Jeb Bladine: Focus on spending, not just on taxes and fees
Oregonians have focused too much attention on government taxes and not enough on government spending. That applies as well to McMinnville, where changes in city leadership do not yet seem destined to quell the kind of spending sprees so prevalent in local, state and federal governments.
As described in today’s N-R editorial, Oregon has a long history of revolt against excessive property taxes. However, while limiting those taxes and adopting a few procedural revenue restraints, Oregon citizens have accepted income and estate taxes that rank at the highest levels among all states.
Even more impactful, Oregonians have failed, repeatedly, to restrain the growth of government fees that allow continuation of excessive spending. Reading the tea leaves, I think uncurbed government “user-fee” systems will become the next focus of Oregon taxpayer revolt.
Perhaps the most egregious examples of those escalating fees are system development charges (SDCs) and public utility surcharges.
This week in McMinnville, city counselors are prepared to massively increase parks-funding SCDs on new homes from $3,210 to a minimum of $6,042 for the tiniest houses. The increased SDCs would rise further by house size, up to a high of $15,577 for homes over 4,000 square feet.
I wonder: Do house sizes determine the need of their occupants for parks facilities? Also, do we really believe in affordable housing while piling tens of thousands of dollars onto the cost of homes for planning fees, SDCs, excise taxes and other government-mandated costs?
That is just one small example from the thousands of SDCs, construction excise taxes, planning fees, utility surcharges and other user fees imposed on Oregonians by local and state governments. Time after time, those governmental bodies point to others with even higher fees to justify their own escalations.
It is time to account for what all that costs us; it is time to reverse the trends of government spending that are supported, without a vote, by the fee-paying public.
In one positive sign, this month in Willamina, a school district appeal persuaded Willamina City Council to waive plans to assess $250,000 in city planning fees related to new school classrooms and other improvements.
The Willamina school superintendent called the fee arbitrary, ambiguous tax-like; a bonding company executive said equivalent planning fees would be $100 in Amity and $20,000 in Salem.
The Willamina council also agreed to review its fee schedules.
In Oregon, supporters last year captured more than 200,000 voter signatures for a ballot measure to stop the major increase in state gasoline taxes. The Legislature, it appears, will move that election ahead to May from its original November date.
Back in McMinnville, despite anticipation of more conservative fiscal governance, the city is moving full speed ahead with tax and fee increases established in recent years. City leadership directions, still in flux, could be affected by pending appointments of a new city councilor and a new city manager.
Meanwhile, we need a complete accounting of the costs that Oregon governments heap on their taxpayers and ratepayers to avoid fiscal prudence.
Jeb Bladine can be reached at jbladine@newsregister.com or 503-687-1223.
Comments
B
So, what ever happened to Mayor Morris idea of a forensic audit? Seems to have gotten lost in the shuffle.
Otis
Instead, focus on wages being depressed by billionaires for decades.
tagup
Forgive my ignorance, but why would a “ forensic audit” be necessary?
Do you (or anyone) suspect fraud or misconduct by staff?
B
tagup - Surprised you don't remember Ms. Morris while campaigning suggested that a forensic audit or accounting of city finances should be done. I believe, as do I, that she felt the city needed to take a close look at all expenses. Unfortunately, I have not seen any evidence of expense restraints; rather I'm seeing a tax and spend model.
B
Oh and Otis - not sure what you did for a living, but I had no difficulty making a decent salary and I am far far from a billionaire.
tagup
B- I do recall some conversation about it, but my understanding of a "forensic audit" is it is much more detailed, and includes a deep drill down on selected expenditures. It is usually warranted when legal issues are suspected. This process is more expensive, as following up on details takes time. I'm not sure any audit would add restraint to the spending & certainly would not replace the need to balance the budget.