Portland Politics Thread

[maccoinnich]

Originally Posted by subterranean

Now you're just being intentionally misleading. The $11,500 I stated was for an assessed value of $500k, not the real market value.

At no point did you say assessed, and I don't think that's what most people think of when the hear that a house is valued at a certain price. It also doesn't make sense in the context of your initial post, because an assessed value of $500,000 can very easily be a real market value of $1,000,000, like this house in Laurelhurst... and realistically there's no situation in which a household with an income of $116,900 is buying that house and getting approved for a mortgage at 80% LTV, per your example.

Originally Posted by subterranean

At this point, I just don't even know what you're arguing anymore. Portland has higher taxes, housing is expensive and there's not enough of it, water is wet.

I'm not arguing that Portland has lower taxes than other jurisdictions, I'm just saying that you keep using examples that make no sense... going back to the post about how you would pay "between $10k and $15k more per year in taxes" to move to Portland—which would require your household income to be somewhere around a million dollars a year. Which, congratulations to you all if that's the case, but it makes your argument somewhat less sympathetic.

Even in those examples above—only one of which was completed in this decade (since Portland's zoning reforms) and many of which were completed in the Obama admiration—none of them reach the property tax example you gave of $11,500 a year. They range from 61% of the tax burden to 81%. And for what it's what worth, all of the examples listed are more than what my household pays... and we don't live in a townhouse.

[subterranean]

Originally Posted by maccoinnich

At no point did you say assessed, and I don't think that's what most people think of when the hear that a house is valued at a certain price. It also doesn't make sense in the context of your initial post, because an assessed value of $500,000 can very easily be a real market value of $1,000,000, like this house in Laurelhurst... and realistically there's no situation in which a household with an income of $116,900 is buying that house and getting approved for a mortgage at 80% LTV, per your example.



I'm not arguing that Portland has lower taxes than other jurisdictions, I'm just saying that you keep using examples that make no sense... going back to the post about how you would pay "between $10k and $15k more per year in taxes" to move to Portland—which would require your household income to be somewhere around a million dollars a year. Which, congratulations to you all if that's the case, but it makes your argument somewhat less sympathetic.

Even in those examples above—only one of which was completed in this decade (since Portland's zoning reforms) and many of which were completed in the Obama admiration—none of them reach the property tax example you gave of $11,500 a year. They range from 61% of the tax burden to 81%. And for what it's what worth, all of the examples listed are more than what my household pays... and we don't live in a townhouse.

Originally Posted by maccoinnich

At no point did you say assessed, and I don't think that's what most people think of when the hear that a house is valued at a certain price. It also doesn't make sense in the context of your initial post, because an assessed value of $500,000 can very easily be a real market value of $1,000,000, like this house in Laurelhurst... and realistically there's no situation in which a household with an income of $116,900 is buying that house and getting approved for a mortgage at 80% LTV, per your example.

I'm not arguing that Portland has lower taxes than other jurisdictions, I'm just saying that you keep using examples that make no sense... going back to the post about how you would pay "between $10k and $15k more per year in taxes" to move to Portland—which would require your household income to be somewhere around a million dollars a year. Which, congratulations to you all if that's the case, but it makes your argument somewhat less sympathetic.

Even in those examples above—only one of which was completed in this decade (since Portland's zoning reforms) and many of which were completed in the Obama admiration—none of them reach the property tax example you gave of $11,500 a year. They range from 61% of the tax burden to 81%. And for what it's what worth, all of the examples listed are more than what my household pays... and we don't live in a townhouse.

I don't know why this has been moved to "politics" when it's really just economics and taxes I was discussing. I wasn't trying to make it political, but for some reason it just feels like you have an axe to grind.

Anyway, when someone talks about how taxes are charged, I assumed everyone knew it was on the assessed value. I didn't think I had to differentiate between that and the real market value.

When I made the statement about 10-15k more per year in taxes, it was under the assumption we'd purchase a house with a market value of between $650-750k in Northwest or Southwest Portland (due to jobs being on the west side), which I had stated was our budget in a prior post:

Originally Posted by subterranean

Can’t speak for anyone else, but the property taxes are definitely a huge deterrent to my household moving to Portland/Multnomah County despite a strong desire to live a more urban lifestyle. The additional income taxes is just adding insult to injury after that. Between the two, my household would likely pay anywhere between $10k and $15k more per year in taxes. With two young kids in daycare and a wife still paying off her student loans, an extra $1000 per month makes a big different to our bottom line, even as upper middle class earners, because we are frugal and value saving for retirement and the kids’ educations. I really don’t see much difference in service provisions, either.

