Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About The Bulletin. (Bend, OR) 1963-current | View Entire Issue (Aug. 13, 2021)
The BulleTin • Friday, augusT 13, 2021 A5 EDITORIALS & OPINIONS AN INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER Heidi Wright Gerry O’Brien Richard Coe Publisher Editor Editorial Page Editor Should councilors or voters fill council vacancies? V oters or Bend city councilors? Who should pick who fills vacancies on the Bend City Council? It seems Bend city councilors may hold on to their power to fill vacan- cies, rather than turning the decision over to voters. That’s the direction taken Wednesday by a subcommit- tee of the Bend City Council look- ing at revising council rules. And it comes just a few years after an ugly political fight erupted in 2019 when councilors made an appointment to fill a vacancy themselves. That fight began after then-Coun- cilor Sally Russell won the election to become Bend’s mayor. Her win created an opening for her councilor spot. The council devised a process to fill it. They accepted applications. Applicants were checked to ensure they had the qualifications to serve. Candidates were interviewed. Coun- cilors tried to narrow down the many applicants. The process was open to the pub- lic. But there were conversations and emails exchanged that largely didn’t become public until after the choice was made. It led to charges of backroom deals — that the fix was in. Coun- cilor Barb Campbell accused Russell of betraying the principles she ran on because Russell voted in 2019 for the eventual choice, Chris Piper. And that was perhaps some of the milder criticism. There was some debate at the time that the council should wait until the next election and let voters de- cide. That’s what we argued should have happened. The counterargu- ment was that many important deci- The process was open to the public. But there were conversations and emails exchanged that largely didn’t become public until after the choice was made. It led to charges of backroom deals — that the fix was in. Councilor Barb Campbell accused Mayor Sally Russell of betraying the principles she ran on because Russell voted in 2019 for the eventual choice, Chris Piper. And that was perhaps some of the milder criticism. sions had to be made quickly by the council, such as setting budgets and priorities. It was better to have any new councilor participate than have them join later. There was also the possibility that councilors could be deadlocked 3-3 on important issues, if they had to wait a few months for an election. And, of course, elections have costs. Those arguments won. Letting voters decide lost. And those same arguments are winning again. Is that what you want? You can let Bend city councilors know at council@ bendoregon.gov. Courts block Bend’s effort to spend less on tourism I f you think Bend should spend less on promoting tourism, well, it tried. The courts have stopped it. The Oregon Court of Appeals af- firmed on Wednesday a lower court decision against the city. The city of Bend passed an or- dinance in 2017 to lower the total percentage of total local transient lodging tax revenues from 35.4% to 31.2%. Those taxes are basically the taxes people pay when they stay in a hotel. The Oregon Restaurant and Lodg- ing Association and two local hotel owners challenged the ordinance in court. The city has argued the plaintiffs didn’t face real or probable injury. The courts disagreed. The city also argued that the over- all percentage allocated to tourism remained above 30% and that was The city of Bend passed an ordinance in 2017 to lower the total percentage of total local transient lodging tax revenues from 35.4% to 31.2%. Those taxes are basically the taxes people pay when they stay in a hotel. sufficient to meet the law. The courts disagreed, saying there was also an unambiguous prohibition from de- creasing the amount for tourism promotion on or after July 2, 2003. It may seem like Bend doesn’t need tourism promotion. But if the city of Bend wants to make a change like this, it would seem to need a change in state law. Editorials reflect the views of The Bulletin’s editorial board, Publisher Heidi Wright, Editor Gerry O’Brien and Editorial Page Editor Richard Coe. They are written by Richard Coe. Flaws in Bend’s housing plans B BY TED BAYER renna Visser’s July 30 article about Bend’s housing dilemma highlights key elements of the crisis but fails to call out real flaws in the city’s planned effort to create af- fordable middle housing. City staff and elected officials have focused solely on diminished hous- ing supply as the source of the crisis. In recent presenta- tions, a staff mem- ber has suggested that systemic rac- ism, NIMBYism and resistance to change are primary causes of the re- Bayer duced affordable housing supply and further that De- schutes County —with a population in 2016 of 190,000 residents — “un- derproduced 150,000 homes during 2010-16.” A typo? If not, drop a zero, and you are likely closer to the reality. Similarly, the $650,000 median home price utilized in those presentations applies to single-family residences; median prices and rents for middle housing were not provided. This approach, with its failure to examine relevant facts and an us- versus-them hostility toward any who question the city’s proposed manner of implementing House Bill 2001, disturbs many residents who are con- cerned about the shortage of afford- able housing for those working here. It also ignores the impact of a major cause of the crisis: the nature of Bend’s current housing demand. GUEST COLUMN Bend’s population increased by 35% between 2010 and 2020 and has grown more in 2021. With these new residents, housing demand has sky- rocketed. A significant part of this increase recently has been from re- tirees who, after cashing out market gains in their homes in major urban areas, have moved here because of Bend’s livability and relative afford- ability. Since COVID-19 started in early 2020, Bend also has become a Zoom town, again because of its liva- bility and perceived lower cost. That surge has brought many new residents who, while perhaps not so cash-rich as retirees, continue to work remotely in the cities from which they migrated at much higher salaries than those of- fered here. Finally, the same qualities that have drawn retirees and Zoomies continue to attract tourists. As a result, short- term rental property, although now more regulated, has drawn cash inves- tors simply seeking a return on their money. These three buyer groups are the primary cause of a median