Issues
A Big Thanks From Sheriff Turner – And a Promise
The Sheriff’s Office has been working hard to hire staff and prepare the jail for the July 1 opening of more jail beds.
The Lane County Sheriff’s Office (“LCSO”) will bring on new staff and open up more jail beds in two phases, culminating in the reopening of 131 more jail beds by July 8, 2013 – all in the name of making Lane County a safer place to live. Housing areas of the jail that had been collecting dust are being cleaned and refurbished to hold inmates once again.
To keep all of the costs down we have been using inmate workers to complete much of the work. They are cleaning and painting the cells as well as re-grouting the showers in the housing areas that are being reopened. 14 previously laid off LCSO Deputy Sheriffs have accepted recall notices and will return to employment with LCSO. These are positions that were vacant and can be immediately filled and put to use.
We will fill the remaining 32 Deputy positions during a second recruiting campaign. These will be directly paid for with the levy money. In the near future we will be recruiting and filling the remaining 6.5 positions that make up the rest of the positions which will be paid for with the levy.
The Sheriff’s Office is working hard to get the jail beds reopened as soon as possible so the community can begin to feel some relief from the daily capacity based releases that we have all endured for far too long. The planning began well before the levy passed in hopes that it indeed would; now this preplanning is paying off by accelerating our opening of the additional beds.
While the reopened beds won’t eliminate the early releases, they will allow the jail to hold more violent offenders rather than releasing them into the community. Anyone interested in employment opportunities within the Lane County Sheriff’s Office should visit http://jobs.lanecounty.org
I am excited about the progress so far and I have you, Lane County citizens, to thank for this opportunity. We are working on the annual audit of all expenditures of levy funds and I hope the information will be available soon so citizens can track how their money is being spent and ensure that it is spent exactly as you intended. The actual audit is relatively simple, but making the information it generates available on an ongoing basis is what I’m hoping for. It is also important to mention that the money is “carryover” money, so it cannot ever be used for a different purpose. If there is money left at the end of the five years we can continue using it for public safety until it is exhausted.
I plan to provide regular progress reports to the public on our use of the levy funds and to keep up a very robust public meeting schedule to continue to keep the Sheriff’s Office and our progress on everyone’s mind!
From all of us who work in your Sheriff’s Office to keep you safe -Thanks again to all of you who helped make this happen.
As always, don’t hesitate to contact me if you have a question or issue.
Thanks again!
Tom Turner – Lane County Sheriff
Paper, Plastic or Unintended Consequences?
The debate about Eugene’s plastic bag ban is getting heated.
The City Council’s champion of the bag ban [Alan Zelenka] on Monday said he will propose that the council exempt people who receive food stamps from paying the 5-cent charge for paper bags in the city’s recently enacted prohibition on thin, single-use plastic retail bags. Southeast Councilor Alan Zelenka said he will propose the exemption as a way to make the ban less of a burden on low-income people. – Eugene Register Guard, June 11, 2013
Lane Solutions replies:
We believe that this sort of constant fine tuning is the inevitable result of governments’ attempts to force changes in citizens’ behavior. First the Eugene City Council bans plastic bags in the interest of the environment. Their goal? Encourage use of reusable bags. One result has been increased use of paper bags. Paper or plastic – which uses more total energy? According to a study cited by UO chemistry Prof. David Tyler this March, it’s paper. Which leaves more solid waste? That’s right – paper! Now comes the unintended consequence of poor people struggling to pay $.05 for each grocery bag. Next follows a lengthy debate on exempting the bag charge for the poor. Inevitably, there will be conflicts of interest with the Council picking winners and losers. Which products will qualify for the exemption? Groceries? Soft drinks? “Essential” hardware? Producers and retailers will lobby the Council to exempt their products from the bag charge. The result? More unintended consequences, more debates and more regulations.
Let us know what you think below
Special! Rep. Richardson on Salem’s “Blame Game”
I was first elected to the legislature in 2002, yet I am still surprised by the political “blame game” that occurs at the end of most Legislative Sessions. [To see a brief YouTube on this subject, click here.]
Last week, Oregon Governor John Kitzhaber spoke to the House Republicans and requested an additional $275 million in tax increases. He promised that if Republicans joined the Democrats in voting for tax increases the additional revenue would enable the legislature to help publicly funded K-12 schools, community colleges, universities and youth mental health programs. In other words, “it’s for the kids.”
I reminded the Governor that:
- The Democrats control the spending priorities and drafted the State Budget;
- There is a $1.91 billion (12%) increase in the 2013-15 Budget over the current one; and
- If he’s only asking for less than 2% of the $16.5 billion State Budget, then surely he could find such a small amount in the State Budget “for the kids,” without raising taxes on Oregonians.
