of us are off the hook, it’s because we have government jobs and government retirement. The way this tax is levied, any Multnomah County resident entitled to government retirement benefits (PERS) is excused from paying it.
Simply because I was a public highschool teacher, I don’t have to pay the tax, while my neighbors who don’t have government jobs, have to carry the weight of the extra burden. That is just not fair.
The irony of it all
The Oregon Constitution contains a uniformity clause which states that all citizens should be treated the same. In spite of that, it’s clear our government is not letting the Constitution stand in the way of awarding government employees preferential treatment over private citizens.
The irony of all this is that those who benefit the most from this tax because it goes directly to their pay and benefits, don’t have to pay it.
It’s not only a bad tax, it’s unfair to boot.
Repeal it. Vote Yes on 26-64
(This information furnished by Sharon Flood)
The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.
Measure No. 26-64 | Multnomah County
ARGUMENT IN FAVOR
As a former vice-chairman of the Senate Revenue Committee my job was to oversee legislation involving taxation of those working in Oregon. When I heard Multnomah County chairwoman Diane Linn describe the county’s income tax as having the wording taken directly from Oregon tax law I was quite interested in researching her claim.
Oregon applies its taxes equally to all who work here. Even if you line in Clark County and work in Multnomah County you still must pay Oregon income tax. Yet Multnomah County’s income tax applies only to those who both work and live here. If you work here but live in any county other than Multnomah you pay no income tax. That structure has absolutely nothing to do with that used by the State of Oregon. Add in the fact public employee retirees do not pay the tax and it becomes an even greater burden on those who are required to pay.
That is a grossly unfair tax structure and encourages additional individuals, and jobs, to leave our county. The Portland metro region already is considered the fourth most costly in the nation. We certainly do not need yet another tax, and a significantly unfair one at that.
I’m the father of two sons, ages 5 and 10, attending Portland Public Schools. A quality educational system is my top priority. Yet I feel compelled to speak out against what I see as a poorly conceived attempt by government at gaining additional revenue. Add up all of the funds diverted from public education, police, and fire through the use of tax breaks for real estate developers, and the government’s use of urban renewal zones, and you will find it far exceeds the total budget of the Portland Public School system.
We simply have politicians who do not have their priorities straight. Our kids really should come first. Vote YES to repeal this very unfair tax. Thank you.
The Hon. Thomas Wilde
(This information furnished by Thomas Wilde)
The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.
Measure No. 26-64 | Multnomah County
ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION
A Message to the Voters and Taxpayers of Multnomah County from students, seniors, and the most vulnerable members of our community.
Before you read the Voters Pamphlet Statement arguments on Measure 26-64, we have something we would like to say.
THANK YOU.
We know it’s a sacrifice.
We want you to know it has made a difference.
You are keeping our schools open.
You are providing prescriptions, housing and emergency assistance to seniors in need.
You are providing medications, treatment and emergency assistance to the mentally ill.
You are keeping all of us safe by ensuring that the most dangerous offenders are in jail, and not on the streets.
You did this with your vote last year. You stood up for your community when others failed us. We want you to know the money went where it was supposed to.
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU.
(This information furnished by Kate Raphael, NO ON 26-64 STOP THE REPEAL campaign)
The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.
Measure No. 26-64 | Multnomah County
ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION
Nobody enjoys paying taxes.
And it’s easy to be frustrated with politics.
But turning our back on local schoolchildren, seniors in need and the mentally ill won’t solve that.
And that is who Measure 26-64 will hurt.
Last year, County voters passed a temporary local income tax to fill the gaping hole left by the State Legislature’s failure to protect our schools, seniors, safety and our community’s most vulnerable people.
Here’s what the money was spent on:
All 8 Multnomah County District Schools
- Maintained a full-year of school.
- Avoided over 700 teacher layoffs.
- Restored basic programs.
Senior Services
- Kept about 900 seniors in their homes
- Provided hundreds of low-incomes seniors with prescription drug aid.
- Provided long-term health care to hundreds of needy seniors.
- Provides emergency housing for over 200 needy seniors and disabled.
Public Safety
- Retained 43 Law Enforcement Deputies
- Funded jail capacity for 329 serious offenders.
- Funded prosecution of theft-related felonies.
