The other thing that is absurd is the "Big Oil" bogeyman that is supposed to finance a brainwash campaign so that Portland Voters can't possibly make the "right" decision on this new fee. Local gas stations already have the burden of selling biofuel laced gasoline at a rate and mixture unlike the surrounding areas, and now another fee, that will have to be added into the cost of doing business, is the second strike to make sure folks fill-up their tanks outside the City Limits. Big Oil is going to sell the same amount of gas no matter what, and probably would prefer to sell outside the City anyway where there is less hassle.

"I used to think the good fireman was a breath of fresh air on the council"
Told ya,it wasn't so!
You should have seen him in the legislature.
ROFLMAO.

The fee affects everyone including the gas station owners. For Randy to wrap himself in the aegis of protecting us from Big Oil is so transparent it's sickening.

There is no way CoP wants this in front of voters since they know it will go down in flames - So much for representative democracy.

Anyone with a memory knows hwo Vera/Sam pilalged Bud Clark's franchise fee 15 years ago that was supposed to pay for road repairs, so I suspect this one will be looted after about 4 years also.

Could it be that one reason for the mysterious delay in refinancing the short term URA debt is to wait for this tax to go into effect, so that the City's books look better to the bond insurer? Maybe the city needs better cash flow to borrow more money.

Jack: I take your point, but I bet if Sam the Tram was enacting an ordinance banning all streetcar development for the next 20 years, you would likely commend is hardball tactics.

Randy Leonard is so phony.
This latest David vs Goliath against "big oil" is so typical.
Leonard just makes things up.
What's his problem?

It's Sho time if for no other reason but to get rid of Sam "the Scam." As for Leonard, he may be courting Adams to get the Police Bureau under Adams' administration.

It's disappointing to see city hall work so hard against allowing a voter referral. It's disappointing to see the Secretary of State stifling the initiative process.

PDX and Oregon are too Blue. Bring back some gridlock.

We all know City Council places of our community projects in various levels of priority. Because of aging, many are in need of major repair and maintenance.

However, I’d feel much more comfortable about Council’s funding priorities if I believed Council performed their fiduciary obligations on behalf of the city’s taxpayers in a prudently fiscal manner.

No efforts were made to recover a project’s (the tram) funding that was later revealed to be based on concealment, false and material misrepresentations (The Oregonian: 1/12/2006 & 4/2/2006).

Furthermore, no one in city government disputed the accuracy of the articles. It leads one to the conclusion that our city council will allow our tax monies to fund projects based on fraud. Commissioner Leonard reported these fraudulent actions and further stated,

"These various financial sweetheart deals with OHSU amount to a MINIMUM of a $14.15 million total direct taxpayer subsidy of OHSU and its tram." (City Council remarks, Commissioner Leonard, 4/12/2006).

Now we have taxation without representation. I thought that was put to bed years ago. Council wants to deny city taxpayers the right to vote if, and how, we wish to be taxed (or fee'd). Before we allow Council to tax us any further, how about we demand they make efforts to recover our taxes allocated to projects based on fraud.

We can not afford, nor should we be governed by this lackadaisical and condesendingly cavalier type of policy making. Our city’s fiscal policy making must not, should not, be based on fraud supported by our local, state or federal taxes.

The review Mayor Potter promised back in 2006, to prevent such a tram debacle from happening in the future, must begin immediately.

It is about time we took action. Demand Council and the city auditor initiate measures to recover our taxpayer funds that were allocated based on the reported fraud to begin with. Demand our right to vote on how we are taxed. Sign the one, two or three petitions.

If our city government refuses to act, go to state agencies, then federal.
Public funds – our taxpayer dollars – should not be committed to ANY projects based on fraud or to ordinances of road tax magnitude without the right to vote on it.

If Sho commits to a full audit of the PDC then he's got to be elected.
It would be interesting to see Sam oppose the audit.

The right to vote is important, which is why every politician faces reelection. It's a little far-fetched to call this "taxation without representation" because the Council is enacting a tax without referring it to the voters -- that's what "representative democracy" is all about. If people don't like the tax, vote out those who support it and vote for new commissioners who oppose it.

As for the referral effort, it's not like there is some groundswell of grassroots support for the referral. If there were, it wouldn't be a problem to get the signatures, whether it was one ordinance or ten. The people who want to refer it are the special interests who don't want to pay it. That's their right, but I'm not going to feel sorry for them that they played hardball by using the threat of referral to get a discount on the tax, then broke their promise, and now they're pissed off that someone played hardball back.

