how about all the crooked and corrupt public employee unions in this state and their extortion scare tactics they will be using to get voters to pass those tax measures?what are these public employee unions doing for anyone in the private sector now?schools are not suffering that bad now because they are still getting 10,000 bucks a kid very stable funding so can we please get off this trip about how badly funded our schools are?taxpayers are sick of the same old gloom and doom nonsense about schools and everything else.the govt wastes millions on consultants and other nonsense at the same time the public is told how broke the state is.the state has a 54 billion all funds budget now with a 2 billion surplus so enough of this nonsense about how short of money the state is for essential services.report the truth for once instaed of the same old lies.liberalism is a mental disorder like michael savage says

MV, what do you do for a living? Lawyer for employers? Small business owner? Rank and file employee for some large corporation? Political consultant? One of those people I have read about who are paid by some large national organization to post comments like yours on blogs?

"how about all the crooked and corrupt public employee unions in this state and their extortion scare tactics they will be using to get voters to pass those tax measures"

I have had email exchanges with 2 friends undecided about the tax measures. One didn't even know there were tax measures until I told him right after the measures qualified. The Measure 30 election had come as a complete surprise---very active in his church, with his family, on top of running his own business, he had not paid attention to the news and had not heard about Dick Armey coming into the state to help collect signatures. He declared M.30 too confusing, and did not vote.

So when these measures qualified, I let him know and said I was going to make sure he was well informed. I sent him the Legislative Revenue link about the ballot measures. He wrote back that he didn't know such information was available to the public, and the information was very easy to understand.

Another friend is a retired gentleman who is a Republican. When I saw this, I sent him the link and said I thought it was very interesting.

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/steve_duin/index.ssf/2009/10/lobbying_to_overturn_oregon_ta.html

He wrote back and agreed it was interesting.

Your entire message is that unions are bad and all good people believe in the "all funds budget". Does that include the Common School Fund? What about SAIF funds? What about federal funds? Are we supposed to use those to balance the general budget?

WESD Supt. was just fired for, among other things, co-mingling funds and using funds for other than their particular purpose. Was that wrong because every governmental organization should use an "all funds budget" approach? Why?

If people don't like what they hear from Pat McCormick and the others on the anti-tax campaign; if people didn't like the result of Measures 28 and 30; if people say "the legislature balanced the budget as they were supposed to and the opponents don't seem to have an intelligent alternative; name calling is not going to get them to vote no.

No one is required to support a campaign they believe is obnoxious, or to use that wonderful Ed Rollins quote, "not always on message with the truth".

Republicans love to say "the voters have spoken" when they win. But the voters also spoke when they elected legislators in 2006 and 2008, and badmouthing everyone who disagrees with you is not likely to win legislative elections in 2010. Or are you just angry so we should be angry too?

I had more or less given up on Steve Duin's ability to write a column that actually contains usable and worthwhile information.

She comes out trolling, from the very first sentence! No wonder Blue Oregon is mostly visited by link spammers!

I don't know when Conk 'Em, Fist 'Em & Mic On 'Em was abhorant to what you desscribe, but it must have been a long time ago. Maybe the key word is "claimed".

Is "Steve Duin" a synonym for "The Oregonian"? Talking about his freelance work? "Today's colum" is a spectacularly ambigous reference to what, I'm not sure. Even if you just mean the guy, people write different depending on where it is.

The corporate minimum isn't black and white. Suppose I own a religious non-profit that makes nothing one year. The old minimum was $250. That's a lot when you haven't made anything. Any corporate minimum should also exempt all income up to 10 times the minimum. Otherwise you are being hypocrites and taxing the poor. There are poor corporations, ya know?

T.A. is right, but it goes further. Every issue like he says, not abuot the issue. It used to be that you voted for a party, and they decided what the issues were. Now the losers use referendums to create a pseudo political platorm and functions like a real party.

mv's not so bad. He's a bit tightly wrapped for this society, but anyone that would sit out all night in a cold, lonely vigil, jst becaus of a rumor that Wal-Mart is coming has something more than 99% of Blue Oregon readers. He doesn't just talk, he personally sacrifices for the cause. I live 50% in Oregon and 50% in Bath, England and no where do people actually get off their butts and act. If we had more mv's, the few that are like mv today wouldn't be crazy.