Note, I did not say strictly property taxes. I was talking about property taxes and income taxes. I said the property taxes would likely be be between 10k and 16k total:

Originally Posted by subterranean

Our mortgage payment (PITI) right now is just $1500/month with no HOA. My property taxes are about $4300 per year. We often discuss moving to Northwest when the kids are a little older. We've been looking at houses and condos in the $650-$750k...there aren't many, but the ones I've seen are like $10k on the low end and $16k on the high end in terms of property taxes.

To your point about an assessed value of 500k on a $1 million house, you can also find lower RMV houses with higher assessed values. It's not hard to have an assessed value of $500k on a similarly valued (RMV) house. Up until the most recent price increases following COVID, it was even more common, especially in western Multnomah County.

For example, here's a property that was valued at $450k in 2020 that had an assessed value of $420k that same year. A family earning $116,900 could have qualified for this home, especially if they had a down payment. And in the intervening years, their tax bill would have gone from $8k to $10k. That is over double what my taxes are on a house that's valued the same.

Here's a link to a property in Southwest that is very close to the type of property we would be looking to purchase if we couldn't find something in Northwest within our budget. The listing price is $675k and the assessed value is $510k. The taxes last year were $12,976. My taxes this year were $4,300. That's $8600 more than we currently pay in taxes. And this is very common to what we're seeing on the west side. Houses that are our logical "step up" house, but instead of a commensurate adjustment in taxes, it's double or even triple what we're currently paying. And that's on a house near the bottom of our budget.

I originally thought that the 1.5% Preschool for All tax was on a household's entire income, so I incorrectly assumed our tax would be somewhere in the 3-4k range. Still, for a family with a taxable income of $250k, according to this table, taxes owed will be about $1,000.

That still puts us at $9600 more tax for the year than we are currently paying, even with my misunderstanding of how the PFA tax worked.

As for the townhouses, we have yet to see how the new townhouses will be taxed, but I assumed that since they are new construction that their assessed values would be close to their real market values. Hell, even you said they were too high. Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised.

[colossalorder]

https://www.opb.org/article/2025/01/24/p...unty-metro-homeless-service-tax-housing/

The Metro supportive housing services tax, approved by voters in 2020, pays for programs that help move people experiencing homelessness into housing in Multnomah, Clackamas and Washington counties. That can include eviction defense, rent assistance, behavioral health programs, job training, or help retrieving legal documents that may be lost, among other services. It’s not meant to pay for housing development.

The fund is currently made up of two taxes. The first is on people making above $125,000 annually (or couples making more than $200,000). Those taxpayers must pay 1% on any income made above those income levels. The second is a 1% business income tax on income for businesses making more than $5 million annually.

While the fund has outperformed — bringing in $100 million more than anticipated annually — it’s also been criticized for not addressing the region’s sprawling homeless crisis more swiftly. A December poll commissioned by Metro (obtained by Willamette Week) found that just two in five voters support the measure.

The tax sunsets in 2030.

[downtownpdx]

Originally Posted by colossalorder

https://www.opb.org/article/2025/01/24/p...unty-metro-homeless-service-tax-housing/

The Metro supportive housing services tax, approved by voters in 2020, pays for programs that help move people experiencing homelessness into housing in Multnomah, Clackamas and Washington counties. That can include eviction defense, rent assistance, behavioral health programs, job training, or help retrieving legal documents that may be lost, among other services. It’s not meant to pay for housing development.

The fund is currently made up of two taxes. The first is on people making above $125,000 annually (or couples making more than $200,000). Those taxpayers must pay 1% on any income made above those income levels. The second is a 1% business income tax on income for businesses making more than $5 million annually.

While the fund has outperformed — bringing in $100 million more than anticipated annually — it’s also been criticized for not addressing the region’s sprawling homeless crisis more swiftly. A December poll commissioned by Metro (obtained by Willamette Week) found that just two in five voters support the measure.

The tax sunsets in 2030.

I'm not understanding this -- the article states that the 2018 Metro housing bond expires this year, which is why they're pushing for this 2020 homeless services tax to include affordable housing development... Why not ask voters to renew the 2018 bond, isn't that something we voted on? Then lower the tax rate as proposed for the homeless services.. ?

