Does the tax have to be assessed before it can be challenged in court?

“We need to educate every Portland resident about paying this,” says Jessica Jarratt Miller, executive director of Creative Advocacy Network, which backed the tax measure. “Educating people will require mailing a lot of information.”

Don't educate them; reeducate them. Send them to reeducation camp.

With a 61% passage rate, at the deepest level it looks like most Portlandians have already reeducated themselves.

I think when Portlanders find out the details, they may regret their "feel good" vote.
I support positive aspects of the arts, but did not support this head tax, and have mentioned before, the big brother aspect of this, in the city collections process
of not only the money, but of how many people live in a house and their income.

See you in court, Sammy boy... no, wait, by then you'll be working at the Portland State Patronage Center. Guess we'll be seeing someone else.

Sammy may have just created his new position, he may become the head of the city department to collect the head tax! Then what Jack? He may be coming to your household first to collect. I am sure he would be more than happy to add interest and a penalty.

Sam and a head tax? There's got to be a good joke in there some place. Where’s Bill McDonald when you need him?

Wasn't there an article somewhere too that state the "tax" is retroactive- So when the bill shows up in the mail, it will be for 2012 and 2013? $70/person, It's just the cost of art, baby!

This was the arrow in the side for me and Portland, just hoping it gets proven un-constitutional before I reach the door. Us "simpleton working folk" have little time to enjoy family, let alone whatever 'benefits' this garbage is supposed to bring.

Anyone ready to chip in for legal costs to fight this miserable tax? An initiative to repeal it has no chance but that's why we have a judicial system, to rule on the legality of laws.

The way this council has been carrying on we could be collecting for legal costs continually. I agree this does need to be taken to the courts.
I wonder if those who promoted this ever thought that this collection and intrusion may eventually lead to people in the community feeling negative towards the arts?
I wouldn't be surprised if some artists were against this as well.

Does anyone know if a legal challenge is in the works? Aside from that, it's really disappointing (but not surprising) that this tax doesn't require a public benefit for the money being siphoned off to arts organizations. There should be a substantial number of public (no admission charge) events in return for the public money the organizations receive. Ordinary folks would then at least have the opportunity to benefit from this subsidy to affluent arts patrons.

Clinamen's comment about a possible backlash makes some sense. In the same vein, I stopped buying an annual family membership for the Chinese Classical Garden when it became necessary to pay for parking on Sunday afternoons. City Council might think the well is bottomless, but it isn't.