Cagers
successful at
Canada
tourney
Page 7
Child Care
Center loses
funding
Page 4
Wednesday, January 11, 1984
Clackamas Community College
Vol. XVII, No. 10
Board votes against referring tax
By Shelley Ball
Of The Print
A disagreement with the
state
Legislature
led
Clackamas Community Col
lege’s Board of Education to
vote last month not to support
the reference of Oregon’s sales
tax proposal to the public by
putting it on the ballot.
The legislature is holding
the College, as well as other
school districts and local
governments, responsible for
determining if the sales tax will
appear on the ballot. The sales
tax issue was referred by the
Revenue Committees of both
the House and Senate in
a special session to the
Legislature, who in turn refer
red the tax to the school
districts and local govern
ments. At this point enough
votes have been collected to
put the tax on the March 27
ballot.
The Board voted 5 no to 2
yes to “not refer it to the peo
ple,” Board Chairman Larry
Wright said, because he and
other Board members think
the task to be the responsibili
ty of the Legislature.
Wright explained the vote
is not a reflection of the
Board’s opinion on the sales
tax, but the opinion of having
them decide whether the tax
should be presented to the
voters on the ballot. “We’re
(Board) not supporting the
concept that we should be the
bad guys to put it (tax) on the
ballot. No one objected to the
people voting on it, but it real
ly wasn’t constitutional for us
to make that decision,” he
said.
The Board meeting was
held on campus in the
McLoughlin Theater, and
State Representative Robin
Lindquist and Oregon Com
munity College’s Association
(OCCA) Executive Secretary
Roger Bassett were on hand to
explain the sales tax. Also pre
sent at the meeting were
Richard
Weiss,
Dave
McTeague and Stephen
Scheer, who were representing
Citizens Opposed to Sales
Tax.
If the College’s Board
had not had to vote on referr
ing the sales tax to the voters,
Wright said he believes the
Board would have supported
the tax on the ballot. Wright
also said if a sales tax was
passed, the College would
benefit from it, but he explain
ed the bill is so complicated he
is not sure how much the Col
lege would benefit. Wright is
also not certain if the public
would save any money from
the tax.
“I think it (sales tax) has
some real glaring faults,” he
said, as he explained there is
the possibility of levy amounts
being raised after a sales tax
passage, and because the tax is
so confusing, Wright said
most voters will probably be
voting on emotion alone.
College President John
Hakanson said the College
would benefit from a sales tax
by making it “easier to sell or
get the voters to vote on a tax
levy,” as it is estimated a sales
tax would reduce the public’s
property taxes between 40-45
percent in over a year.
Otherwise, Hakanson
said there would be “no direct
increase in money to the Col
lege.”
Although Hakanson is
currently not taking a stand on
the sales tax, he said “It’s hard
for me to think that it’s going
to pass,” based on the past
performances of the issue at
the Oregon polls.
In addition to the sales
tax vote, Wright said the
Board decided to place
Hakanson in charge of draf
ting a letter explaining their
dislike of having to make that
vote. The letter will then be
sent to the Oregon Legislature.
A
Board meeting to
discuss levy status
BIRD DROPPINGS—A duck shows off with a
one-leg balancing act on a trash receptacle at
the recycling depot near the Environmental
Learning Center.
Photo by Joel Miller
centimeters
Colors by Munsell Color Services Lab
Recommendations for the
March 27 serial tax levy will be
discussed tonight at the Board
of Education Meeting set for
7:30 p.m. in the boardroom in
Barlow Hall.
It is recommended that
the College propose the same
levy to county voters as it did
in the November election.
With projected state revenues
in 1984-85 and estimated
enrollment for the next year,
the same type of levy is still
valid.
The November levy was
defeated by voters by over 13
percent. The College is cur-
rently functioning on the last
year of a three-year serial levy
that expires June 30, 1984.
In November, the Board
asked for a four percent an
nual increase in property
taxes, which would tax each
property owner $1.39 per
$1000 of assessed value. The
current rate is $1.24 per $1000.
If the measure is approv
ed, $7,610,700 of the taxes
levied during the next fiscal
year will be eligible for partial
state funding. However,
$671,318 of the taxes levied
will be financed by taxpayers
without partial state payment.
\_________________________
_____________ )