RECENTLY ON TOL:
The TOL Blog
TAGS:
EvaCatHerder's comments:
on Ballot Measure 5 Turns 20
The most lasting and damaging impact of Measure 5 was the way it restructured school funding. Measure 5 shifted responsibility for education funding from local to state government and created caps on the percentage of property taxes that could be allocated to education. Initially, the impact of Measure 5 was mitigated to some degree by a growing economy and equalization grants that provided short-term help to some underfunded school districts. But now school districts throughout the state are struggling to survive.
Oregon's State Legislature has heard the complaints about underfunded public K-12 schools. Schools that are additionally burdened by testing requirements established by No Child Left Behind. But as much as State Legislators might want to redirect funding towards education, they are hamstrung by the property tax allocation limits established by Measure 5.
If we are going to improve education funding in Oregon, the legislature needs to revise the state's constitution and eliminate the property tax distribution limits created by Measure 5. This revision will require an intense voter education effort to help Oregonians understand why a revision is necessary. Additionally, any voter education efforts will need to be agile enough to counter the misinformation and scare tactics that will inevitably follow any efforts at reform.
posted 1 year, 6 months ago
view in context
on Stories of Adoption and Adaptation
I suspect my perspective on adoption is different than most. All of my first cousins and two of my nieces are adopted. No children were born into our family from my brother's birth in 1977 until his daughters were born in 2007.
My cousins and nieces joined our family as newborns, infants and toddlers. One has her original birth certificate and a photo of her birth mother. Two came from eastern european orphanages with no family history at all. All of them know their adoption stories.
I was to young to understand what my aunt went through to adopt her two children. All I knew was that it was an expensive proposition to just bring her son and daughter home with her. I was an adult when my uncle, his wife and my brother and sister-in-law adopted their children. I knew about the hurdles they needed to jump and endless fees that needed to be paid: from meetings with social workers to psychological evaluations to parenting classes to the bureaucratic red tape required to acquire US passports for their children born abroad.
I find it ironic that these parents who clearly demonstrate their desire for children and literally put their money where their mouth is, are screened so carefully. While men and women who have children "the old fashioned way" can become parents regardless of whether they are ready or not.
I am not suggesting that adoptive parents should be able to skip the asessments and classes. In addition to the seemingly endless challenges of parenthood, adoptive parents can be faced with their own set of issues. It can be heartbreaking to watch a parent trying to bond with a child raised in an orphanage. Or a frightened parent going from doctor to doctor trying to diagnose and address medical issues that are extremely rare in the US.
I don't have any realistic suggestions to ensure that all potential parents go through the assessments and classes required of adoptive parents. But I do believe that requiring the potential parents in my family to negotiate and articulate their parenting styles before bringing children into their lives served them well. And I suspect the same would be true for birth parents as well.
posted 1 year, 7 months ago
view in context
on Day After the Debate
The League of Women Voters of Oregon is looking for Oregon teenagers to record their questions for the candidates. If any readers know any kids that might be interested, please go to our site at http://lwvor.org/MockElection/?p=227 for more information.
posted 1 year, 7 months ago
view in context
on Downsizing as a Senior
About 6 years ago I helped my grandparents move from the first (and only) home they had owned and lived in for 50 years to an assisted living facility much closer to family. The issue was not one of downsizing, but rather a need for us to be able to better assist them in managing their own health and well-being.
Although we all knew that the move was taking a toll on our grandparents, we had not anticipated the significant health crises instigated by the process. Both ended up in the hospital immediately after the move, and we very nearly lost my grandmother.
In time, both grandparents recognized that the move had been the right decision. They appreciated being able to see family more often. They also came to appreciate the assistance as their mobility declined over time.
In the past year or so, we realized that their needs had progressed beyond what an assisted living facility could offer. But, nursing homes are not designed for couples and no one was willing to separate a couple who remained deeply in love after 68 years of marriage. Instead they now have aides who spend days with them providing the support they need. Our solution is complex to manage, and somewhat expensive, but clearly the right choice.
posted 2 years ago
view in context
on Northwest Passages: Naseem Rakha
I don't know if your timing was deliberate, but the Jewish High Holy Days start tomorrow. Ten focused days of repentence and forgiveness. It has been an extremely challenging year for me--shutting down the community hub that we had created and losing 3 extremely beloved cats. While my trials are nothing compared to the death of a child, I am also in mourning; For my community and a place to call home.
I feel completely unready to start the work and introspection required by Rosh Hashanah. I haven't been able to put my finger on why, but your introduction clarified it for me. I am not yet ready to forgive. I know I will be someday, but now it is too soon. So my question is this: how do I manage this season of introspection knowing that I am not ready?
posted 2 years, 8 months ago
view in context
on Sam Scandal
Sam,
I am the go-to person on local politics for Portland's open source tech community. I have lost track of how many times I have been asked today my thoughts on your current situation. Given all of the pressure that is being placed on you to resign, I want to offer my counter-argument that I have shared with everyone who has asked for my opinion.
