Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About The daily Astorian. (Astoria, Or.) 1961-current | View Entire Issue (Jan. 23, 2020)
A4 THE ASTORIAN • THuRSdAy, JANuARy 23, 2020 OPINION editor@dailyastorian.com KARI BORGEN Publisher DERRICK DePLEDGE Editor Founded in 1873 JEREMY FELDMAN Circulation Manager JOHN D. BRUIJN Production Manager CARL EARL Systems Manager OUR VIEW Warrenton and the price of growth he official U.S. census tally each 10 years — one is coming right up — results in updated population numbers proudly displayed on city limits signs across the country. Declines bring a sense of decay, even failure. Americans mostly like the idea of population growth and the devel- opment that spurs it. We associate more residents with success. See- ing more neighbors is a validation of our own choices to live in grow- ing communities. We welcome expanded employment, cultural and shopping opportunities. To live along the North Coast in the past decade is to experience the pleasures — and some of the pit- falls — of popularity. More com- merce comes with more traffic con- gestion. Greater opportunities attract more people to compete for those chances. Expanded housing necessi- tates expansions in maintenance and public services. In our immediate region, nowhere better epitomizes these trade-offs than Warrenton. Grappling with how best to move forward without giving up too much of what makes it so special is certain to occupy the attention of city residents and lead- ers for decades to come. In a December story, “Warren- ton’s growth isn’t paying for itself; New and higher fees are possible,” we explored the outlines of the city’s dilemma. In a nutshell, this is how to maintain a distinctly pro-growth philosophy while making sure ordi- nary residents aren’t made to pay an unfair share of associated expenses. It still will surprise some — and spark denial among others — to learn that growth usually doesn’t pay for itself, at least not fast enough to be helpful to a majority of current residents. Warrenton’s planning, police, public works and finance depart- ments asked for around $500,000 in new staff, building remodels and equipment they argue are necessary to keep pace with the city’s rapid growth. But the city only expects another $81,000 in property tax T Colin Murphey/The Astorian Walmart employees cut the ribbon to celebrate the opening of the new store in Warrenton in 2018. revenue. “Much of the growth going on isn’t paying for itself,” City Com- missioner Rick Newton said in December. “It’s eating us all the time.” As we editorialized in 2003, “A city visioning session … revealed that many Warrenton citizens would like their city to be more discrimi- nating in what it allows to happen. …Warrenton’s taxpayers also real- idents get socked with the bill or suffer from city departments being stretched too thin? The giant corpo- rations that make the city a regional shopping destination ought to have been paying all their own bills from the start. To whatever extent possi- ble, Warrenton will have to make up for any past laxity and make certain that companies pay their own way out of the profits made in Warrenton. IT STILL WILL SuRPRISE SOME — ANd SPARK dENIAL AMONG OTHERS — TO LEARN THAT GROWTH uSuALLy dOESN’T PAy FOR ITSELF, AT LEAST NOT FAST ENOuGH TO BE HELPFuL TO A MAJORITy OF CuRRENT RESIdENTS. ize that development is not free. Infrastructure costs of develop- ment are largely borne by the tax- payers. That’s why many munici- palities now charge development fees. Allowing development free of charge is an easy way to build a fis- cal deficit.” It’s good that Warrenton’s lead- ers get it. Why should ordinary res- Police Chief Mathew Workman’s idea of a public safety fee to busi- nesses based on calls for service for law enforcement and justice-system follow through makes good sense, for example. A more complicated situation arises when local Clatsop County people are the developers. Faced with a multiyear housing crunch, few would want to get in the way of construction of new houses or apart- ments, especially by contractors who Warrenton residents may know. It’s hard to draw the line with a high school classmate. Even so, if a new subdivision requires hiring another cop and expanding the water plant, ulti- mately the buyers of those new homes are the ones who should pay. This needs to be reflected in fees and taxes, even if these must be ini- tially borne by builders and then passed along to buyers. Warrenton has managed to oper- ate on one of the lowest property tax rates in the region. But as Mayor Henry Balensifer has observed, with property tax rates controlled by state law and unlikely to go up signifi- cantly, the city has to focus on rais- ing revenue locally. It should do so by every means necessary. At the same time, the Oregon Legislature must actively look for better