I'm sure the reason only 40% of voters approve of this homeless measure is because of the rise in visible unsheltered homeless camps post-Covid, so it seems like they ought to use more of that $$ to push through the mayor's proposed overnight shelters. Voters want to help people get housing ... but they won't revive this measure if street camping doesn't get addressed more effectively.

[downtownpdx]

Here's some clarity on the housing bond. I guess they've spent all the $$, and built more units than expected. They expect it to be paid off by 2039.

https://www.oregonmetro.gov/public-projects/affordable-homes-greater-portland/background

In 2019, Metro issued $652.8 million of bonds to fund the program. Bond debt payments are funded by property taxes. Property owners are assessed approximately 20 cents per $1,000 of assessed value to pay for the annual debt service, which is expected to be fully paid in 2039. In Fiscal Year 2023-24 the rate was 18.97 cents per $1,000 of assessed value, or $47 annually for a home with an assessed value of $250,000.

The bond is currently exceeding its goal, for an estimated 4,700 homes. All funding will be committed by the end of 2024, all projects are expected to break ground by no later than 2026, and will complete construction within a few years of their groundbreakings.

[RED_PDXer]

Originally Posted by subterranean

I don't know why this has been moved to "politics" when it's really just economics and taxes I was discussing. I wasn't trying to make it political, but for some reason it just feels like you have an axe to grind.

Anyway, when someone talks about how taxes are charged, I assumed everyone knew it was on the assessed value. I didn't think I had to differentiate between that and the real market value.

When I made the statement about 10-15k more per year in taxes, it was under the assumption we'd purchase a house with a market value of between $650-750k in Northwest or Southwest Portland (due to jobs being on the west side), which I had stated was our budget in a prior post:

I appreciate this discussion being moved out of the other threads because it's not relevant to other threads and is confusing/distracting from more interesting topics to me. Taxes are based on policies/politics, so this thread makes sense to me.

I still don't understand if you are discussing a $650-750k real market value or assessed value, which are completely divorced in this state. But honestly, I don't really care.

The property taxes vary from one property to the next so much, I don't know how this would affect anyone's decision to move anywhere when there are low-tax options throughout Portland. I pay less property taxes on a much higher market value 4-plex compared to a lower market value SFH in the same city. I have looked at moving to west Portland and the property taxes there do seem to be consistently double or triple what I've seen on the Eastside. But I prefer more walkable and bikable areas with good transit, so that's much more of a deciding factor than the taxes for me.

I'm sure we'll have more conversations in this thread once the new city council settles in and starts making big policy decisions (or doesn't).

[colossalorder]

Just for clarity, the Metro Housing Bond and the Metro Supportive Housing Services Tax are two different things. The former builds housing units, the MSHS does not ... it provides supporting services like emergency shelter, paying peoples rent, mental and substance abuse services, etc. To my understanding, it does not add to the supply of permanent affordable housing. This is part of why its under scrutiny. Are taxpayers really getting value here? The average voter is skeptical because it would be hard to argue things feel much better in terms of homelessness as a result of passing the tax.

Likewise, with preschool for all tax. Best I can tell, there are only 2,200 students currently covered by the program.

Are these results worth the cost of making Portland the most punitive tax jurisdiction in the country, depleting our tax base which will mean budget and service cuts elsewhere? One's answer is a matter of political opinion. But the city is in a tough spot by many metrics and I think its time to ask questions about our priorities within practical realities.

[subterranean]

Originally Posted by RED_PDXer

I appreciate this discussion being moved out of the other threads because it's not relevant to other threads and is confusing/distracting from more interesting topics to me. Taxes are based on policies/politics, so this thread makes sense to me.

I still don't understand if you are discussing a $650-750k real market value or assessed value, which are completely divorced in this state. But honestly, I don't really care.

The property taxes vary from one property to the next so much, I don't know how this would affect anyone's decision to move anywhere when there are low-tax options throughout Portland. I pay less property taxes on a much higher market value 4-plex compared to a lower market value SFH in the same city. I have looked at moving to west Portland and the property taxes there do seem to be consistently double or triple what I've seen on the Eastside. But I prefer more walkable and bikable areas with good transit, so that's much more of a deciding factor than the taxes for me.

I'm sure we'll have more conversations in this thread once the new city council settles in and starts making big policy decisions (or doesn't).