Yup, Ricky, and here we all are. I personally discovered Blue Oregon when I was engaged in flame wars with a liberal progressive, at another blog. A fellow Christian blogger pointed out that this blog regularly dealt with progressive liberals when they disagree with His Holiness, President Hussain. Without their extreme talk, the remaining tent meeting of well behaved moderates is just the kind of environment that you can imagine preaching the message to. Roll wit' Rush and roll 'em over! Democratic Party truth that the end justifies the means means that she won't get a word of what you said. "The difference is, we're right". They really believe that. I know we get painted that way, but we only represent God. We don't claim to always be right, but to be behind God's will, and it is always right. Always right. Think about it.

Well, Paul you make some good points and credit Barnhart for his points also. But I am getting extremely TIRED of the bleating horns from people like Carla. All of her posts amount to little more than flames, or attempts to express herself (like when she decided she was a photographer and felt some desire to share her "art"). Kari should warn her and remind she is not even being close to a journalist. And rarely discusses anything of importance to progressive politics. If that lady doesn't contain herself I will spread enough money around to ensure she isn't involved in any campaign payroll, ever again. Oregon should be a leader in bringing legislation and direction to the country. We have done well in that for many years. Yet, this "fellow" is given free reign to make activists look like trolls. It even rubs off on people who run for office. Like Novak, Who has national aspirations, yet posts in the Axtman troll like way. That shit comes back to haunt you.

Kitzhaber's famous statement on Oregon being "ungovernable"? Well, when the framework of things you post about are designed to cause reaction and be a flamer? Then Carli is no better than Beck or Rush. She insults you and apologizes to you in the same breath. That's a snake. Anyone can see that.

All this bitterness and vitriol, yet no practical reason being given. Here is the argument Matthew Vantress and other conservatives would make if they could lay off the ad hominem course:

A business tax is a double tax. Business employs individuals who pay income taxes. Furthermore, the licensing fees, regulations, property taxes, and other related fees associated with doing business are paid so that the organization can exist well into the future. In contrast, any bureaucrat whether they be a pencil pusher in a state capitol, a mailman, policeman, fireman and on are paid for by those very same taxes on the income of those employed by business. Therefore, business should not be taxed or if taxed, it should be taxed so lightly because business is the tax base that allows those government workers to have that nice salary, enviable pension, house in Bali, and full health care benefits.

That is the argument that cold-blooded conservatives make, while hot-blooded conservatives ramble in a manner that is indistinguishable from the bleeding-heart college kid who is out to save the world, yet knows nothing of it.

I agree in principle with the argument, but I disagree with the level of taxation on business. I believe that business should pay the $150 and more, but not so much that business becomes an endeavour solely to benefit government be it Federal, State, County, or Local.

Without business, there would be no tax base with which to support government, yet without government our level of civility would be that of an African nation where warlords drug up young boys, give them assault rifles, and spend their time pillaging and looting to the extent where life becomes meaningless for all.

An eternal tug and pull is how I see the relation between business and government.

I just hope we are not on the path to becoming the next dysfunctional "California" with state government bound, gagged and hamstrung into bankruptcy by too many ill-conceived ballot measurers designed and financed by rich and powerful business interests for their self protection.

Paul,

I think your comments about Carla - especially related to her photography - were rude and childish. I don't always agree with Carla, but that's why I enjoy coming here. I'm challenged to look at things differently.

And, you should be reminded that this is a BLOG! Which means those who run it and contribute to it will sometimes post personal stuff.

Duin had a well written piece noting a particular lobbying group's willingness to change their previous message for the BIG BUCK$. Carla has done a good job showing that apparent monetary hypocrisy here.

What carla continues to fail to do is substantiate why she insists on calling permanent raises in taxes on the wealthy and adding a Gross Receipts Tax to corporations in a temporary state revenue slump; Tax-Fairness.

