amanda photo Looking for the Amanda for Portland 2008 campaign site? Click HERE Amanda is a Registered Nurse, mother of three, and community leader in Portland, Oregon. She was the first candidate ever to qualify for Portland's Public Campaign Financing in her run for City Council in 2006. All photographs on the blog are by Steve Fritz (Amanda's husband), unless otherwise noted. navigationNavigationFavorite links:***************** Coalition for a Livable Future
syndication |
Property tax rates for public schoolsSubmitted by Amanda Fritz on October 29, 2007 - 5:07pm.
From a press release by Matt Shelby, Portland Public Schools: "Portland Public School's property tax rate rose this year after Portland voters approved a five-year local option levy with a 63% vote in November 2006. At $6.53 per $1,000 of assessed value, Portland Public Schools' tax rate is still low compared with its neighbor districts, ranking 14th of 20 school districts in the Portland metro area." Bold emphasis added, showing school districts with significant numbers of students living in the City of Portland. Riverdale and Gresham-Barlow also serve a few Portland residents - AF
"All figures are for the tax rate per $1,000 of assessed value, and include property taxes for operations, local option taxes where voters have approved them, and existing capital bonds. * Some school districts levy capital bonds over only part of their territory (due to previous school district mergers and other complications), so tax rates may not be uniform across the school district." The raw numbers, of course, don't take into account many other factors. The David Douglas and Lake Oswego rates are almost the same, for example, but both the assessed home values and family income levels are likely to be greater in LO. The amount of money raised from area property owners may not translate into effective education of the children in a district. Most public school funding now comes from state income taxes rather than local property taxes. And the cost of educating children depends in part on the challenges faced by each one, including physical/mental disabilities, language learning needs, family stability/frequent moves, and so on. The numbers in the press release do seem to show that Portland's school districts aren't totally out of line in their property tax assessments compared with other Metro-area districts, however. "The urban renewal charge on the Tigard bill was $1.90. That's right, less than two bucks. What's wrong with this picture?" If I were a Tigard taxpayer, I'd wonder what that $1.90 was for. "Downtown Tigard" is hardly a destination or a desirable place to live, for most people. While I certainly want to be part of a major discussion of urban renewal funding, projects, timelines, and cost/benefit payors/recipients in Portland, urban renewal in and of itself isn't A Bad Thing. Its implementation needs revision with consideration of other priorities. Downtown Tigard ain't so bad. I'm sitting in the middle of it. Definitely worth a buck ninety. The story is similar to Dave's in Clackamas County. A friend and I have compared tax bills over the last three years on his Portland home and on my old homestead in Clackamas. Three years ago my tax bill was bigger than his, but this year his Portland tax bill was more for the first time increasing 11.4% while mine increased 4.9%. The $$/thousand was very different mine is at $12.66 his is at $22.46 up over $2.00/thousand or the 11.4%. 45% of my Clackamas taxes go to education only 30% of his Portland taxes do. If you count bonds for school capital which we have in Clackamas but not in Portland it adds another 10% so 55% of my taxes go to support education while only 30% of his taxes do in Portland. Clackamas K-12 funding not counting community college or ESD is still 24% greater than Portland on the same amount of taxes paid. Also you shouldn't be as quick to poo-poo Tigard's UR program. I did a little googling, and the approval was only passed in May of 2006, I like the link http://www.tigardfirst.com/UrbanRenewal.htm "Making sure YOU have a say in the decisions that affect our community" http://www.localnewsdaily.com/news/story.php?story_id=115162527165081000 The story in the Trib quotes. "In the May 16 (2006)election, citizens approved the formation of Tigard’s first urban renewal district. The Tigard site is http://www.ci.tigard.or.us/downtown/urban_renewal/default.asp Pretty readable and easy to navigate. It makes me wonder a couple of things, I think a fairer comparison to Tigard's $1.90/thousand would be how Portland UR is treating the Gateway district, or Rockwood, or Wilkes. While those Eastside folks cough up their $2.14/thousand for Urban Renewal. How that UR % increased to 9.55% of their tax bill, while compression (the tax limit ceiling) decreased voter approved Levy's like the Parks Levy we all worked so hard for by 4%. Not to mention the TIF(tax increment funding) hit as reported in the League of Women voters materials you posted of $59 million annually paying off PDC projects, of which $19 million annually would have gone to schools, and $15 million annually for county social services, as well as the $24 million for general services like Parks and roads. |
When I filled in for Jayne Carroll on KUIK on the 24th, I did a segment comparing and contrasting the tax bill on my home in the city of Portland, Mult Co., with the tax bill on our office property in Tigard in Wash Co. The thing that was the most interesting to me was that 40% of the Tigard tax total went to schools. On the PDX bill it was 30%. The percentage difference was accounted for by urban renewal. The urban renewal total was 10% on the PDX bill. The urban renewal charge on the Tigard bill was $1.90. That's right, less than two bucks.
What's wrong with this picture?
Dave Lister