ways to meet 21st century needs and not be hobbled by knots tied in the 20th century. Yes, no one likes taxes. But neither does anyone like paying the price for someone else’s decisions. GUEST COLUMN Will the GOP walk out? T he plot thickened last week in the Oregon Capitol. Senate Minority Leader Herman Baertschiger Jr., R-Grants Pass, confirmed what has been on everyone’s minds: All options remain on the table for Senate Republicans as the 2020 legislative session approaches. That includes walking out to deny Democrats a quorum for passing the carbon cap-and-trade bill. The 2020 Legislature is scheduled to convene Feb. 3. Baertschiger said the new version of the climate action bill, the Oregon Greenhouse Gas Initiative, DICK is no better than last year’s HUGHES House Bill 2020 despite a number of alterations. If the bill gets to the Senate floor this year, Democrats appear to have the 16th vote needed to pass it. One of last year’s holdouts, Sen. Arnie Roblan, D-Coos Bay, has endorsed the revised version, which includes changes he advocated. On the other side of the Capitol, a quo- rum-denying mass walkout by House Republicans seems unlikely. Their cau- cus lacks such unanimity, although their new leader, Canby Rep. Christine Dra- zan, could be more rigid in confronting the Democratic supermajority than her prede- cessor, Carl Wilson, of Grants Pass. Lobbyists made the rounds during last week’s Legislative Days, keeping relation- ships in good repair, attending legislative committee meetings and discerning what to tell their clients about the upcoming session. The dynamics remain so uncer- tain that some lobbyists advised clients to avoid pursuing any issue that had more than token opposition, so as to avoid con- tributing to legislative blowups. The question hanging over the Capitol remained, “Will there be a session?” Such a question seemed inconceiv- able 10 years ago when two-thirds of vot- ers amended the Oregon Constitution to authorize annual sessions. That ballot mea- sure created 35-day sessions in even-num- bered years and restricted sessions in odd-numbered years to 135 days. Assuming all Democrats show up, each chamber will need at least two Repub- licans in attendance in order to have the two-thirds participation required to have a floor session and vote on bills. A Senate Republican boycott could block the entire session. That has Capi- tol insiders calculating whether it actu- ally might happen or whether a short-term walkout could lead to tactical deals that enabled budget-adjustment legislation and certain noncontroversial bills to pass while sidelining the carbon bill. With Senate Republicans and Demo- crats appearing ready to call each other’s bluff, the most unlikely of unlikely sce- narios is that the two sides will reach an agreement on the carbon bill. Among other things, Republicans want it sent to voters — assuming Oregonians would defeat it — and Democrats do not. Republicans in both chambers want more emphasis on encouraging people — especially in the Portland metro area, the state’s Democratic stronghold — to con- vert to electric vehicles. I hear that one or more proposals could gain support from middle-of-the-road (no pun intended) Democrats. Gillian Flaccus/AP Photo Loggers protest outside the Capitol in Salem in June. Some Democrats also will side with Republicans who believe voters should be asked whether to repeal annual legis- lative sessions. The even-year short ses- sions were promoted as primarily being for items requiring immediate fixes, such as budget adjustments, especially in human services programs, or flaws discovered with previous legislation. Lawmakers disagree whether such major items as the climate change bill are legitimate for the short session. Demo- crats, and their allies, already decided to wait until 2021 to resurrect some conten- tious bills from the 2019 session, such as ones disallowing religious exemptions for childhood vaccine requirements and end- ing the mortgage interest tax deduction on second homes. As if this weren’t enough uncertainty to invigorate Capitol scuttlebutt, Senate President Peter Courtney’s health became the newest hot topic. Courtney, a legisla- tive workaholic, missed last week’s Legis- lative Days because he was hospitalized at Oregon Health & Science University with severe hip pain. Courtney has had several health con- cerns over the years, including missing time with eye issues during last year’s session. His office said Courtney expects to be back at the Capitol for the February ses- sion. Still, his hospitalization has peo- ple wondering what shape he will be in to guide the Senate through this tumultuous time. Meanwhile, some of the most liberal Democrats can’t wait to replace the mod- erate Courtney with one of their own as Senate leader. dick Hughes has been covering the Ore- gon political scene since 1976.