I'm fine with it being moved out of the downtown discussion, especially since I never meant to get embroiled in a discussion about a topic as uncontroversial as comparing property tax rates between Multnomah and Washington counties. That said, it was never a political stance I was making, simply a financial observation that it impacts people's life choices, myself included. I used to underwrite affordable housing loans for for a living -- taxes do make or break people's housing budgets. Taxes also impact rents, and even the rents that certain affordable housing developers are able to charge.

There’s a reason why Aloha, Beaverton and Hillsboro are all growing in population and have growing minority populations -- they are more affordable overall and part of that is lower taxes. In fact, Washington County overall has become more racially diverse than Multnomah County and I believe we have in recent years received a huge influx of people displaced by gentrification, including some of NE Portland's black population (tripled here since 2000), because of that affordability. Ever heard the phrase "drive until you qualify"?

We could look at individual properties all day long, but the fact remains that Multnomah county's tax rate is almost 5 mills higher (22% higher) on average than Washington County. This, along with the fact that Portland real estate on the west side of the river is typically assessed at a higher starting point, are two very impactful and meaningful things for the average family’s budget, especially when interest rates are at 7%. An extra $300-$400 in taxes plays into the maximum loan you can afford, and in an area where the median income family often can't even qualify for a median priced home just exacerbates affordability issues and even contributes to homelessness. This is all I'm going to say on this topic because it's been a waste of time.

[subterranean]

I take it back, I have one more thing to post. I found an old Multnomah County audit on tax inequities by neighborhood. While this data is over 10 years old (2014), it shows pretty strikingly how much taxes would change by neighborhood if based on real market value.

The image below shows that most Portland neighborhoods west of the river would see their tax bills drop between 5 and 15%, while many neighborhoods in inner southeast, northeast and north Portland would increases of more than 15% (red) or between 5 and 15% (orange). Places around Forest Park and Gresham would drop by more than 15%.

Again, this is old data, but I bet the trajectory has remained relatively unchanged. A 20-30% tax spread between certain east and west neighborhoods is pretty wild stuff. Would love to see this updated by the Multnomah County assessor.

[subterranean]

Some interesting data and considerations from the Portland City Auditor's monitoring report on Middle Housing in Single-Dwelling Zones, Progress Report 2018-2024.

My takeaways:

• While middle housing is much needed and has provided 1400 more units between 2021 and 2024, most of these units are still out of reach of median income families. For example, the average closing price for middle housing units was $614,223 in 2024, which would require over double the median income cited ($213k+).
• That said, smaller units are being produced at a higher rate since RIP's adoption (500-1500 sq ft) and are averaging below 500k. The most common size seeking SDC exemptions was 2 bedroom, 750-999 sq ft.
• Between the PHB tax incentives for moderate income homebuyers and the SDC exemptions, developers were able to produce more sub-500k units. Approximately 868 units participated in one or the other program, while 251 of those units qualified for both programs between 2018 and 2024.
• Middle income units were $250-300k less on average than attached units. Despite this, they have a higher cost per square foot, which is to be expected.
• PHB's sale price limit is $455k, which is presumably affordable to those making 120% AMI. However, by my math, a 455k loan requires ~$172k in income when assuming 1% property tax (which the auditor used) and $450 in other monthly liabilities, which is a low assumption. This drops to about 141k in income required under normal underwriting guidelines with the tax abatement - a HUGE advantage. So without the tax abatement, even these smaller units are unaffordable to median income families unless they are debt free.

[PhillyPDX]

Not sure where to put this. But this seems important to discuss (although not necessarily looking to talk politics per se). I wonder what the effect will be on these research institutions (and building development etc).

https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/08/health/nih-indirect-costs-rate-cap/index.html

Portland is not a huge research city like many others, but this will have huge consequences regardless.

OHSU did $374M in federal research last year, and PSU did $46M. All likely supporting high paying fields. From external sources into the state.

https://ncsesdata.nsf.gov/profiles/site?method=report&tin=U2418001&id=h3

https://ncsesdata.nsf.gov/profiles/site?method=report&tin=U2552001&id=h2

[subterranean]

Economist warns of Portland ‘doom loop’ - oregonlive.com

Source: https://www.oregonlive.com/business/2025/02/economist-warns-of-portland-doom-loop.html

[maccoinnich]

Here’s the presentation, which will be presented to new City Council Arts & Economy Committee next week: https://www.portland.gov/sites/default/f...TE-City_EcDev_committee_02_25_25_0_0.pdf

[PhillyPDX]

Originally Posted by subterranean

Source: https://www.oregonlive.com/business/2025/02/economist-warns-of-portland-doom-loop.html

Such a vicious complicated problem. One thing I don't agree with though is a stance that people are destined to come back on their own, just because.