It is clear that you expressed poor judgment in lying about about your relationship with Beau. And any time there is a sexual relationship between a mentor and a mentee, it raises appropriate concerns about the possible abuse of power. However, what happened between you and Beau was between two consenting adults it is really none of my business.
Instead, I hold the media responsible for creating unecessary sensationalism over an act of poor judgment. I normally appreciate Nigel Jaquiss' in-depth reporting and without question, he demonstrated his skills as a reporter when he was the member of the press who asked the best questions about FPD&R reform. That being said, I think both he and Willamette Week made the decision to sensationalize a relatively minor issue during a time of unprecendented change, both good (Obama's inaguration) and bad (the ecoomy). Nigel failed to make a case for his story to be broken with such great urgency. You have already been elected and sworn in and the only reason I can see for not waiting until after the inaguration is to maximize sensationalism. That doesn't even take into consideration the question of the numerous instances of unfounded speculation in his article.
The Oregonian further sensationalized the situation by placing your admission as the very first headline above the fold on inauguration day. I can see no justification for placing the admission of a lie that was not made under oath above the news of an absolutely historic moment in our country's racially checkered history. That is nothing but irresponsible journalism.
I suspected, and you have since confirmed, that your rationale for your deceit being concern that as an openly gay man, being honest about your relationship with Beau would bring an innapropriate amount of focus to your sexual orientation. I am saddened to have seen your concern come to pass. When listening to OPB yesterday afternoon, the story made several references to how little attention was given during the mayoral race to the fact that you are an out gay man and how proud we were that it was a non-issue to the voters. If that is the case, why did it need to be raised in this context at all? Frankly, your sexual orientation and the attention paid to it during your mayoral campaign is completely irrelevant to the situation at hand. I am confident that there would have been no mention of how the people in question were straight if the situation had involved a man and a woman.
Furthermore, the question being raised is not whether you expressed poor judgment and exacerbated the situation by lying about it. The question is whether or not you should remain mayor of Portland. In this particular situation we have a clear answer. You have been in City Hall as Vera's Chief of Staff, as a City Commissioner, and were elected as mayor by an majority of voters, securing your electionin the May primary. My response to cries of "how do we know we can trust him?" is simply that we know because of your long record of public service. Regardless of whether or not people agree with the political decisions you have made over the course of your career, the voters have repeatedly made it clear that your decisions are based on what is best for Portland.
Case in point is the work you and your staff have put into finding ways to help Portland through the current economic downturn. You didn't wait for the massive bank failures, the ongoing layoffs or the wringing of hands. You presented a draft proposal of 10 things that the City government could do to buoy small businesses in Portland in April, 2008, even before you were elected mayor. As a member of the SBAC, I have been witness to your ongoing and evolving efforts in this area, and that is what leads me to my final point.
We, as a city, cannot afford the time, effort and energy a new mayoral campaign would require. I suspect much of the work you have put in towards economic recovery will be put aside because of its association with you, and City Council will end up reinventing the wheel. We are in a time of crisis and we need to keep our focus if we are going to survive as the vibrant city that we know and love. Given the choice between forgiving you for two acts of poor judgment for which you have repeatedly publicly apologized versus creating a major disruption in City goverment in the midst of yet another challenging budget process during an unprecedented economic crisis, the answer is a no brainer.
That is why I am asking you not to step down from your position as mayor.
I have also posted this email publicly on my blog at http://catherder.wordpress.com.
posted 3 years, 4 months ago
view in context
on Budgeting for Hard Times
However, putting money into education and infrastructure allows us to put money into a place where it will make a systemic difference. Otherwise we will be hamstringing future generations with ever more difficult decisions, as if the huge defivit is not enough.
posted 3 years, 5 months ago
view in context
on Budgeting for Hard Times
Measure 47/50 created a double majority that has further hamstrung the ability to raise taxes, even if so desired by the citizens (In May , 2002, Portland Parks & Registration put a levy on the ballot which passed by over 70% of the visiting electorate--but because less than 50% of registered voters turned out to vote, the levy did not pass. Not only did the citizens not get the services they were willing to pay for, but they also incurred the cost of a second election on the same issue). Fortunately the supermajority rule was overturned in the November 2008 election.
Finally, the kicker penalizes our state legislature for sound budgeting practices. We want our government to budget expenses high and our revenue low. That greatly reduces the chances that we will be put into the situation we are now in, where there is a need for mid-year budget cuts. But instead, we return the overbudgeted revenue to both citizens and corporations.
This trifecta of restrictions make it virtually impossible for our state legislature to support the services we as citizens want and need, or have the flexibility to continue to be the innovative and trend-setting state that we have been historically. Yes, we need to address the current budget situation we are faced with. But, we also need to look forward and remove the constraints we have put on ourselves and our legislatures.
posted 3 years, 5 months ago
view in context
on Open Source City
posted 3 years, 10 months ago
view in context
on Open Source City
I agree that the challenge is in getting seed money for open source software development. I have just pulled together a group of public policy makers, small business development professionals and private money, so I am hoping this will change over time. But it is a different model and requires funders to change their thinking somewhat.
posted 3 years, 10 months ago
view in context
on The Upside of a Downturn?
posted 4 years ago
view in context