To Matthew,

(As much as we might agree (a little) on some things and probably voted for a lot of the same people), learn to use the spacebar, and capitals, and civility.

Your posts are so error filled that I am 50/50 on whether you are truly conservative or just trying to paint the conservatives in a bad light. People have called you on it before and it doesn't make a difference, so I have dismissed you as a leftist making disparaging comments about the left to add fuel to your sides fire.

Just curious...since I believe the underlying foundation of the "tax fairness" argument is based on the fact that income tax revenues from corporations have decreased as a percentage of all income taxes collected in the state, has anyone done any research into the following:

Population growth vs. C corp growth Growth of S corp businesses (business taxes paid as individual)

Wouldn't it be a hoot if the disparity could be explained away with some simple research.

carla schools have been still getting 10,000 bucks a kid still and thats stable funding and have been wasting millions on consultants.baloney the state is struggling for revenue they have a 54 billion all funds budget with a 2 billion surplus carla.im sorry when the state is boo hooing about money when at the same time they are fattening state workers way overgenerous bloated pers pensions and wasting millions of dollars on unnecessary contracts and consultants i have no sympathyy for them and it dont prove they are struggling for money that bad for revenue.businesses pay more than enough taxes and fees now carla and the greedy selfish state govt dont need another dime and let them live with what they darn well get now which is more than enough.rick please explain to me what have i said that is an error in m7y post?unlike you brainwashed liberals who cant see through the same old nonsense and gloom and doom garbage i can.i see through extortion scare tactics.i am a conservative not a leftist rick.what would you call your fellow liberal supporters rick that continue to fall for the same old tired liberal nonsense year after year about how badly broke the state really is and that we will have to throw grandma off her medicine if you vote these taxes down?i see through liberals.

Carla,

You stated, "Cuts to schools have been going on for years and years"

Actually, this is not exactly true. I think you meant to say that schools have received less funds than what they requested. School funding has increased year over year, but what has happened is that schools don't always receive what was requested, budgeted, or promised. When tax revenues are lower than planned, less money is available.

What has happened is that school costs are increasing faster than our ability to fund them.

Even if these measures pass, the funding problem for schools and other public entities is not resolved.

It's better to be honest about the use of the word "cuts". It is not a cut when actual funding from one biennium to the next is increased. Using the word "cuts" to describe budgets that are less than requested is inaccurate. Of course, when government expands, adding new departments, sometimes that expansion comes at a cost to existing ones. Overall, the spending increases, but individual departments may still receive less.

I got a written response from the budget office when I asked for an explanation regarding how a 9% increase can be interpreted as a "cut". I did get a reply. To paraphrase the response:

• some budget items had to be increased in order to qualify for federal fund matching
• some budget line items had to be increased due to legislative measures passed in previous sessions (unfunded mandates?)
• state costs for many programs have gone up

In other words, not a direct answer to my questions, except to say that everything is more expensive, and the state needed to spend more in order to qualify for federal funds.

I did not get any answer regarding what was a fair tax rate, nor why a budget increase was described as a cut.

The real question I have is why clients of CFM who are damaged by their campaign against the legislative tax package aren't making more noise about how they are being misrepresented! They represent numerous clients who rely on human services programs and funding that will be severely cut if they are successful in over turning the legislature's budget and revenue plan. These guys are complete mercenaries who are making money on the campaign and then will make money lobbying for clients against the ensuing budget cuts. Hypocrisy in the name of the almighty dollar is the only explanation.

Carla is right. Suppose the Fir Street Elementary School (imaginary name) has 200 students one year, 225 the next year, 250 the year after that.

Let's say that the school gets X dollars the first, second, and third years.

That means all operating expenses of the Fir Street elementary school is X divided by 200 the first year X divided by 225 the second year X divided by 250 the third year.

Only an ideologue would say that all three of those numbers (X divided by ___) are equal.

And about "less funds than requested", some school districts budget on the basis of the lowest possible prediction of funds, and then when the extra amount turns out to be the accurate number, they use the extra funds for lower priority items--be it supplies, training, maintenance. Ever been to a school board meeting? Our local cable access channel broadcasts them.