- Investigated more child abuse cases.
- Provided outpatient drug and alcohol treatment and DUII services for over 2,700 people
Health Care
- Provided food vouchers, nutrition education for 18,500 low-income pregnant women and infants.
- Restored tuberculosis and other communicable disease prevention.
- Provided 1000 health care visits for low-income patients in Gresham.
Mental Health & Disabilities Services
- Maintained urgent walk-in clinic, response units and crisis call center for nearly 20,000 mentally ill.
- Provided outpatient treatment and medications for over 1,700 mentally ill patients.
- Retained school mental health counselors.
- Covered case management for 3,400 people with developmental disabilities.
That is what Measure 26-64 will cut.
If you are upset with the priorities or actions of local leaders there are ways to let them know. But voting for this measure shouldn’t be one of them.
PLEASE VOTE NO ON 26-64
(This information furnished by Reverend Benjamin Owre)
The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.
Measure No. 26-64 | Multnomah County
ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION
PTAs URGE A NO VOTE ON MEASURE 26-64
Parent Teachers’ Associations (PTAs) are one of the reasons our schools succeed. They represent all the elements of good schools: parent volunteers, dedicated teachers and a joint commitment to an education that builds successful futures, good citizens and a strong community.
But the greatest PTA in the world cannot replace the basics of a good education.
- To learn, kids need to be in school enough days of the year.
- They need classes small enough so the teacher can spend time with them.
- They need the basic educational programs that will challenge them, and will give them the tools the need for their future.
That is what the temporary local income tax has meant for schools. No more, no less.
The local income tax provides our schools with much-needed temporary funding, and the money is being spent exactly as promised. The School Efficiency and Quality Advisory Council (SEAC) oversees the use of these local tax dollars. In its March 18, 2004 report, SEAC concluded that, “97% of funds [dedicated for schools] go directly to teaching and learning. The remainder goes to central support for those school-based activities.”
(Please see www.seacinfo.org for more information.)
The temporary tax has filled the hole left by state funding shortfalls and the struggling economy. It’s all we have, locally, to bridge the gap in our community. And the money it generates for schools goes directly to the kids.
In a sense, we are all the PTA for our community’s schools. And we all have an interest in their success, whether or not we have children or grandchildren, nieces, nephews or neighborhood children in them right now.
So please join all the local PTA’s of the Portland Council of PTA’s by
Voting NO on Measure 26-64!
(This information furnished by Lotto Schell, Portland Council of PTA’s)
The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.
Measure No. 26-64 | Multnomah County
ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION
Parent Volunteers Know Our Schools,
And They Know Our Schools Need Measure 26-48.
As active volunteers, we are in our local schools everyday, across our community. We know firsthand the challenges our schools have to meet. Without volunteers, without teachers reaching into their own pockets to pay for supplies, and without the extraordinary dedication to kids demonstrated by everybody involved, we cannot deliver the education our kids need to succeed.
The miracle is that our kids are getting that education – a challenging and varied curriculum validated by the fact that the overwhelming majority of parents send their kids to public schools. That’s not true in most other cities, and those places have suffered greatly as a result.
BUT WITH MEASURE 26-64, WE COULD LOSE ALL OF THAT.
Our temporary local income tax isn’t paying for “frills” or “extras.”
It pays for the very foundation of a sound education, in each school in Multnomah County.
We must defeat Measure 26-64 to protect the basics:
- The length of the school year;
- The number of kids in the classroom;
- Basic educational programs.
And something else that is very important: The money for schools is going directly into the classroom. It does not go towards administration. And there are regular independent audits, so the public is getting information on how the money is being spent.
There’s another reason we oppose Measure 26-64: We are members of this community. We can’t count on the Legislature. We must continue to help ourselves, to make sure this remains a successful, safe and community where families can raise their children.
VOTE NO ON MEASURE 26-64!
Gerald Anvil, Volunteer, Centennial Schools
Beverly Fischer, Volunteer, David Douglas School District
Donna Edgley, Volunteer, Reynolds Schools
Toby Rubin, Volunteer, Shaver Elementary – Parkrose
Gabriel Shannon, Parent Volunteer – Grant High School
Kathleen Roy, Parent Volunteer, Atkinson School
Ruth Adkins, Parent Volunteer, Mary Rieke Elementary School
Linda Lovett, Parent Volunteer, Lincoln High School
(This information furnished by Kathleen Roy, parent volunteer Atkinson School)
The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.