What you left out is the focal point of Comm'r Leonard's ire: Paul Romain. Of course, his name is becoming similar to Bill Sizemore's, in terms of sounding a death knell to his cause. After all the press on campaign donations and boondoggle trips, and the fact that Randy Leonard specifically mentioned Romain, I'm surprised it's not come up here, yet.

calling this money grab "a fee" rather than tax, is the sort of stuff that gives all government a bad name!

Randy Leonard is so phony.
What's his problem?

Tight shorts?

The right to vote is important, which is why every politician faces reelection.

Huh?

The right to vote IS important - as is the right to refer cr*p like this - which is why implying that a referendum is somehow an illegitimate exercise is so bogus.

Interesting that you characterize taxpayers as "special interests", or were you pulling a *randy* and trying distract from the fact that every homeowner and renter in the city will be paying?

Randy Leonard is so phony.
What's his problem?

problem?

singular?

As usual, Counselor Jack has made a succinct yet trenchant case for the primary matter at issue: the voters of Portland should have opportunity to vote on how their money is spent.
Especially when it's tax money to be raised by making it yet more expensive to secure an essential need: water.

While PanderSham and his new best beau Randyman have been throwing sand in our eyes and earning every criticism, there are three other votes on the Council. (Please don't groan.) One of those, Ol' TomP, after learning that Sham intended to split his measure into three, sent a memo to his colleagues on the 18th in which he expressed his displeasure at Sham's intended flim-flam:

“Without a strong legal reason to put the single ordinance in three separate ordinances, I am concerned these actions might give an impression to the public that we are trying to make the referral process more difficult and manipulate the outcome,” Potter wrote.

You can read the whole piece by JRedden in the PTrib (Jan22) here:

http://www.localnewsdaily.com/news/story.php?story_id=120104022769194000

A vote on this measure would not be a vote about big oil. It would be more like a vote about what Bechtel did in Bolivia (until the people decided they'd had enough of private ownership of their water).

A water bill should not be a city tax bill.

BTW, the Randyman still hasn't mentioned how much it would cost us to convert the Water Bureau to monthly billing.
That is, how much of the proposed levy would be consumed in administrative matters to accommodate Sham's scam.

So contact the mayor and tell him why we need a popular vote on this matter. Remind him that a civic-minded leader would circumvent the need for a petition or three by putting this matter, with full public disclosure of costs and expenditures, before the voters.

Contact brooding Erik, too. Remind him of why he should vote for the people of this city. And silent Dan, too, though he may long to add his own Parks levy to our water bill. Democracy must be served.

Interesting that you characterize taxpayers as "special interests",

The "taxpayers" aren't organizing to refer this, the special interests are. Show me the neighborhood groups that are mobilizing and the citizen-led committees forming in opposition. There aren't any. This is being driven by the gas stations and convenience stores -- and if they don't qualify as a special interest, than what does?

If Randy and Sam once again enacts three tax ordinances, then two other referendums should accompany the three-Randy and Sam recall referendums. I'll gladly sign all five and let the voters decide.

Why should a little three person business with no retail sales creating traffic have to pay over $600 per year to this street tax disguised in a water bill. This one, three, or five referendums are not about "special interests", the oil industry, quick marts, but about all of us homeowners, renters and hundreds of thousand Portland "mom and pop" businesses.

You would think after Sam and Randy exhibit so much pride about meeting the public, visiting businesses, that they would know that proposing this tax then not allowing a vote on it is asinine.

Randy,
The battle is between you and gas dealers. Not the citizens. Shame on you for forgetting about the hard working taxpayers of Portland that will get stuck with millions in new taxes, just because you have a beef with the gas dealers. Give me a break.

If you really cared about the people, you would demand that the city do the following:
1. Take that parking meter rate increase back from the streetcar and apply it to roads, like parking revenue was before the streetcar lobby stole it. (You could justify it as revenge against Chris, like this is revenge against the gas dealers)
2. Take back that 30 million in Interstate urban renewal road money that you (the city) gave to Trimet to build Vera’s crime infested, overpriced, wasteful toy train.
3. Take back the many millions of road money spent on Vera’s esplanade.
4. Tell Trimet that you have changed you mind about giving them several million dollars from the urban renewal road fund of one of Portland’s most needy neighborhood’s for the I205 toy train.
5. Find out how much city money is being spent on that crappy transit mall and send Trimet the bill.
6. Send Trimet the bill for all those “transit supportive, extended curbs.” You know, the ones that force buses to stop in the middle of the travel lane
7. Send Trimet a bill for its road damage.
8. Send the bikers a bill for the bike lanes, bike boulevards and bike boxes. (BTW, why don’t bikers get stopped for running stop signs, red lights and no lights at night. If anyone at city hall cares, I could suggest s few dozen places to set up stings, like you routinely do for cars.)

Disgusting, simply disgusting. Especially your dis-regard for people you claim to represent.