LT and Carla,

The state allocates dollars per enrolled student. The number of students used for the determination for the funding is the number of students enrolled on the last class day of September.

Budgets for each school district are compiled during the preceding year based on forecast enrollments for the coming year. They do try to adjust, and be conservative. Problems occur when actual enrollments are significantly above or below the budget assumptions and forecast. The school finalizes its real funding expected and spending level based on the end of September enrollment, as that usually corresponds to what the state will distribute later in the year.

In other words, a lump some is not simply assigned to each school district. The allocated amount is based on the number of students enrolled. There is an upward adjustment for ELL students. Of course all schools can't always respond linearly to changes in enrollment; but their funding does.

As the school year progresses, the state does adjust the funding per student amount, based on actual tax revenues. All the school districts work with the state using per enrolled student numbers. Schools aren't too happy when they lose enrollment, or in-district students transfer to private schools, charter schools, out-of-district schools, or are home schooled. Yes, they lose funding then that they thought they could count on.

Yes, I have been involved with the school boards and their budget committees. Yes, I have several years of budget analysis experience. Yes I have navigated the DOE and local school district's budget information.

My original comment was regarding the willy-nilly use of the word cuts whenever it is spoken or written when their is less money allocated or available when compared to the want or need.

When the funding per student year-over-year increases, but not to the level a district may want, that is not necessarily a cut. However, if the amount requested is truly what is needed, but the funding is not there, we all have a problem. But that is not a cut. That is a shortfall in funding.

Yes, it is possible that operating expenses can rise at a faster rate than enrollment. At the same time, when enrollment falls, there will be a funding reduction. That is why many schools are conservative, and do have and use a reserve fund. Healthcare insurance costs and other benefit costs are increasing at a rapid clip; faster than CPI growth or inflation; inflation as officially measured has not been rising at a fast clip at all. Staff step increases also result in higher labor costs regardless of enrollment numbers.

But in the end, the state has a finite level of revenue to count on, and up until this year, tax revenues have increased year over year. Just need to make sure spending does not increase at a rate faster than we are able to fund.

That reminds me of the many sales tactics one sees in stores and the papers: no money down, no payments until next year. This expansion of credit is a curse to careless consumers.

Thank you for all your involvement with schools.

However, about "that is not a cut. That is a shortfall in funding."

OK, semantics. Like someone not being fired, but subjected to a reduction in force.

My frustration is with the folks who say it is all the fault of the teacher's union.

If there is a district (I used the Fir Elementary example for simplicity) where enrollment goes up and funding stays the same---or where special needs kids move into a small district (which sometimes happens), call it cut, shortfall, or whatever, there is a problem with funding. In such a situation, cutting instructional or library assistant hours down from what the school staff think is needed is something that must be addressed in as plain language as possible.

And saying management salaries don't matter because it is all the fault of the teachers union is a way to lose friends and alienate people.

Remember last December when so many people were snowed in? Our school district budget committee met and decided on top management salaries. They voted them in at the Jan. board meeting as a consent calendar item, without discussion or context. Were these flat salaries, raises, without the cost of living adjustment, or what? Board members acted like they never even considered an explanation, because after all they had discussed it in such detail at their December meeting.

The first most people heard about this was in the newspaper article a day or 2 before the meeting:

"Also on Tuesday, the board is scheduled to approve contracts for top district managers:

Deputy superintendent, who earns $132,913 and has a $3,000 car allowance

Assistant superintendent for human resources, who earns $121,716 plus a $3,000 car allowance

Chief financial officer, who earns $126,585 plus a $3,000 car allowance" .....

That is not money spent per student, nor money spent on unionized instructors. And yet that shouldn't matter. Were any school programs cut to pay those salaries? After a lot of phone calls and emails, I finally got an answer to the "car allowance"----"we've always done it that way" dated back several superintendants and maybe a couple decades.

Did anyone ever take those salaries, divide by the number of students, and decide how much per student those folks were paid?

We can't have an honest debate on school funding if that sort of information on public management salaries is not publicly available.

