A8 The BulleTin • Tuesday, decemBer 21, 2021
EDITORIALS & OPINIONS
AN INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER
Heidi Wright
Gerry O’Brien
Richard Coe
Publisher
Editor
Editorial Page Editor
City of Bend makes
changes to policies
on homeless camp
T
he City of Bend made two changes last week in its policy
toward people who are homeless.
One is immediate. The Bend City
Council gave staff authorization to
remove large homeless camps with-
out coming to councilors for ap-
proval first. A large camp in the city’s
definition is eight or more campers
Don’t expect the city to now
sweep in and clear camps. There
must be triggers before that hap-
pens because of laws, court rulings
and city policy. Some of the factors
considered when the city makes that
call are: safety, such as tents too close
to the road; increasing calls and in-
creasing severity of calls for service;
environmental impact from burn-
ing or human waste; and increasing
amounts of trash.
No single violation would nec-
essarily trigger a removal. It’s still a
judgment call. It just would not re-
quire council approval first.
The second change is that the city
is going to, in 2022, develop a city
code for camping and trash. That
will, at least, provide greater clarity.
The question is: Will the city have
the staff and a budget to implement
it? The city doesn’t really now. It
won’t matter what the policy is if it is
not monitored and enforced.
When homeless camps in Bend
are removed, it may feel like victory.
It’s hollow. It breaks up a camp. It
doesn’t break homelessness. It’s not
like there are good other places for
people to go. Shelters are full. People
just must move and go someplace
else. Service providers can lose track
of them because of the disruption.
And that doesn’t help get people
where they can transition into a bet-
ter situation.
It’s like what Bend city councilor
Megan Perkins said last week: If
you don’t like what you see with the
homeless camps in Bend, do some-
thing about it. The city, the county
and nonprofits are working to find
solutions. They don’t have the re-
sources to solve the problem by
themselves. They need help locating
shelter space and with money, vol-
unteers and time.
An Oregon De-
partment of
Transportation
crew removes a
campsite from
a homeless in
Bend in Octo-
ber.
dean Guernsey/
Bulletin file
Bend considers tax breaks
for certain construction
B
uild more housing in Bend
and prices, and demand likely
won’t really go down. But any
solution must focus on supply. That’s
why the city’s new look at property
tax exemptions is interesting.
Bend is considering handing out
tax breaks to certain kinds of devel-
opment. The city could use more
multiunit housing. It could use more
middle-income housing. Some in
Bend would like to see nonprof-
its play more of a role in providing
housing. And some in Bend want
more vertical development, multi-
story buildings, rather than sprawl-
ing ever outward.
The city could create property
tax exemptions to give one or all of
those a boost. Bend city councilors
have given staff the go-ahead to look
at all four options.
A problem with any tax exemp-
tion is determining if the incen-
tive given is worth the loss in taxes.
Property taxes in Bend do go to
varying degrees to help the city pro-
vide its services whether they be
streets, public safety or clean water.
So if the city does go ahead with any
exemptions, there is a cost for the
benefit. How big a cost? It’s too early
to tell. It may be relatively insignif-
icant. Bend, though, already relies
on a separate levy to help support
its fire department. It has had to ask
voters to support bonds to keep up
with the explosive growth in trans-
portation needs.
One of the many other challenges
with tax exemptions is evaluating
what they achieve. Would the same
development have happened any-
way? It’s hard to know without a
convenient alternative universe to
do testing. City staff — as resource-
ful as they are — do not have that at
their disposal.
And there is always the question
of who benefits. Will the big benefit
of any tax break really go to develop-
ers and builders or will people who
need housing truly feel it?
Staff and councilors discussed
putting in place some sort of sun-
set or limitation on any tax exemp-
tion to ensure it was working as in-
tended. That’s especially important.
Although the public does generally
get to vote when their taxes are in-
creased, they don’t get a vote when
the City Council starts handing out
tax breaks to certain sectors of the
economy.
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.
Sen. Jeff Merkley seeking to address
opioid crisis with alternative meds
BY JEFF MERKLEY AND DAVID RUSSO
Sen. Jeff
Merkley,
seen here at
a town hall
in 2020, is a
cosponsor of
the Non-Opi-
oids Prevent
Addiction in
the Nation
Act.
T
he terrible pain caused by the
opioid crisis has reached every
community in our country. So
many of us have heard from Orego-
nians whose loved one died from an
opioid overdose after struggling with
addiction — all because they filled an
opioid prescription. And our nation’s
overdose death rate soared to record
highs during the coronavirus public
health emergency. Preliminary data
from the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention released in August
show that drug overdose deaths in
2020 rose nearly 30%, to a record-set-
ting 93,331. Opioids, including pre-
scription pain medication, caused
a staggering three-quarters of those
deaths — a record 69,710 lives lost.
Sadly, Oregon has been hit hard with
a nearly 44% increase in overdose
deaths over the past two years.
Putting a stop to this opioid crisis
requires a multifaceted response with
economic and social dimensions. It
also requires us to look at the underly-
ing policy and commercial factors that
drove the epidemic to reach such stag-
gering heights of tragedy and despair.
Health care providers have taken
steps to try to reduce the contribution
of prescription drugs to the opioid ep-
idemic.