price for a single-family residence over $625,000. These demand drivers also have a common element: Few of the buyers and no short-term renters are em- ployed in Deschutes County. Conse- quently, while our population con- tinues to swell, “help wanted” and “now hiring” signs proliferate; and St. Charles hospital, the only hospi- tal system in Central Oregon, faces a severe staffing shortage. It is these missing workers for whom the city ostensibly desires to provide afford- able housing. Yet, as the economist cited in Ms. Visser’s article confirms, simply increasing supply will not re- sult in a decline in median housing costs but “might help” affordability. He does not indicate how increased supply will help, and neither does the city. Instead, staff and elected officials just think it will — even when they are aware of other measures within their control that definitely will affect affordability. Ms. Visser details some of those solutions at the end of her article; others are set forth in state regula- tions. Council says it is considering a number of them, but since afford- able housing is so critically needed, why some or all of them are not be- ing implemented along with the HB 2001 code amendments is puzzling. Demonizing those who challenge not your objectives but rather your meth- ods and trivializing their concerns over forced street parking may be easier than doing a thorough analy- sis and then implementing measures that actually work. Retirees, Zoomies, tourists and others will keep buying and renting housing here — so long as Bend remains livable. Our lead- ers have tools that could enable them to create affordable middle housing for those who work here without di- minishing the character of our town. Given the stakes, Bend residents and workers are wondering, why not im- plement them right now? e Ted Bayer lives in Bend. Letters policy Guest columns How to submit We welcome your letters. Letters should be limited to one issue, contain no more than 250 words and include the writer’s phone number and address for verifica- tion. We edit letters for brevity, grammar, taste and legal reasons. We reject poetry, personal attacks, form letters, letters sub- mitted elsewhere and those appropriate for other sections of The Bulletin. Writers are limited to one letter or guest column every 30 days. Your submissions should be between 550 and 650 words and must include the writer’s phone number and address for verification. We edit submissions for brevity, grammar, taste and legal reasons. We reject those submitted elsewhere. Lo- cally submitted columns alternate with national columnists and commentaries. Writers are limited to one letter or guest column every 30 days. Please address your submission to either My Nickel’s Worth or Guest Column and mail, fax or email it to The Bulletin. Email submissions are preferred. Email: letters@bendbulletin.com Write: My Nickel’s Worth/Guest Column P.O. Box 6020 Bend, OR 97708 Fax: 541-385-5804 What should be done about homelessness? BY RON SMITH H omelessness should not be considered normal or an ac- ceptable life choice. It is nei- ther of these. It is a visible symptom that some- thing has gone seriously wrong, and it should trigger a strong response from a robust social safety net designed to set things right again. Think of this safety net as scaffolding with many interlocking parts offering many lev- els of support activated by individ- ual needs. Here’s how such a system might operate. Stage 1. As soon as a tent appears on public property, social services would spring into action. A poten- tially homeless person would be vis- ited by a social worker who will assess the situation. If it is clear that there are no means of immediately obtain- ing conventional accommodations, the new client would be escorted to a temporary intake shelter (along with their secured possessions). This shel- ter might be along the lines of a su- pervised military-style barracks with basic accommodations and amenities (communal restrooms and cafeterias). Stage 2. Once safely housed and fed, a longer-term social worker would be assigned and intake screening would start immediately. First, identification would be attempted and kin folk con- tacted, if appropriate. Next, a physi- cal exam would be performed and a mental health screening would be un- dertaken. Depending on the outcome of these screenings, the appropriate health services would be engaged. If the client has been in the military, VA resources would be activated, if appli- cable. After a personal history has been pieced together and a review of per- GUEST COLUMN sonal goals completed, the client would transition from the temporary shelter to the next setting that is con- sidered most appropriate. For some, this may be a clinical setting, but for most, this transition would be to a su- pervised dorm-like pod with social support. Each pod would be small, per- haps accommodating a dozen folks (including partners and children as appropriate). The pods would be dis- tributed throughout the city neigh- borhoods to promote normalization. Stage 3. If the client decides to re- main in the local community going forward, the social worker and client would work together to set goals and a plan for achieving independence as soon as possible. Job placement would Clients can opt out of this support system at any time, but if they do, they must leave the local area. Is this an intrusive process? Yes and for good reason. Restoring independence for a homeless person is no easy or painless task. But as a civilized society, we have an obligation to support those experiencing significant life issues. be a point of emphasis. Most jobs would be in essential services with training, transportation and initial wage subsidies provided as needed. Once stable employment is achieved, the client would transition to a small, supervised mainstream (possibly subsidized) apartment. As more independence is demon- strated, scaffolding would be reduced until full community integration is achieved. But regular social worker contacts would be permanent. Clients can opt out of this support system at any time, but if they do, they must leave the local area. Is this an intrusive process? Yes and for good reason. Restoring independence for a homeless person is no easy or pain- less task. But as a civilized society, we have an obligation to support those experiencing significant life issues. Let’s move on from hand wringing to action. In my next installment, I’ll explain how to fund and administer these kinds of scaffolded support sys- tems. e Ron Smith lives in Bend.