Measure No. 26-64 | Multnomah County
ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION
A Message from
Fire Chief Ed Wilson
VOTING NO ON MEASURE 26-64 IS CRITICAL
As firefighters, we are proud to be the first line of defense in protecting our community.
When you think of us, you most likely think of people going into burning buildings. But we are also the first responders for medical emergencies and accidents. We are the people that are called when there is a crisis affecting someone’s health or safety.
That is why we have a particularly good view of the critical importance of voting NO on Measure 26-64. When our community’s safety net is in tatters, we are the ones who must try to catch those who fall through the holes.
What happens when we lose the services that our local funding pays for? We see the evidence every day.
- We answer calls from seniors are cut off form their medication, and the assistance they need to live independently.
- We answer calls from severely mentally ill people who have lost the medication they need to function, and have been turned onto the streets.
- We answer calls for children who have lost health care coverage, so that the first time they get medical treatment is from one of us.
- We need to maintain the basic services that make a community a community – nothing more, and nothing less.
As a 27-year firefighter and Chief, I am dedicated to keeping you safe, and providing a good example to young people that it is important to do the right thing, even when it is difficult. That is true for us as voters as well, and it is why I hope you will join me in voting no on Measure 26-64.
It is a matter of safety, and it is the right thing to do
for our seniors, our schools and the people who need us most.
(This information furnished by Edward Wilson, Fire Chief)
The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.
Measure No. 26-64 | Multnomah County
ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION
SMALL BUSINESSES SAY PLEASE VOTE NO ON 26-64
Our voter-approved temporary tax has kept its promise of accountability.
We shouldn’t repeal it.
Small business creates most of the jobs for our community. It is also represents the entrepreneurship, energy and hard work key to our economic future.
As small business owners, we were strong supporters of the passage of the temporary Multnomah County Income Tax last year, because we know that our success depends on a strong, vital community.
The elements of a community’s success are the same as ours: vision, commitment and wise investment.
Those are reasons voters overwhelmingly approved this necessary, temporary measure to protect our schools and basic services.
We looked at the question of continuing the commitment we made just as we would evaluate an investment in our own businesses.
Has it offered a good return? The answer is yes.
- It protects our schools, which provide a reliable and productive workforce. And a community with good public schools helps attract the talent and investment we need to thrive.
- It protects critical public safety services for stronger and safer neighborhoods.
- It restores critical cuts seniors, the disabled, the mentally ill, and others. That means a decent, livable community.
As small businesspeople, accountability is important to us: the money for schools goes directly into the classrooms. The services goes directly to the people in need: seniors, the mentally ill, the disabled.
And there’s no question that if this repeal succeeds, these services will be cut immediately. It’s not good for our community, and it isn’t good for our businesses.
A tax isn’t something one looks forward to. But this is money well-spent, wisely invested and accountably tracked.
VOTE NO ON 26-64.
It’s a good business decision.
Neil Kelly Company, Inc
Powell’s Books
Grand Central Baking Company
Earl’s Barbershop
Ron Tonkin Family of Dealerships
Kitchen Kaboodle
Gresham Sanitary Service
Paloma Clothing
Linnton Feed & Seed Store
Thinker Toys
(This information furnished by Mike Roach and Kim Osgood, Paloma Clothing)
The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.
Measure No. 26-64 | Multnomah County
ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION
Local School Principals*
On Measure 26-64
When it comes to our schools’ direction, a principal is captain of the ship. It’s a big responsibility to ensure our passengers – our students – arrive safely at their destination. That’s at risk, right now.
It doesn’t matter how skilled or dedicated a ship’s captain is if the crew or engine is lost. And that can happen in our local schools – if Measure 26-64 passes.
Children can’t learn if they’re not in school and they don’t have enough teachers.
Unless we retain our temporary local income tax, the loss of school days, teaching positions and basic educational programs will rob us of our ability to provide a basic education. The ship will not just slow down, it will capsize.