I also reminded the Governor that, notwithstanding the $1.9 billion of additional revenue, he and his party are once again holding the K-12 school budget hostage, and acting like a tax increase is required to fund it. It’s an obvious set-up. If the Republicans fail to agree to the proposed tax increases, the Democrats will, once again, play the “blame-game,” and accuse Republicans of neglecting children, hating schools and abandoning seniors. This is a transparent and unfortunate case of playing political games instead of focusing on actually helping the kids and other Oregonians. (Click here to read entire article)
– Oregon Representative Dennis Richardson
Lane Solutions Replies:
Rep. Richardson couldn’t be more correct. Like Martha and the Vandellas sang, this time for the Democrats there’s “Nowhere to Run to Nowhere to hide.” They’re in charge of the Oregon House, Senate and Governor’s office. They can spend where and when they want to. They can spend every cent “For the kids.” But they chose to spend it to subsidize health insurance for families of four making up to $94,000/year. After all – unlike kids, these moms and dads will vote.
Tell us what you think below in the Comment section
Recruiting for Big Government: Food Stamps Run Amok
Cascade Policy Institute
By Elise Hilton
One in five Oregonians participate in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the federal government’s “food stamp” program. Despite indications that the national economy is showing signs of revival, SNAP usage is at an all-time high:
Food-stamp use rose 2.7% in the U.S. in February from a year earlier, with 15% of the U.S. population receiving benefits….One of the federal government’s biggest social welfare programs, which expanded when the economy convulsed, isn’t shrinking back alongside the recovery.
Food stamp rolls increased on a year-over-year basis, but were 0.4% lower from the prior month, the U.S. Department of Agriculture reported. Though annual growth continues, the pace has slowed since the depths of the recession. The number of recipients in the food stamp program…reached 47.6 million, or nearly one in seven Americans.
It seems to be an easy equation: If joblessness is decreasing and the economy is improving, there should be fewer people receiving government assistance, right? Not so. Why? Part of the reason is that the government is actively recruiting people for SNAP, part is America’s ever-increasing dependence on government to solve our problems; and part is crony capitalism. It’s a heady mix of money, entitlement, and big government.
SNAP is symptomatic of America’s current view of the role of government: It is there to take care of our every need. Rather than seeking a way to solve problems of joblessness and hunger, we simply grow the programs once designed to help only in a crisis. Of course, the only way to grow these programs is to increase taxes on those who are working. As Dr. Samuel Gregg points out in his new book Becoming Europe, this creates an atmosphere of conflict, rather than harmony, in society. It means standing behind the food stamp user in line at the grocery store and grumbling about their purchases: In a sense, it is your money they are spending on soda and chips. It also means, according to Gregg, that there is less incentive to be productive on the part of citizens; after all, won’t the government take care of things?
The state of Florida, like many others, actively recruits SNAP recipients. According to The Washington Post, Dillie Nerios, a Florida state employee, has a quota of 150 new SNAP recipients monthly:
[I]t is Nerios’s job to enroll at least 150 seniors for food stamps each month, a quota she usually exceeds. Alleviate hunger, lessen poverty: These are the primary goals of her work. But the job also has a second and more controversial purpose for cash-strapped Florida, where increasing food-stamp enrollment has become a means of economic growth, bringing almost $6 billion each year into the state. The money helps to sustain communities, grocery stores and food producers. It also adds to rising federal entitlement spending and the U.S. debt.
As the name suggests, SNAP is meant to be a “supplemental” program. It has its roots in the Great Depression, when the federal government was faced with a surplus of agricultural goods, and high jobless rates. Food stamps allowed participants to purchase excess items at discount prices. The program vastly expanded in the 1960s, as part of the “Great Society” initiative. No longer were participants limited to purchasing surplus items, and benefits were tied to recipients’ income levels. By 2009, the Obama Administration further eased eligibility requirements, encouraging “states to disregard savings and higher incomes as criteria to disqualify applicants.”
The USDA claims that SNAP lifts people out of poverty, but the sheer numbers of those on SNAP belie that. As with many other issues in America, the attitude of many citizens toward hunger has become, “the government will take care of it.” This approach destroys charity on behalf of others and undercuts the dignity of those receiving handouts. Programs such as SNAP go from being “supplemental” to “lifestyle”: People stay on these programs longer and longer, with no incentive to support themselves, or to respond to the generosity of others by striving to contribute in turn to the common good. While most people would tell you that you can’t get something for nothing, SNAP proves them wrong.
