As reported on page 1 in this week’s issue, it looks like Sweet Home is not only going to lose its Oregon Department of Transportation facility, but state officials are now going to stick it to the citizens to cover for their own incompetence and free-spending ways.
That’s assuming the Oregon Senate follows through with the prognostications (after we go to press) and concurs with the House’s 36-12 largely party-line vote to impose a 10-year, $4.3 billion package of tax and fee increases.
If that sounds harsh, I can only imagine what my parents would have told me if I’d gotten myself into deep financial doo-doo, then asked them to pay for my food and rent so I could stay in college and keep that brand new Mustang I’d purchased to tool around town in.
Granted, the analogy isn’t perfect, but the principles are, and Oregon citizens need to wake up and recognize that we’re on a collision course with even worse economic fallout if our state doesn’t get it together.
Yes, we need ODOT, but we don’t need what it is right now.
I’ve mentioned previously on this page the Oregon Journalism Project reports quoting critics of what’s been going on. One of those critics is Joe Cortright, who staffed the Oregon Legislature’s Trade and Economic Development Committee from 1983 to 1994, when he launched his own economic consulting practice.
He’s one of the folks who have challenged ODOT budgets and has led opposition to projects such as the proposed replacement bid across the Columbia River and a proposed expansion to I-5 in the Rose Quarter in Portland. He argues that ODOT’s real problem is overspending on big projects.
This is a guy who’s in a lot better position than most of us “people on the street” to gauge what is actually going on and make informed judgments.
I’d suggest you read OJP’s interview with Cortright for more details: www.sweethomenews.com/odots-most-persistent-critic-says-the-state-could-solve-its-road-funding-crunch-by-scuttling-some-projects. This is not some flaming government-hater who sees a boogieman behind every move. He has walked the hallways of the state capitol and is trained to think strategically. He knows the territory.
An OJP analysis of Oregon’s transportation spending has questioned the “party line” advanced by the state that Oregon underfunds its roadways compared to other neighboring states, which (they say) means ODOT needs more money.
As the OJP report pointed out, that ignores sales tax – which Oregon doesn’t have and which, in those states that do, does not go to road construction and repair. But the legislators arguing the under-funding line haven’t mentioned that.
There’s a lot the state’s leaders, who control all the branches of our government, don’t tell us – which is why I’m happy that the volume of reporting by experienced journalists in Salem is improving.
Although Oregon has no sales tax, residents shoulder a pretty significant tax burden through our “progressive” individual income tax system and Oregon’s corporate tax burden, which, particularly in Portland, is one of the highest in the nation.
And then there’s the nature of the beast.
Anyone who pays close attention to civic activity – and I have, for many years – knows that “government” is not a synonym for “efficiency.”
We run a newspaper in a social climate in which it has become increasingly difficult to even sustain a healthy business operation, let alone get rich on it. We scratch for every dollar and you’d better believe that we make every dollar count.
Government doesn’t have to scratch for anything – except votes, because our legislature and agencies are playing with other people’s money. There are certainly government employees who are exemplary at what they do, but their drivers are usually not economic like they are for the rest of us.
It may sound simplistic, but it seems clear to me that lack of oversight by legislators and lack of attention to the economic principles that drive the rest of us have taken their toll.
Multiple Oregon agencies beyond ODOT have gotten bad press lately for various types of dysfunction.
The Oregon Secretary of State’s office released an audit some 18 months ago that pointed out big problems in staffing and efficiency among the state’s workforce of 45,000 people across some 80 agencies, which makes it the largest employer in, well, the state.
Agencies like the Department of Human Services, the state’s pension fund (PERS), the DMV, all have prompted questions about their operations and integrity.
To be fair, some of those problems could stem from COVID – all of us suffered and are still feeling effects of that debacle. The audit also noted a lack of data to ensure competency within the state’s workforce.
Approximately half of state employees work remotely at present. While there are plenteous arguments that remote workers are more efficient, the question is whether that is true for state agencies. It’s notable that some of the largest employers in the Northwest – Boeing, Nike, Amazon, PacifiCorp – not to mention some of the big financial services firms (Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Deutsche Bank), have moved back to an on-site model for their employees. I mention the latter because these are people who, we presume, know how to manage financial resources efficiently.
The fact that only 20% of state offices have people in them, as reported by various sources over the past year or so, adds one more layer to the challenge of figuring out where our state government needs to go.
Ultimately, we need leadership – people who aren’t afraid to call a spade a spade, who are willing to listen to criticism and respond proactively, who aren’t afraid to actually take a stand – beyond slick talk – to solve Oregon’s problems.
Republicans have complained that they don’t see that in the capitol, but if they don’t, they need to produce it and sell it to Oregon’s citizens.
Because it’s us who are paying the bill for all this.