If this source of funds is repealed, some schools will close weeks early. Others will see dramatic increases in class sizes. Programs for kids at risk of dropping out, sports, outdoor school, and summer school – will be cut. We operate on very tight budgets already: loss of this funding means cuts in teaching and learning in our classrooms.
We thank County taxpayers for shouldering this responsibility of retaining basic local services. We know the tax is substantial. However, the alternative means compromising our children’s basic education.
The temporary tax gives our schools breathing room needed for a full school year, protects teaching positions and ensures reasonable class sizes.
Every student in every school gets the same funding from the tax.
Don’t give up the ship! Protect our schools, our kids, our future.
Vote NO on Measure 26-64
Penny Alby, Principal, Parkrose Middle School
Randy Hutchinson, Principal, David Douglas High School
Tim Oberg, Principal, Hall Elementary, Gresham-Barlow Schools
Carla Randall, Principal, Wilson High School
Joseph Malone, Principal, Ockley Green Middle School
Helen Nolen, Principal, Buckman Elementary School
Heather Hull, Principal, Woodmere Elementary School
Portland Public Schools
*Neither taxpayer dollars nor public time was used to create, or support, this statement.
(This information furnished by Carla Randall, Wilson High School, Portland Public Schools)
The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.
Measure No. 26-64 | Multnomah County
ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION
Vote No on the Repeal: Local Support Crucial to East County Schools
Nobody likes to pay more taxes, especially right now, but we cannot turn our backs on our community’s most pressing needs.
Please keep the commitment to support local services, and remember how the temporary local income tax helps every local school – including East County schools!
Here’s what it delivers for East County Schools:
- Parkrose: the ITAX provides 13% of our budget, without which we would lose 19 teaching positions, causing class sizes to grow and kids to get less attention from their teachers.
- Centennial Schools: the ITAX funds 12% of our budget without which we would lose school days and teaching positions, as well as education support staff in classrooms, the library, and programs that assist kids at-risk of dropping out.
- Gresham-Barlow: the ITAX funds nearly 11% of our budget, without which we would lose over 100 positions, including teachers and educational support staff – causing class sizes to grown significantly.
- David Douglas: the ITAX funds 11% of our budget. If repealed, possible effects include class size increases, reduction in secondary classes, deferral of textbook purchases and elimination of Outdoor School.
- Reynolds Schools: the ITAX is 13.8% of the budget. Repeal of the tax means severe cuts to school days and/or teaching positions – meaning larger class sizes throughout our schools.
The tax funds all 40,000 public school students in East County Schools. It’s a great example of using local money for local services.
Each student receives the exact same level of per student funding as students in Portland Public Schools.
Please don’t harm our local schools because of frustrations with local officials.
Vote NO on 26-64. It’s the right thing to do.
Jon McHenry,
School Board Chair
Centennial Schools
Michael E. Centoni,
David Douglas School District,
Board Chair
Katherine Ruthraff,
Gresham-Barlow
School Board
Katie Larsell,
Parkrose School Board,Chair
Terry Kneisler, Superintendent
Reynolds School District
(This information furnished by Jon McHenry, Centennial Schools, School Board Chair)
The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.
Measure No. 26-64 | Multnomah County
ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION
A message from our local classroom teachers
We Must Protect the Two Most Important Elements of a Good Education:
Time in the Classroom and Individual Attention
As teachers, we spend every day in the classroom with one goal – to give young people the education they need to become successful adults and productive citizens. Of the many elements of a good education, two are absolutely indispensable: days in the classroom and individual attention.
That is why defeating Measure 26-64 is so important.
Days in the Classroom
We are proud of the varied and challenging curriculum we offer our students. It takes time in the classroom for them to be able to master the work. Voters last year restored funding for a full school year for all students in Multnomah County. It is one of the basics of education. If Measure 26-64 passes, we won’t have it.
Individual Attention for Students
A sound education also requires that teachers spend individual time with the students. That’s especially true when a child needs some extra help because he or she is struggling with a subject, or wants to learn more. It’s impossible, however, when class sizes become so large that teaching becomes more of an exercise in traffic control than giving children the attention they need. Measure 26-64 will cause crippling class size increases.
Strong schools mean a strong community.
And this tax funding is vital to EVERY public school in the County.
