04 21 2015
  1:31 am  
40 Years of Service

Who doesn't want to support education? Who isn't shocked by the bad repair of public schools in Portland?

And now the big question: Who can afford another $500-$1,000 in property taxes every year for the next six years? Because that's how passage of the Portland schools levy and bond measure would hit households and businesses if they are both approved by voters next week.

Costing $2 per $1,000 per assessed value, Portland School District Measures 26-121 and 26-122 dwarf other bond and levy proposals we've seen in recent years. The Portland firefighter levy last year was 13 cents per $1,000; the Oregon Zoo levy in 2008, 9 cents; the Portland Community College levy was a whopping 35.5 cents. We argued over the size of some of those measures at the time – but $2?

For a school district that has earned so much public distrust of its financial decisions – such as firing the entire janitorial staff to save $4.5 million and then paying more than $10 million a few years later when the Oregon Supreme Court ruled the firings illegal – the two funding measures now on the ballot are like a slap in the face to homeowners in a down economy.

As The Oregonian PolitiFact analysis showed last year, Superintendent Carole Smith's claim that the measure would "impact" 40 percent of all students is simply incorrect. The district says it wants to spend much of the nearly half a billion dollars in new taxes on complete rebuilds of Cleveland, Jefferson and Roosevelt High Schools – but together these schools' catchment areas only represent 23 percent of the district's student population. The Oregonian's PolitiFact Truth-O-Meter gave Smith a "Pants on Fire" rating for claims made during the funding measures rollout last November.

The district's sketchy financial pitch for the levy and bond measures underscores what's wrong with how the school district relates to taxpayers and families: Bringing out the largest bond measure in Oregon history – on the heels of a string of other funding measures brought by desperate local agencies – seems tailored to appeal to upper-income professionals at the expense of regular taxpaying homeowners who are watching the price of gas, groceries and insurance skyrocket.

Considering the state's unemployment benefits expansion this week is already set to be wiped out early by the unprecedented demand of jobless workers, we simply can't believe the Portland Public Schools could be so tone-deaf to its own community.

One more thing: The Portland district is one of the biggest property owners in Portland. A facilities management audit released in 2008 showed the district owned six 'vacant' properties; the report was titled, "Effort Needed to Improve the Capability of School Facility Maintenance Services."

Sell your vacant property, PPS. If you did, ironically, then those properties could be taxed to contribute to your own operations budget.

Who doesn't want to support the schools? Who doesn't want all our children to have the best educational facilities we can afford?

But the bottom line here was stated best by New York gubernatorial candidate Jimmy McMillan of the Rent is Too Damn High Party: Portland School District Measures 26-121 and 26-122 are too damned high. Vote no on both and send the district back to come up with solutions that won't tax us out of our homes and businesses.
What do you think?

Pacific NW Carpenters Union

Commenting Guidelines

  • Keep it clean: Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language
  • No personal attacks: We reserve the right to remove offensive comments
  • Be truthful: Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything
  • Be nice: No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person
  • Help us: If you see an abusive post, let us know at info@theskanner.com
  • Keep to topic: We will remove irrelevant posts and spam
  • Share with us: We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts; the history behind an article

Recently Published by The Skanner News

  • Default
  • Title
  • Date
  • Random
  • When should we use military to enforce US goals? NASHUA, N.H. (AP) — Rand Paul lashed out Saturday at military hawks in the Republican Party in a clash over foreign policy dividing the packed GOP presidential field. Paul, a first-term senator from Kentucky who favors a smaller U.S. footprint in the world, said that some of his Republican colleagues would do more harm in international affairs than would leading Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton. "The other Republicans will criticize the president and Hillary Clinton for their foreign policy, but they would just have done the same thing — just 10 times over," Paul said on the closing day of a New Hampshire GOP conference that brought about 20 presidential prospects to the first-in-the-nation primary state. "There's a group of folks in our party who would have troops in six countries right now, maybe more," Paul said. Foreign policy looms large in the presidential race as the U.S. struggles to resolve diplomatic and military conflicts across the globe. The GOP presidential class regularly rails against President Barack Obama's leadership on the world stage, yet some would-be contenders have yet to articulate their own positions, while others offered sharply different visions. Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, whose brother, President George W. Bush, authorized the 2003 invasion of Iraq, declined to say whether he would have done anything different then. Yet Jeb Bush acknowledged a shift in his party against new military action abroad. "Our enemies need to fear us, a little bit, just enough for them to deter the actions that create insecurity," Bush said earlier in the conference. He said restoring alliances "that will create less likelihood of America's boots on the ground has to be the priority, the first priority of the next president." The GOP's hawks were well represented at the event, led by Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, who has limited foreign policy experience but articulated a muscular vision during his Saturday keynote address. Walker said the threats posed by radical Islamic terrorism won't be handled simply with "a couple bombings." "We're not going to wait till they bring the fight to us," Walker said. "We're going to bring the fight to them and fight on their soil." South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham addressed the question of putting U.S. troops directly in the battle against the Islamic State group militants by saying there is only one way to defeat the militants: "You go over there and you fight them so they don't come here." Texas Sen. Ted Cruz suggested an aggressive approach as well. "The way to defeat ISIS is a simple and clear military objective," he said. "We will destroy them." Businesswoman Carly Fiorina offered a similar outlook. "The world is a more dangerous and more tragic place when America is not leading. And America has not led for quite some time," she said. Under Obama, a U.S.-led coalition of Western and Arab countries is conducting regular airstrikes against Islamic State targets in Iraq and Syria. The U.S. also has hundreds of military advisers in Iraq helping Iraqi security forces plan operations against the Islamic State, which occupies large chunks of northern and western Iraq. Paul didn't totally reject the use of military force, noting that he recently introduced a declaration of war against the Islamic State group. But in an interview with The Associated Press, he emphasized the importance of diplomacy. He singled out Russia and China, which have complicated relationships with the U.S., as countries that could contribute to U.S. foreign policy interests. "I think the Russians and the Chinese have great potential to help make the world a better place," he said. "I don't say that naively that they're going to, but they have the potential to." Paul suggested the Russians could help by getting Syrian President Bashar Assad to leave power. "Maybe he goes to Russia," Paul said. Despite tensions with the U.S., Russia and China negotiated alongside Washington in nuclear talks with Iran. Paul has said he is keeping an open mind about the nuclear negotiations. "The people who already are very skeptical, very doubtful, may not like the president for partisan reasons," he said, and "just may want war instead of negotiations."
    Read More
  • Some lawmakers, sensing a tipping point, are backing the parents and teachers who complain about 'high stakes' tests   
    Read More
  • Watch Rachel Maddow interview VA Secretary Robert McDonald  
    Read More
  • Some two thousand people pack halls to hear Trayvon Martin's mom speak   
    Read More
load morehold SHIFT key to load allload all
Carpentry Professionals



About Us

Breaking News

The Skanner TV

Turn the pages

Hood to Coast
The Skanner Photo Archives