A footnote on page 2 of that document says that the Urban Renewal Area would have "no direct impact on PPS."

WRONG! Or as Joe Wilson would say, YOU LIE!

In a 2008 agreement between PDC and PPS they both recognized that urban renewal hurts school funding:

There is both a direct and indirect financial impact on PPS due to forgone revenues within URAs.

1. The direct impact can be described as such: Currently, PPS forgoes approximately $5.2 million annually in gap levy (reauthorized by the state legislature in 2006) and local option levy revenues due to existing URAs within PPS boundaries. These URAs cover approximately 10 percent of the school district’s jurisdiction.

2. The indirect impact: About twenty-five cents of every dollar available to invest in urban renewal areas (URAs) would otherwise be available to the State School Fund, which benefits schools across Oregon. Eight percent of the State School Fund is typically passed through to Portland Schools, which would invest the money in teaching positions and educational programs.

I thought a bunch of that space (PSU-owned) didn't pay prop taxes, so how would TIF work there?

Not that it matters, it gets them OPM now to spend on their dreams.

Steve, you're right, much of the to-be- defeated proposed PSU URA wouldn't be paying prop taxes=TIF. It's like SoWhat, over 50% of its area is not paying now. We have OHSU/PSU, Affordable Housing, and other non-paying tax entities in the URA. They can't even pay their debts down there and are having to bond borrow. Much of the burden is being put on schools, fire, police, parks and us.

The "Inovation Distritict"...Mayor Creepy has innovated new ways to screw the taxpayers and line the pockets of his developer weasel masters.
Go by coal train! But only to Hayden Island.

I find it interesting that a substantial portion of this district includes the old South Auditorium URA, which was Portland's first urban renewal area. So is PDC saying that previous attempts at reducing blight in this area and they need a do over.

I knew there would be a day when PDC recycled old URA's in order to feed their addition to TIF monies.

Who is going to start the petition to outlaw URD's?

Quite the racket they have running here. I almost hear the movie narratives from Casino where you've got voice-overs from Joe Pesci and Robert DeNiro talking about how the city of Vegas really works behind the neon glare.

Pesci voice: That's Mayor Sam, the bicycling "green" politician who's breaking ground for gay rights. Problem is, every back-room real estate developer in town knows he's got a history putting the make on teenage boys. So long as he keeps the urban renewal money coming where condos are priced in the millions, we keep his pedophilia out of the news.

DeNiro voice: It's easy being a crook when you know how dirty the "good guys" really are. At least we offer fair odds, but for guys like Adams and Leonard, the dice are always loaded and the drinks are always spiked. They call it the Rose City, but if you get to close, the whole thing stinks.

How about supporting "jobs" by not demanding various fees associated with the employment of up to one person within a place of residence. (Type-B permit, and inspection . . . associated with Home Occupation Permits)

Or, in the interest of anti-discriminatory parity in gifting per job, let folks that claim to "create" "one" job in their home get the same gift that the big boys get.

How much would the one-job-created-gift have to be to match the dizzying distortions for the big projects and TIF financing? Can it even be measured? And if it can't be measured?

New urban renewal areas do not collect based on local school taxes -- only on the PPS permanent rate that contributes to the State School Fund. So the city is correct that a new area would not have an additional direct impact on PPS collections.

Sarah Carlin Ames
PPS Public Affairs

Sarah

What happened to that PDC 5 year projected $193 million loss to PPS that was posted here some time ago?

No surprise....no response from Sarah.
TIF steals tax dollars from schools and other public necessities.
I hope Jerry Brown can stop the URACs in CA! That will lead the way for other communities to stop this theft.

Where is PPS Sarah Ames coming from?

Even the Oregonian, Tribune, Willamette Week, Tualatin Fire & Rescue, Clackamas Co. Sheriff's Office, and even PPS itself has calculated the $Millions of lost dollars due to Urban Renewal. I guess she is writing PPS PR releases too often and not reading or listening.

Wow. I didn't check the blog all day today -- silly me.

New urban renewal areas operate under different law than old ones. There is a direct impact to PPS collections in the older urban renewal areas. But in new ones, the URA would collect tax increment financing only based on the PPS permanent rate. Those tax collections offset the State School Fund -- so the impact would be in reducing funding for schools statewide, not a direct impact to PPS.

Sorry I didn't try to explain the whole deal Friday night.

Sarah Carlin Ames
PPS Public Affairs

So what does the School Board have to say about the continued loss to Urban Renewal debt servicing?
"No comment"?
"Never mind"?
"We are aware of the issue of UR"?
Or,
"We would like to oppose UR but our political allies run the city so we sell out the school children"?

"Milwaukie Light Rail is more important than school children so we have no comment oN the $400 million in lottery profits going towards it"?

Or "crickets"?

Those tax collections offset the State School Fund -- so the impact would be in reducing funding for schools statewide, not a direct impact to PPS.

Is this proposed URA located in Portland then going to have the effect of reducing the funding for other schools statewide? If so, that is wrong and sets up further animosity towards Portland from the rest of the state.

Children no matter where they live in Oregon should not be hurt by this.

Please clarify as I am not well-informed about URA, TIF, etc.

When did different laws come about? Who makes decisions about these laws of URA?

Sarah Ames, you have used the words "not a direct impact to PPS". It is sad that PPS would keep insisting using "direct".

Its like taking a household budget whereby both spouses (state school districts) pool their incomes (the State School Fund). Then having a spouse's income reduced (property taxes siphoned off for a URA). Then the household has to live on $40,000 vs. $60,000. I guess you could say that "pooling of funds" makes it not "direct".

As Ben stated above and you have ignored, PPS is DIRECTLY affected by even this state pooling scenario by over $193 Million in the next 5 years by urban renewal. This was tabulated by our own PDC which was conservative in it's estimate. I'd say $193 Million is dang "direct". How will PPS respond to this fact?

People aren't buying it anymore. Why should PPS?

Dear Sarah,
The ONLY factual part of your previous post is the comment, "silly me".
I can feel only regret that some of my tax dollars are paying your salary instead of being used pay a teacher.
I don't recall that school districts needed or paid persons to be public affairs officials in the past. We need teachers, not bureaucrats.

Isn't it amazing how every single government entity is afraid to have a genuine, open and honest, real conversation?

Instead we get these pretenses by PR staff or you get to give your 3 minutes at some dopey board meeting without getting to ask questions and get answers that can be challenged.