But it suits the anti-taxers to blame teachers unions (board sets management salaries, sometimes giving them a raise and holding unionized compensation flat) and others would rather debate theory than reality.

LT, I expected better from you. With your keen understanding of Oregon public education and school district budgets you are fully aware that districts get revenue PER STUDENT ENROLLED. That enrollment figure trickles down to the individual school. So, in the example of rising enrollment you postulated the true mathematical representation would be:

That means all operating expenses of the Fir Street elementary school is X divided by 200 the first year X divided by 200 + (x/200)25 the second year X divided by 200 + (x/200)50 the third year.

Kurt, I never did very well in math. You may be entirely right in setting up the problem. I barely passed math in school, so don't blame me if I set the problem up wrong.

Question is--what is the answer?

Well, I had a longer post written and then eaten, so I guess the message back to me is don't be too wordy!

LT, what you describe about Fir Elementary is clearly a problem. Multiply that by the many school districts and other public departments throughout the state, and those little things all add up to something big. Sometimes the level of oversight is lacking, and that costs us all.

I have my own anecdotes concerning consent agenda items, and ridiculous spending by the district directed to favored consultants, all in the name of "helping the students".

Another example is one big waste that was stopped a few years back was when the district sent a form to all families in the district to qualify for free or reduced price lunches at the schools. It wasn't so bad that the form was sent to every family with children in the district. What was egregious was that each had a pre-metered return envelope for families to return the form.

Smart mailers know that business-reply mail on pre-printed return envelopes only incur postage charges if actually used. In the Beaverton mailing however, each envelope had postage applied from a Pitney-Bowes machine; and it was for more than 1oz. of postage. Just think of how many dollars went down the drain for that snafu over the years. When I brought this up to the superintendent, she agreed that this was stoppable waste, and it has been corrected since then

I am sure there are many other simple examples of savings that can be pursued. Follow that up with a zero-base budget that is built every two years, rather than using the past biennium spending with an inflation multiplier to come up with the next budget.

Lt, I understand and still may not have the equation exact ;-).

The answer is that individual school funds go up (or down) as a function of rising/falling student enrollment. If more students are enrolled, more dollars flow, presumably to fund the additional costs associated with each additional student.

My contention is that per student funding has not kept up with unfunded mandates.

Has it kept up with inflation as indicated by the official CPI, yes, it has kept up.

Unfortunately, there is no adjustment to the CPI at the local level.

There is no adjustment to the CPI when the influx is from lower and middle income families who may contribute less to state and local tax revenues and require higher level of services. Yes, I know that tax revenues come from all residents, and not everyone has children in the schools.

You ask the simple question - I provided a simple answer already. Our spending is increasing at a rate faster than our also increasing tax revenues can pay.

Property taxes are limited as to how fast they can grow; artificially limited of course thru measures 5/47/50. Then again, new real property has been added every year, resulting in more property tax revenue, too.

Districts with declining enrollments are in the worst situation, since they cannot roll-back the spending fast enough. Districts that are growing too fast have to live with overcrowded classrooms.

All I am advocating is that we all need to look beyond the tax increase issue. Whether the measures pass in January or not, the longer term problem is still ahead of us. Personally, I believe that if the measures pass and the tax increases are approved, we still have a much larger, longer term problem.

I hope the legislature is able to look at a longer term solution to our funding needs for all our services.

Let me throw back the Portland Public Schools report.

The chart demonstrating that funding per student has not kept up with inflation has this note:

*Inflation adjustment uses a price index that measures education costs in Oregon

Since the chart does show that funding has increased annually overall, why index to education costs rather than the CPI or inflation rate? Looking only at education costs is a feedback loop that unfairly increases the adjustment. Any increase in education costs alone will show a larger reduction on the effective rate than looking at the CPI alone.

There really is no value in the back and forth - you'll pull out a statistic, and I or someone else will come back with another contrasting one.

In the meantime, you ignore the elephant in the room that is our longer term funding crisis for all public services.

I hear the cry loud and clear - public agencies want more money than they are getting or likely to get from tax revenues.