According to the American Medi-
cal Association, physicians and other
health care professionals’ use of state
Prescription Drug Monitoring Pro-
grams increased 64.4% and opioid
prescriptions decreased by 37.1%
from 2014 to 2019. Yet, opioid over-
doses continue to be a problem, largely
driven by illicit forms of opioids.
Health care providers need access to a
variety of options to manage their pa-
tients’ pain, but often administrative
and financial barriers get in the way of
comprehensive, multidisciplinary pain
care and rehabilitation programs.
ryan Brennecke/
Bulletin file
In order to increase access to safe
and effective non-opioids across
America’s health care landscape, we
are pushing for passage of the biparti-
san Non-Opioids Prevent Addiction
in the Nation Act. This legislation
would address the barriers within
Medicare reimbursement policies that
lead providers to prescribe opioids.
By fixing the policy, providers could
more easily offer non-opioid pain
management alternatives to Medicare
patients undergoing surgery.
Under the current system, Medi-
care does not allow adequate reim-
bursement for alternatives to opioids.
Instead, the program shoehorns al-
most all non-opioid pain manage-
ment treatments — drugs, devices,
and biologics — used in outpatient
surgery into payment “packages” that
don’t allow for separate reimburse-
ment for individual treatments. As a
result, providers can either take a fi-
nancial hit to prescribe the alternative
pain management treatments or be
fully reimbursed when they prescribe
opioids — even if alternatives would
be more appropriate for the patient.
That’s why it is critical to pass the
NOPAIN Act. By directing Medicare
to allocate separate reimbursement
for pain management alternatives
approved by the Food and Drug Ad-
ministration, we can ensure patients
undergoing a surgical procedure have
a choice when deciding which treat-
ment is best for them.
Importantly, this legislation would
not prohibit or stifle patient access
to physician-prescribed opioids for
chronic or acute pain in any way. In-
stead, the NOPAIN Act would create
an equal playing field that gives doc-
tors and their patients more auton-
omy when choosing between differing
opioid or non-opioid treatments.
With so much pain and hardship
wrought by the opioid epidemic,
Congress must spearhead innovative
policy remedies that help address the
structural causes of the crisis. The
NOPAIN Act is one such remedy. By
fixing Medicare’s reimbursement pol-
icy to ensure patients across the coun-
try have a choice between differing
pain management treatments, we can
help combat one of the major drivers
of this addiction epidemic.
e
U.S. Sen. Jeff Merkley is a cosponsor of the
NOPAIN Act. Dr. David Russo is a physiatrist and
pain management specialist at Columbia Pain
Management, PC, in Hood River and a member
of the Oregon Medical Association.
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
We should honor promises to Afghans who helped U.S. troops
THE WASHINGTON POST EDITORIAL BOARD
P
resident Joe Biden’s decision to pull out
of Afghanistan led to chaos and blood-
shed in Kabul, as well as the fall of a U.S.-
backed government; the Taliban, the Islamist
movement that the United States had fought for
two decades, now rules. Given this debacle, it
is perhaps understandable that administration
policy toward Afghanistan since the last troops
left Aug. 30 has seemed to be: The less said, the
better. On Thursday, however, the State De-
partment provided a much-needed update, first
reported by the Wall Street Journal, on a key
piece of unfinished business: the status of more
than 60,000 Afghans who are eligible for special
immigrant visas because they had helped U.S.
troops, often as interpreters, and their family
members.
Some 33,000 Afghans have been vetted and
are eligible to be taken out of the country imme-
diately; because of logistical difficulties, though,
they might not actually get out until “well into
2022,” the Journal reported. Another 29,000 ap-
plicants remain to be processed and would not
be eligible to leave until after that. That’s a lot of
friends the United States has left behind.
The Taliban has so far shown restraint; the
systematic violence that many of these people
feared has not materialized. That is cold com-
fort however, because — meanwhile — Taliban
units have summarily executed or forcibly “dis-
appeared” more than 100 former police and
intelligence officers, according to a recent re-
port by Human Rights Watch. The organization
also reports that the Taliban has been seizing
land in central Afghanistan to give to its fight-
ers. Those dispossessed are generally members
of the country’s long-persecuted Shiite Muslim
minority.
And there is one clear and present danger
facing all 40 million of Afghanistan’s people:
economic privation, bordering on starvation
in many parts of the country. International do-
nors have pledged more than $1 billion in food
aid, some $64 million of which is new money
from the United States. The Biden administra-
tion has also taken steps to make it easier for
Afghans abroad and humanitarian groups to
send resources without violating continuing U.S.
economic sanctions. The problem of how to
make sure that relief reaches people who need
it, rather than the Taliban — still not recognized
as the legitimate Afghan government by most of
the world — remains a real one, and it affects the
flow of aid.
The Taliban is calling for the United States
to release more than $9 billion in the former
government’s reserves held in U.S. institutions,
blaming the Biden administration’s refusal to do
so for the country’s economic plight. U.S. diplo-
mats are continuing to talk about that with the
Taliban in Qatar. Also on the agenda are U.S.
concerns such as cooperation against terrorism,
safe passage out for our former allies and human
rights, including the fact that the Taliban in-
sists on limiting education for Afghan girls. The
United States’ goals should be to ease the Afghan
people’s critical near-term needs, while securing
the Taliban’s long-term commitments on human
rights and terrorism. With tough but wise use
of its leverage, the Biden administration could
achieve both.