This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on January 5, 2011 4:45 PM. The previous post in this blog was Kroger to Kulongoski: Beat it, Grandpa, I'm next. The next post in this blog is Pro football overtime will be different in playoffs. Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

E-mail, Feeds, 'n' Stuff

Wednesday, January 5, 2011

Portland schools want *two* property tax measures?

On top of the half-billion-dollar-plus construction bonds, they want to extend their local property tax levy for operations as well? That ought to be an interesting sell in the depths of the recession.

Comments (12)

Thank you Vicki Phillips for your behind the scenes shenanigans.

I wish we could demand a "no confidence" referendum instead. None of these systems have any remaining integrity or credibility.

"That ought to be an interesting sell in the depths of the recession."

Easy sell, anytime:
"It's for the children. The children are our future."

The public unions are not to be stopped, regardless if it is shiny new buildings to work in, or continuation of gold plated PERS pensions and Cadillac Health insurance. The children, please remember the children!

Harry is correct. In the immortal words of Helen Lovejoy, "oh won't somebody please think of the children!".

I'm sure we'll see kids excused from math or english classes to help protest march with little signs.

This is probably how they will pay for the move to give the old headquarters to Costco.

I saw some guy from PPS on the news the other night saying that they havent been in talks with Costco or the city, but even if they were, the entire move would have to be financed without using their budgeted money.

Yes, it all has to do with land land land and construction deals. Use the children when money is needed for pet projects. Just looks like the children and what is in their best interests doesn't matter otherwise.
Adults playing the "kiddie card."
Shame on them!

They know the bond won't pass even with simple majority requirement in effect for May.

Rosa Parks, their new 21st century model has a bill coming due soon with no way to pay it, without exposing the scheme to the public. Please look closely at this example.

PPS is disingenuous in their complaints, in that they are complicit as a party to the continual and ongoing boundary realignments to match with the new proposed URA so those public/private partnerships can get the tax credits/deferrals.

Council says they have no authority over PPS and PPS says they are not subject to City Ordinance or land use law.

Wasn't it the mayor who is discussing the Blanchard redevelopment? Wasn't he the treasurer of the Real Estate Trust?

The money we pay to PPS with our property taxes, is then diverted to other uses /Capital projects, not schools. If this levy increase is approved, (and you have no say or vote) the additional tax beyond that which you already pay will be a lien against your property without your consent.

Seeing the pattern here with financing schemes like URAs and TIF?

PPS has disposed of 32 properties in the recent past. They set up a dedicated fund for those proceeds 8.70.042 which is a paper sham. Where are those proceeds and that income stream? They're not saying.

How did the public benefit?

The Real Market Value of the remaining 92 schools increased by $16 Billion in 2007/08 alone, according to the TSCC audit. How much did the public lose by allowing PPS to manage and disinvest our public land and facilities portfolio?

We lost 30-45 existing recreational fields which we now must replace with general fund dollars or an additional tax lien on your property to meet 2020 goals.
Yes we are repurchasing that which we already owned. Sometimes more than twice.

How much will they cost to repurchase if they can be bought? You will soon find out.

See the pattern here?

Did PPS even have legitimate tile to convey? They won't respond to this question and certainly won't provide it. Many properties have reversions, or specific use emcumberances attached to the deeds by donors who knew the perils of political dealings.

No problem if you do partnerships. See Washington High. Oh and this explains many of the PPS facility name changes. Bury the past to make title and deed searches more difficult.

PPS by law was to provide the public by Dec 29 2009, their facility planning results.

When pressed they say they have not yet begun. That is because they wanted to complete the redesign and boundary changes prior to providing the public with the required analysis in ORS 195.110.

This statute specifies that PPS use certain criteria based on the stated and required analysis for making those choices. They did not provide for the public either the criteria used or the analysis to substantiate the criteria for making decision about facility and land planning. Instead they posed the issue to the public as one of equity knowing the disproportionate distribution of resources and curriculum was an ongoing issue for more than a decade.

That is why at those "public" meetings discussing high schools, the agenda was carefully controlled and no material questions were allowed, nor were answers given. Check the box and done, vote... except they remain in violation of State law.

There is much more, but this was about the tax lien.

All measures will pass as the systems is totally corrupt. Take your property tax statement out and look on the right top side of the page. Now tell me that we voted all of this crap in. Democrat union workers counting the votes? Yes it will pass.

Thank you Mark for the important research and information,
and your time to bring this out.

Shining a spotlight on PPS and city involvement helps the public to understand.

Or, if all weren't so cynical, PPS could risk losing both elections. Perhaps they'll run them both so that most voters will choose one, and enough will choose two that both will pass. I have to guess there is some strategy behind these considerations, probably based on Mark Weiner polling.

Thanks Mark for the information.

Just to clarify, there will not be two ballot issues.

The PPS Board will unilaterally vote next week on the levy which I understand will be .65 per thousand or approximately $500 per year on a $200,000 home.

This appears to equal the proposed bond so they will get that $1.2 BILLION they wanted.

As a landlord I will pass these cost ($40 per month) along to tenants so renters do not get to avoid this tax. Everyone will pay while funds specifically allocated to schools are diverted to other political pet projects through the URAs.

If both pass then $80 per month on an average home. Got your attention?

Add Water and sewer and soon we will be indentured servants to the political class who is empowered by our indifference to extract revenue without end.

It is important that people show up and let them know what they think about this.
If you don't make your voice heard you'll get what they decide for you.


Clicky Web Analytics