And giving young people a good future is the right thing to do.
Let’s keep the promise of a sound education.
PLEASE VOTE NO ON MEASURE 26-64!
Linda Timmel, teacher
Sacramento Elementary
Parkrose Schools Steve Rosenfeld, teacher
Jason Lee Elementary
Portland Public Schools
Ann Nice, President
Portland Association of Teachers Dennis Storey, teacher
Kelly Creek Elementary School
Gresham-Barlow School District
Tammy Sykes, teacher
Davis Elementary
Reynolds School District Karen Engdahl, teacher
Harold Oliver Primary
Centennial School District
Stephanie Myhre, Teacher
David Douglas School District
(This information furnished by Ann Nice, President, Portland Association of Teachers)
The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.
Measure No. 26-64 | Multnomah County
ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION
SENIOR CITIZENS OPPOSE MEASURE 26-64:
We made a commitment to protect vulnerable senior citizens, our children, our community and it’s a promise worth keeping!
Senior citizens are strong opponents of Measure 26-64, because the temporary income tax does so much to assist frail elderly people with prescription drug coverage, housing assistance, transportation, and the ability to live independently in their homes.
It’s common decency to keep the commitment to senior citizens that need our help.
The temporary county income tax:
- Maintains relief for costly prescription drugs. If cut, many seniors will simply be unable to afford the drugs they need, and will have to do without;
- Restored funding for Oregon Project Independence, Keeping more than 900 seniors living independently in their homes. Loss of this cost effective program would be devastating;
- Maintains medical transportation for low-income seniors throughout the year;
- Maintains emergency housing for low-income seniors and people with long-term disabilities who are homeless or at risk for homelessness;
- Retains funding for prosecuting crimes like identity theft, which target vulnerable seniors.
Continuing this three-year, temporary source of funding speaks to our values. Seniors helped build this community. We shouldn’t dismantle their basic services.
The temporary income tax is especially fair to those on fixed incomes. This isn’t a property tax – it’s based on the ability to pay.
There are regular audits with public reports, and citizen. We know the money is spent on what we voted for, and it stays in this community.
PLEASE VOTE NO ON MEASURE 26-64
Elders in Action Commission
Oregon Association of Retired Citizens
Save Oregon Seniors
(This information furnished by Patricia L. Brost, Elders in Action Commission)
The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.
Measure No. 26-64 | Multnomah County
ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION
Multnomah County’s Sheriff and District Attorney Ask You to Vote NO on the Repeal
Last year, our community faced cuts to our public safety system that would have had a real and damaging impact on our community. But thanks to the voters of Multnomah County, we avoided it.
The Temporary Tax for School, Services and Safety maintained a basic level of public safety services in our community. Here is what it paid for:
- Jail capacity for 329 dangerous adult offenders. This means crimes like assault, armed robbery and rape.
- Prosecution of theft-related felonies.
- Investigation of more child abuse cases.
- Outpatient drug and alcohol treatment for 1,624 and DUII support services for 1,140.
- 43 Law Enforcement Deputies were retained instead of being laid off.
The simple fact is that without the ITAX, the money for these services disappears. And because of the way the repeal — Measure 26-64 — is written, the cuts to public safety will be retroactive.
That will make the cuts larger.
We have an obligation to be straightforward with you, our employers. Our job is to run your public safety system. If this repeal happens, we cannot tell you honestly that what we will have is a system.
And criminals will know it.
We understand that this temporary tax represents a sacrifice. But it truly is needed to maintain the basic functioning of our criminal justice system.
PLEASE VOTE NO ON MEASURE 26-64
Bernie Guisto Michael Schrunk
Multnomah County Sheriff Multnomah County District Attorney
(This information furnished by Michael D. Schrunk, Multnomah County District Attorney)
The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.
Measure No. 26-64 | Multnomah County
ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION
Measure 26-64:
What are the facts for the Mentally Ill?
Measure 26-64 will repeal the final 2 years of a 3-year commitment we made to thousands of people who are mentally ill and/or suffering from addiction to drugs and alcohol. Before ending this funding, please consider what it has paid for in the year since voters approved it, and what it will continue to pay for in the coming year:
Local services for the Mentally Ill
- Maintaining urgent walk-in clinics, a mobile response unit and a crisis call center for the mentally ill responding to 16,860 calls.