Funny you should mention credits Carla. Do you feel that individuals should get the following tax credits:

Earned Income Credit
Child and Dependent Care Credit Adoption Credit Excess Social Security and RRTA Tax Withheld
Retirement Savings Contributions Credit First-time Homebuyer Credit Home Energy Efficiency Improvement Tax Credits Residential Renewable Energy Tax Credits Automobile Tax Credits

Or are tax credits only bad for evil businesses?

MP, I suggest you find a legislative candidate who believes in ending all tax credits faster than what the legislature did last session.

Personally, I believe every tax credit should be openly debated. Can we afford the Business Energy Tax Credit money to go to a well established wind power industry, or is there better use for that money? How productive are employees who worry they can't afford good child care? Or should there always be a parent at home with small children, even if the other parent doesn't earn enough money to provide for the family?

I'd love to know what you do for a living, MP. Apparently not real estate if you are opposed to the first time homebuyer tax credit.

A political operative, maybe?

"If more students are enrolled, more dollars flow, presumably to fund the additional costs associated with each additional student."

Hence my question: 2 neighboring districts, let's make them in the same county. Each school district has let's say a 14% increase in elementary school students from one year to the next.

"Presumably" doesn't cut it. Either the money arrives or it doesn't. And if it does, how much gets to the overcrowded schools (many schools with a capacity of 300 kids have at one time or another found themselves with a student body of 350 or more)?
How much of it goes to direct student needs (teachers and assistants, library staff, special ed staff if needed, school lunch [breakfast?] staff, office staff, transportation, etc.) and how much gets spent on central office administration?

THAT is what I don't hear discussed. It is as if people are all locked into their generalized debates about "school funding" and don't realize how many parents and others see what happens in their local school and thinks the people debating theory have no clue about real life.

Carla

0.0065% (216 of 33,130) of Oregon C Corp tax filers used tax credits to eliminate taxable income. Not seeing a big problem here.

As far as my position on tax credits, I would just as soon get rid of them. They complicate the tax code and I question just how much benefit they actually are.

LT

First off, no where in my post of individual tax credits did I state whether or not I support or do not support them.

As far as what I do, I have been a small business owner since 1993 in Oregon, Texas, Arizona and now back home in Oregon.

lt the schools get more than adequate funding now at 10,000 bucks a kid.pers,salaries and benefits is eating up most of the school money now and schools refuse to stand up to the greedy selfish teacher unions and tell them no for once and we need to get the ever increasing cost of public education down.the teachers unions are the problem lt whether you like it or not.education would be so much better without the unions and their mandates too.schools are doing nothing to reduce costs by demanding to the unions that teachers share more in health insurance costs like all the private sector has had to.

Oregon Corporate Excise and Income Tax Characteristics of Corporate Taxpayers 2008 Edition

Page 3-14
Exhibit 3.15

ari should warn her and remind she is not even being close to a journalist. And rarely discusses anything of importance to progressive politics

Sorry to break it to you, but that's her job description. Only Karol has done it better, and voila! Quick promotion to editor.

This is the official, unofficial blog of the Oregon Democratic Party. Spin, disctraction, disinformation are par for the course. I am getting a little tired of Dems copying everything we do. I think this is a toe in the water, trying to copy talk radio on a blog. In terms of attitude, Carla reminds me of Lars!

Posted by: Carla Axtman | Oct 31, 2009 12:27:08 PM

0.0065% (216 of 33,130) of Oregon C Corp tax filers used tax credits to eliminate taxable income. Not seeing a big problem here.

Source?

Yeah, that sounds like it could be made up. Spin it girl, spin it!

I'm really very useful to follow a long-time see this as a blog here Thank you for your valuable information I'd love to take one of those for a spin. We need a lambo rental service in Pittsburgh. Any takers. Thnx for the interesting post.I found it very useful for myself.Keep writing. saç ekimi laptop

For those of you thinking that if they implement this it will eliminate some of the waiting and lines… I agree in principal with your ideas at the same time I do believe if someone invents something before others they should have some rights to make money from it. acı cehre koçluk vajinismus