I was thinking about this on Tuesday when I walked from my dentist in Eastside across Burnside bridge to my office in/near downtown. 1.2 mile walk. I decided to count who I passed, to see if my assumptions were biased and add some science into the equation. I tallied a total of 14 people I passed on the sidewalk (14!!!), 11 of whom were homeless. The was at 9AM on a pleasant weather Tuesday. I imagine 9AM on a Tuesday is close to the busiest time of the week for people being downtown for work in the current hybrid environment. I kept asking myself "This is so sad, where are ALL the people?". That number should be a hundred+ into a major downtown. 14 total? 3 professionals?

[downtownpdx]

Fascinating report, but not too surprising. Impressive income growth over the 2010s, which definitely helps bolster state budgets that rely so heavily on income taxes. And thankfully we have a governor who sees the urgency and has acted accordingly, from the central city task force to cleaning up the highways.

I really hope our council takes this seriously. I’m not sure what to think about the different committees they set up, at least how they lumped “economy” and “arts” together. Of course the arts are vital part of the metro culture. But the local economy, in this post Covid era where Portland has struggled, needs to be a top priority.

Thanks for sharing the report, illuminating to see all the numbers.

[subterranean]

Portland, MultCo homeless plan uncertain after leaders meet | News | portlandtribune.com

Multnomah County’s unexpected $104 million homeless services shortfall is upending homeless funding plans announced by Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek, Metro President Lynn Peterson, and Portland Mayor Keith Wilson.

• • •

Most of the members of the new 12-member council said they do not understand enough about how the homeless services system works. Some thought the city and county do not have a realistic joint strategy for addressing homelessness. Others thought the per-person homeless spending figures presented during the session seemed unreasonably high, with shelter beds costing more than one-bedroom apartments.

"Something that I see a lot in these presentations is that some of the costs for having people in shelter spaces — when I calculate it out per day, per month — it seems to be a little but over $3,000 dollars, or more than that sometimes. And when I think about the average cost of a one bedroom apartment in Portland being $1,700 a month, it just makes me curious about how we should be investing these dollars in the best way possible," Councilor Angelita Morillo, who represents city District 3.

Source: https://www.portlandtribune.com/news/por...4329800-f45a-11ef-99ce-ebe3cb1e64ae.html

[PhillyPDX]

Originally Posted by subterranean

Source: https://www.portlandtribune.com/news/por...4329800-f45a-11ef-99ce-ebe3cb1e64ae.html

This whole situation is a mess. What a terrible look for the county. At least the new Council members and other elected officials are pressing it. It's absolutely expected based on recent history over lack of transparency, called out for years and denied w/ hubris of Multco, has turned out to burn us. I'm generally not a fan of recalls as a form of government check, but if there was ever a reason aside from bad conduct, this is it.

Wilson seems to be saying the right things too. It genuinely seems he wants to solve problems rather than the usual performative crap with zero regard for results too common around here (JVP, etc).

This needs to be fixed, and FAST.

[downtownpdx]

Washington and Clackamas counties seem to be doing just fine with their financials re: Metro homeless taxes. I understand Multnomah has a much larger homeless situation to deal with, but considering they were rolling in surplus revenue since the tax passed, it seems like just irresponsible use of dollars to suddenly have such a massive deficit. Yeah a recall of Pederson seems like a good way to go. She’s just been terrible from the start.

[RED_PDXer]

Where do I sign!? I would be happy to recall Pederson. She's running the county into the ground with the lack of transparency and accountability. She acts like she owns the county and it's always someone else's fault for the county's many, many problems.

[downtownpdx]

I’m glad we have an antidote to her in mayor Wilson. He’s calling for an immediate crisis response as opposed to a “maintenance” approach, and acknowledges the ~85% disapproval among local voters when we spend so much $$ and still have tents in the streets. Things have improved in the last couple years, but I’m hoping his overnight shelters are substantially funded since that seems like the major missing (or at least insufficient) piece.

https://www.kptv.com/2025/02/28/portland...onse-combat-homelessness/?outputType=amp