Finally, SNAP is big business, and not in a good way. According to EatDrinkPolitics, the politics of food stamps and the politics of the food industry are deeply entangled in crony capitalism. For instance, Coca-Cola spent over one million dollars in just one quarter of 2011 lobbying the government regarding use of food stamps. Eighty-three percent of SNAP dollars are spent at supermarkets. In Oklahoma alone, Wal-Mart receives over $500 million in SNAP receipts. Because SNAP benefits are now largely utilized via EBT cards, banks benefit financially as well. It’s not just people becoming dependent on food stamps―it’s business. And business has no desire to see the government cut back on programs from which they are making millions.
We cannot suggest that SNAP does no good, or that there is no need for a food safety net in our country. Clearly, though, the astronomical growth of SNAP in the past few years has nothing to do with food safety and everything to do with big government, an entitlement culture, and crony capitalism.
Elise Hilton is a guest contributor for Cascade Policy Institute, Oregon’s free market public policy research organization. She is the marketing coordinator for the Acton Institute in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
Reprinted With Permission from Cascade Policy Institute
Gun Control Issues Updated
By Susanne Penegor
Local stores can’t keep gun ammunition in stock due to panic buying as consumers worry about the government’s willingness to propose new gun control legislation for law-abiding citizens. This bipartisan issue has turned guns and ammunition into hot commodities nationwide. Local stores limit the amount of ammunition consumers can buy and customers line up early in the morning to buy out ammunition in a matter of hours. A local Bi-Mart store said they had not had .22 shells available for sale for 3 weeks.
Gun clubs are adding gun safety and personal protection classes as women who have never shot a gun before are being told by their families to learn how to use one. Recently there was a proposal in Salem to limit Oregonian households to one gun per house. If that law had passed, the police would go door to door and take away extra guns from law-abiding citizens. Even hunters and gun collectors could have been impacted by this proposed bad legislation.
The panic buying of guns and ammunition fueled by recent proposed gun control legislation nationwide is spurred by rumors that the Obama Administration is trying to take away our Second Amendment rights, not by taking guns off the market–but by taking ammunition off of the market.
While the US doesn’t require gun registration yet, gun buyers are subject to background checks and fingerprinting. According to the Geneva-based Small Arms Survey, the US has the best-armed civilian population in the world, with an estimated 270 million guns. That’s an average of 89 firearms for every 100 residents. Firearms that do require registration in the US that are subject to the National Firearms Act include machine guns, shotguns and rifles with barrels shorter than 18 inches and silencers.
According to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, which handles that registration, there were more than 3.1 million National Firearms Act-registered weapons in the US as of March 2012. The National Rifle Association estimates that 100 million American own guns legally.
Some American cities have their own gun control laws now which prohibit guns in public parks. In Utah it is illegal to display a gun in public at all without being subject to a law prohibiting “brandishing” a gun in public. There is a crazy quilt of local laws for states and cities that have effectively amended the Second Amendment without having to go to Congress to change our Constitution.
The gun control enthusiasts don’t want to address the issue of how gun ownership saves lives or stops crime by using guns for self-defense. A recent Gallup poll noted that 3 in 10 Americans own a gun and most gun owners say they use their guns to protect themselves against crime, for hunting and for target shooting. According to a 2012 Gallup poll, Republican and Democratic gun owners are almost equally likely to say they use a gun for protection against crime, 64% to 69%, respectively. According to Gallup, male gun owners are more likely than female owners to say they use a gun for hunting (53% to 45%, respectively) or for target shooting (68% to 59%), while female owners are slightly more likely than male gun owners to use a gun for protection (74% to 63%, respectively).
History shows that a government that takes away citizens’ guns disarms their populace to gain political control over them. The first thing that Nazis did in Germany was to take away the guns from their citizens. Our forefathers understood the need for self-defense of all kinds, including against a tyrannical government. While various government entities in the US are taking a Big Brother approach to us and would like to strip us of our Second Amendment rights, it is up to us to remain vigilant and to keep our elected officials accountable for their actions–especially involving proposed gun control laws.
Susanne Penegor is an Oregon native, a graduate of the U of O and a former local business owner.
Demand action on PERS reform
By Rep. Kevin Cameron (R-Salem)
There have been nearly 50 bills introduced that address, in some way, the PERS issue. So far, there has been no substantial legislation that has received a hearing. I am co-sponsoring the below four bills that were introduced by Rep. Bruce Hanna (R-Roseburg).
HB 3056 would limit the computation of “final average salary” to salary, rather than including unused sick time and vacation accruals.