- Restoring outpatients mental health treatment for 1,039 people who otherwise could not afford it.
- Providing medications for 707 people who otherwise could not afford it.
- Retaining mental health counselors in schools for 950 children, adolescents and families.
Total people receiving critical Mental Health Services: 19,556
For many people who are mentally ill, medication is the only way they can function, and avoid becoming a danger to themselves and others. Measure 26-64 takes away the funding that provides these medications as well as the other services described above. To do so would be irresponsible and cruel.
And Measure 26-64 could cost us more in the long run, as many desperately ill people who currently receive help will wind up in Emergency Rooms and jails, as they try to survive without treatment and medication.
PLEASE VOTE NO ON MEASURE 26-64.
DON’T REPEAL LOCAL MENTAL HEALTH FUNDING.
IT’S A PROMISE WORTH KEEPING.
IT’S THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
Cascadia Behavioral Health NAMI of Multnomah County
(formerly National Alliance for the Mentally Ill)
www.nami.org/multnomah
(This information furnished by John A. Holmes, NAMI of Multnomah County)
The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.
Measure No. 26-64 | Multnomah County
ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION
The Multnomah County and Portland Auditors urge you to VOTE NO:
WE PROMISED ACCOUNTABILITY.
AND WE ARE DELIVERING.
When you passed the temporary local income tax last year, you expanded our audit authority to track how the money was spent in schools and to spot ways to get better results.
As your independent elected auditors, we can report those promises are being kept, and we have much more work to do:
- Money for school is now being tracked and clearly reported to the public, right to the level of the classroom.
- We continue to regularly conduct audits of human services and public safety to get the best value for all tax dollars spent to help people in need, keep inmates in jail, supervise those in the community, and for services proven to prevent crime.
This tax, for the first time, ensures school districts are getting independent performance audits. The audits focus on spending and results, which are the priorities that will find the right kinds of cuts, and improve classroom success.
You, as the public, have a right to know and to be confident that your priorities are understood and met. Our reports on each the school districts are online at www.multnomahschools.org and available from our offices.
Please know that ongoing sharp-pencil work on the schools is needed to meet your expectations of accountability and best value for tax dollars. On our website you can find the list of audits we plan for the next two years.
We urge you to vote NO on 26-64 so we can continue this important audit work on your behalf.
We are confident that the local income tax is delivering on its promise for greater accountability. You can get the facts from us throughout the duration of the temporary tax. That is written into the law, and we are making sure it happens.
Gary Blackmer Suzanne Flynn
Auditor, City of Portland Auditor, Multnomah County
(This information furnished by Suzanne Flynn, Multnomah County Auditor)
The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.
Measure No. 26-64 | Multnomah County
ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION
Leading School Advocacy Groups Oppose Measure 26-64
Voters passed a local income tax last year to pay for basic help for families, seniors and children, and to support our schools. IT IS WORKING.
WE URGE YOU TO VOTE NO ON MEASURE 26-64.
VOTE NO so we don’t repeal the full school year.
Keep students in school until mid-June — save the school year.
VOTE NO so we don’t lose teachers for our classrooms.
Prevent more than 700 teacher layoffs, and retain basic educational programs.
VOTE NO to keep class sizes from getting any bigger.
Maintain reasonable class sizes, giving students the individual attention they need.
Community & Parents for Public Schools, the Portland Schools Alliance and Stand for Children all believe Measure 26-64 would damage not only our schools, but our community values.
VOTING NO supports our economy. Without a strong school system, we cannot attract and retain high-wage jobs in our country. STRONG SCHOOLS MEAN BETTER JOBS.
VOTING NO preserves our democracy. Public schools are the cornerstone of the American Dream, providing a path to prosperity for all. If Measure 26-64 passes, public school funding and quality will drop. Once parents leave the public school system, it is very hard to get them back.
VOTING NO continues our care for the needy. If local funding for local services is repealed, it is the most vulnerable in our community who will suffer.
VOTE NO on Measure 26-64!
Community & Parents for Public School
Portland Schools Alliance
Stand for Children
(This information furnished by Mary Lynn O’Brain, Chair, Portland Stand for Children)
The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.