• 

Leland Thoburn: An open letter from a goose

##Leland Thoburn
##Leland Thoburn

“Taxation consists in so plucking the goose as to procure the largest quantity of feathers with the least possible amount of squealing.” Or so said Jean-Baptiste Colbert, finance minister to Louis XIV.

We are sure feeling the assault of the government pluckers, aren’t we?

• Oregon voters rejected proposition 120 — aka, the gas tax — which by some estimates would have cost the average Oregon motorist between $70 and $100 a year.

• The failed McMinnville City measure 36-237 would have added about $500 a year to the average McMinnville property tax bill for a new aquatic center and deferred maintenance.

• The consolidation of fire districts is now going to cost homeowners an additional $500 per year on their property taxes in previously suspended fees.

• City-provided water and sewer charges are going to be increasing by 4% and $2 per month, respectively. Oh, and there’ll be an “only partially temporary” $15 surcharge.

In a May 16 editorial, The News-Register Editorial Board expressed muted support for these taxes. I would like to demur.

There was, at some time in the past, a golden age when state, county and city governments provided adequate service for reasonable levels of taxation with a balanced budget. So, what happened?

I suggest there are five forces at work:

• Inflation. Inflation augments tax revenues at roughly the same pace that it increases expenses, so it should be a wash.

• Population growth. As with inflation, tax revenues and expenses should rise hand in hand, so this should also be a wash.

• Technology changes. Some save money, as with the change from human-driven to computer-driven switchboards. Healthcare and public safety technology changes probably cost money, as with the conversion of ambulances from station wagons with gurneys to mini-emergency rooms on wheels, though users are now asked to pay for that benefit directly. Some changes may both save and cost, such as computerizing property records and then offering citizens self-service on the web. However, I would bet that, outside of public health and safety, the net effect of technology change is economically positive. Otherwise, why do it?

• New services. These cost money.

• Incompetence. This costs more money.

Note that of the four recent tax attacks referenced above, none were tied to delivering new services. All were aimed at continuing existing services.

All should thus have been provided for with proper budgeting and fiscal management. Any non-governmental business would have done so, or it would be bankrupt.

The aquatic center is a possible exception to this, as debt-funding capital improvements are common. But proposition 36-247, besides funding a bloated aquatic facility, included $20M for deferred maintenance and minor upgrades to existing facilities.

My local park, West Hills Park, is very poorly maintained. Proposition 36-247 would have fixed that, but removing weeds and replacing dead trees should not be held hostage to increasing my property tax bill.

All taxes flow downhill until they reach the taxpayer. And there, they hurt.

I am past the age where I can just ask for a raise, or seek a better job, or even plan to work longer into my dotage. I’m done. What I’ve got is what I’ve got.

Every extra dollar that government plucks from me is a dollar I can no longer spend on food, housing, entertainment, etc. The buck stops here.

I don’t want to hear about shortfalls in the general fund. That’s just whining that you’ve spent all the money we’ve given you, and you want more. Good government consists of placing the interests of citizens before the needs and wants of government.

If you want me to do without, prepare a detailed proposal. I am sure the News-Register would publish it.

Show me, in detail, what the money is for and why it cannot be paid for from your existing pile of my feathers.

I am goose. Hear me squeal.

Comments

CubFan

Mr.Thoburn…

You nailed it! And while I don’t want to strip any remaining feathers from you, let me add a few things:

- In October 2025- The city approved a 4.5% water increase
- In August 2025- The City approved a 4.7% Recology increase
- We are paying a “User Fee” to the City of McMinnville (collected on the Water and Light bill). This started as a charge of $13 per month in December 2022. The city Council raised it in January 2025, and this year the city council approved a provision to increase this fee automatically each year based on the September CPI-U West C index figure published by the federal government. The city graciously allowed this increase not to exceed 5% in one year. For 2026, the 3% increase took effect in March 2026. So, we’re paying in the range of $13-$14 a month for that
- A few months ago the McMinnville School District was anticipating placing a bond on the ballot in 2026 or 2027. At least we’ll be able to vote on that.

I completely agree with your comment:

“ I am past the age where I can just ask for a raise, or seek a better job, or even plan to work longer into my dotage. I’m done. What I’ve got is what I’ve got. Every extra dollar that government plucks from me is a dollar I can no longer spend on food, housing, entertainment, etc. The buck stops here.”

Thank you for raising these valid concerns.

Sincerely,

Your fellow “goose”.

Web Design and Web Development by Buildable