Thanks
JK

lw:
If Randy and Sam once again enacts three tax ordinances, then two other referendums should accompany the three-Randy and Sam recall referendums. I'll gladly sign all five and let the voters decide.
JK:
How about an initiative to require a vote of the people before any new tax can be imposed, or existing tax raised. Would probably require less signatures and do more good.

Thanks
JK

The "taxpayers" aren't organizing to refer this, the special interests are.

So, you honestly doubt that the majority of average taxpayers supports this since they're not "organizing" against it?

If so, we really have nothing to discuss, do we?

Representative government doesn't only apply to "activists" - that's just code for another special interest group. Anyone who doesn't acknowledge that is part of the problem, IMO.

*doubt* = believe

if Sam the Tram was enacting an ordinance banning all streetcar development for the next 20 years, you would likely commend is hardball tactics.

You don't know me very well.

Show me the neighborhood groups that are mobilizing and the citizen-led committees forming in opposition. There aren't any.

Hey, Pollyanna, people have lives. Elections cost a lot of money. Grassroots don't run things. I'm not seeing too many neighborhoods rising up and saying "We want big box condos," either. But money talks.

And if you put this tax up for a vote, it will lose, lose, lose -- not to mention the impact it will have on Adams's and Leonard's council campaigns.

Hey, Pollyanna, people have lives....

That's what I meant to say.

I saw somewhere that there would be a discount for people that drove a Prius, but in looking at what is on the councils site, I only find mention of discounts up to 30% if you meet the criteria, but I can't find the criteria. If someone owns one Prius, and 3 Hummers do they still qualify for the discount? What if they never drive the Prius? What if the Prius is totalled?

What if the Prius is totalled?

Answer #1) Don't ask, don't tell.

Answer #2) Then the Hummer wins.

And if you put this tax up for a vote, it will lose, lose, lose. . .

A lot of people said that about the three-year local income tax, but it passed. This will pass too if the proponents aren't drowned out by the money behind Romain and his friends. I'm fine paying $50 a year to repair the transportation infrastructure around town. So is everyone I know. And businesses that generate traffic should pay the tax as well -- understanding full well that it gets passed to the customer. The gas tax in Oregon is low and hasn't been raised thanks to Romain, and our infrastructure suffers as a result.

not to mention the impact it will have on Adams's and Leonard's council campaigns.

They're not getting off scot-free if the tax isn't referred. They're both running for reelection and voting to raise taxes. I consider that bold leadership. If the people hate the tax, Leonard and Adams will lose. If not, they get reelected. Even Cassandra can see the cause and effect in that series of events.

If the people hate the tax, Leonard and Adams will lose.

Not necessarily true, since that tax doesn't start until July, but the elections are in May, a lot of people may not even know that the tax exists until it is too late.

Miles, who says that a tax rate has to increase? In the case of our ODOT tax kitty, the three combined taxes that contribute to the tax dollars to spend on roads has increased from less than $489 Million/year in 1989 to $989 Million/year in 200l, and this doesn't include the taxes Oregon taxpayers pay that ends up into the ODOT budget.

I would surely call that an increase, but you don't, nor Sam and Randy. I guess you are saying that our federal tax rates should increase every year too.

"A lot of people said that about the three-year local income tax, but it passed."

Yeah, look how many people actually paid it.

"They're both running for reelection and voting to raise taxes. I consider that bold leadership."
I'd call it hubris and an uneducated voting base. Why is it only brave when they raise taxes? I hear this every time.

"if the proponents aren't drowned out by the money behind Romain and his friends."
So, then, explain why Sam won't divert all of the tax to his pet projects after about 5 years.

The gas tax in Oregon is low and hasn't been raised thanks to Romain, and our infrastructure suffers as a result.

The infrastructure is suffering not because the taxes are to low but because the money collected is being misspent. You can't pay for all these pet projects that few benefit and also pay for repairs without raising taxes. Cut out the pet projects and there will be plenty of money going where it is suppose to go.

MIles said,
"The gas tax in Oregon is low and hasn't been raised thanks to Romain, and our infrastructure suffers as a result."

That no true at all.
Why do think that's the case?

Blatant neglect by our elected officials is why our infrastructure suffers.

These same officials are the ones telling Miles it's the gas tax.

With multiple agencies employeeing 100s of planners locally the spending is directed away from infrastructure and towards other plans.
All the while the enormous amounts are obscured, covered up and hidden from public scrutiny.
Over and over and over again this is being done without any accountability.

"I'm fine paying $50 a year to repair the transportation infrastructure around town. So is everyone I know."

Miles, if I thought that $50 per year would fix all our roads, I'd be with you 100%, but I'm not brimming with confidence. Would you be upset if city council tells us later that the tax money isn't close to enough to repair the infrastructure? Or, right after the tax passes, that we need to spend hundreds of millions building a streetcar to Lake Oswego, the B-C couplet, or new roads in the south waterfront?

Would you be upset if city council tells us later that the tax money isn't close to enough to repair the infrastructure?

Obviously a rhetorical question.

the three combined taxes that contribute to the tax dollars to spend on roads has increased from less than $489 Million/year in 1989 to $989 Million/year in 200l. . . . I would surely call that an increase

Using nominal dollars to make your argument isn't going to convince me. Assuming 3% annual inflation over that time, the $489 million equates to $697 million in 2001 dollars. (I'm guessing asphalt and infrastructure inflation has been higher than 3%, so that's conservative.) Add to that the additional wear and tear from increased annual vehicle miles driven, and you'll find that the $989 million falls short of what's needed. So no, that's not a real increase in funding -- it's probably a real decrease compared to 1989.

I disagree that we could fund this shortfall if we just spent taxpayer money more wisely. Fire all the planners, and you save something like $9.5 million annually -- far short of the $30 million this new tax will take in (and Portland will start to look like Houston). Most of the money for light rail, streetcars, Pearl, and SOWA is federal, or TIF, or otherwise unavailable for discretionary uses.

Could Council spend more wisely? Sure. But nickel-and-diming the City budget isn't going to get you the investment needed to repair/replace the infrastructure, which is why I'm fine with the new tax. And I'll bet that a majority of Portlanders agree with me.

"Most of the money for light rail, streetcars, Pearl, and SOWA is federal, or TIF, or otherwise unavailable for discretionary uses."

That's right, but even 10% of $1 billion is still $100 million. Also, that federal money could be spent on projects that would ease pressure on the general fund, instead of adding pressure for future maintenance expenses.

"Could Council spend more wisely? Sure."

I think you're glossing over the connection between council's profligate spending on capital projects and this unfunded deferred transportation maintenance.

nickel-and-diming the City budget isn't going to get you the investment needed

The amounts that are being wasted on the aerial tram [rim shot] and streetcars hardly qualifies as nickels and dimes. Nor does the huge additional streetcar project currently being undertaken for the east side.

I'll bet that a majority of Portlanders agree with me.

But you're not willing to use the only sure way to find out.

Most of the money for light rail, streetcars, Pearl, and SOWA is federal, or TIF, or otherwise unavailable for discretionary uses.
JK: WRONG. TIF money can be used to build almost anything. That is how Sam and the crazy lady from New York stole $30 million in TIF money from the Interstate urban renewal district for her toy train. That money could have been used to fix up streets in that area.

Same for Lents’ streets - they stole the money for wasteful, ineffective rail, instead of fixing the streets in the Lenta area.

Thanks
JK

Miles, you've been around long enough. There are several other piles of money besides "federal, or TIF, or otherwise" going to mass transit in all its forms. Why didn't you mention:

$250 Million of Lottery Funds going to Milwaukie Light Rail;

LID's (a tax that can be used in any form) throughout the city;

$48 Million in Amendment 8 taken out of Portland's general fund to bail out the tram and trolley in SoWhat;

the $138 Million in ODOT gas tax STIP dollars that were diverted to mass transit projects in just 2007 alone; the list goes on.

The public is tired of being deceived by you, Sam, Randy and others that all the money directed to mass transit is not "discretionary". It is, once again, setting priorities.

Miles claim that TIF dollars are non-discretionary is absurd.

If so, then why is Sten and City Council proposing to use Pearl Districts TIF dollars for building a school in the David Douglas School District? Funding schools isn't even in the city charter. According to state statutes, TIF dollars are not to be used outside of an urban renewal district, and Urban Renewal districts are to be contiguous in their boundaries.

There are numerous examples how City Council has used TIF dollars discretionally. They have even "loaned" money from one URA to another against city state policy as admitted by the PDC.

So, how do we throw the bums out??

The bums get crowded out, is how, by wedging 'in' to the positions, the worthwhile's ... got any?

So after taking Gardiner Menefree advise and emailing all the Commissioners and the Mayor on this issues the only one to respond to my query was Commissioner Leonard.

As a pensioner on a fixed income I can sure use the $50.00 dollars a year.
I am sure that all the major grocery chains etc. will just pass their fee (tax) onto the consumer, so in the end it will cost me more then $50.00.

Those Federal Fairy tax dollars aren't free. If you paid federal income tax, then you helped to pay for Max, the trolleys, and the Esplanade.

I'm afraid that large numbers of bike nazis and light rail boosters don't pay federal income tax. From their perspective, Federal Tax dollars are free.