HB 3057 would limit the COLA for PERS benefits to the first $36,000 of retirement income.
HB 3058 phases out the ability of employers to “pick-up” the employee’s 6% contribution into retirement accounts by 2020.
HB 3059 ends the practice of providing a supplemental benefit payment to offset income taxes for those who are not subject to Oregon income taxes.
It is my understanding that estimates of savings after instituting these reforms would be over $700 million per biennium. These alterations to the current process are important steps in the right direction to put PERS on sustainable footing for the future.
This is not a conversation about the worthiness of our public employees. It is a conversation about the absolute proven unsustainability of this retirement system. These bills deserve the opportunity to be heard, at the very least, in order to begin meaningful dialogue about how we are going to address this important issue in our state. The impact that it is having to our school districts and local government budgets is devastating and hurting our kids, our seniors, our social service agencies, and public safety. We must do better.
Reprinted with permission from Oregon Catalyst
Gun Control – a Surprisingly Complex Issue
By Suzanne Penegor
Gun control is a debate that is bipartisan in the sense that there are Democrats and Republicans who care about the Second Amendment and our right to bear arms. The National Rifle Association includes women and men of all ages and all political persuasions. It is a constitutional right we don’t take lightly.
So when recent mass shootings bring the subject up again, once more we are asked to give up our right to bear arms to protect ourselves from criminals or maybe from a tyrannical government.
The gun control debate has caused a boom in gun sales as Americans are concerned about Federal legislation that the Obama Administration is considering to restrict gun ownership. While the discussion of whether to again ban the sale of assault weapons will or will not make our country safer rages, we should also take a less simplistic look at why there are so many mass shootings.
Taking a broader look might include these questions: could there be economic factors related to the poor economy behind the shootings? Should we be looking at restoring funding for public mental health facilities? In our area we are still waiting for the Junction City mental health facility to open and, besides providing treatment, create local jobs in a tough economy. The addition of this facility would address both the mental health and economic issues noted above.
Thanks to cuts in public safety spending and early release of jailed criminals, county sheriffs are telling rural residents they may not be able to respond in a timely manner if they are victims of crimes. In response to this women are seeking concealed weapons permits.
Criminals will always get illegal guns. The young man who went on the rampage last year at the Clackamas Mall in Portland stole his gun from a friend. He did not go out and obtain it legally and he was not subjected to a legal background check.
Gun control, as it is often proposed, is a knee jerk reaction to a more complex problem. We should be looking at this bigger picture.
We should be entitled to defend ourselves as our forefathers intended when they created the Second Amendment – not only to protect ourselves against criminals in tough economic times, but also to protect our freedoms from a tyrannical government. We should have a Federal task force study the complex reasons that there have been more school shootings and mass shootings in the last 20 years. Blaming honest, law abiding gun owners won’t fix this important social problem.
Suzanne Penegor is an Oregon native, graduate of the U of O and a former local business owner
Springfield: Land of Opportunity
By Sean VanGordon
Springfield is a very practical city. We pride ourselves on our open for business and can-do attitudes. Former Mayor Sid Leiken called it “The Springfield Way”. However, Springfield still faces challenges and economic hardship. But, even as we confront a budget shortfall, the discussion around city hall is, fortunately, focused on what we can do as opposed to what we can’t. Because of our attitude and this focus, Springfield has significant opportunities in both economic development and innovation.
Springfield’s economic development program is centered around downtown, Glenwood, and Gateway districts. In 2012 Springfield supported economic development by renewing a public safety levy, which makes downtown as well as the wider city itself safer.
Downtown Development
The Sprout Food Hub, Planktown Brewery, and the Washburne Cafe are some of the businesses that have created a food culture in the city. Downtown has also seen the opening of a new charter school and numerous second-hand stores. Downtown’s success is a result of hard work that volunteers, businesses, non-profits, and the city have performed.
We are creating a downtown where you can enjoy eating and shopping. We now have an inviting downtown where it is safe to take your family to dinner or open a new business.
City-Wide Development
In addition, there has been significant progress in Glenwood. And the Gateway District continues to be the largest employment area in the city.
In sum, we continue to make city-wide progress in economic development.
Innovation – The Springfield Way
Springfield has a long history of innovation and creativity in city services.
As a mid-size city, we offer creative, innovative services that save taxpayers money and support healthy, growing businesses. For instance, the merger of the Springfield and Eugene Fire Departments was a good example of improving city services while saving money through innovation.
As a result of our creative thinking and dedication to improving services while zealously guarding taxpayers’ money, Springfield is now a finalist for the Bloomberg Mayor’s Challenge. Plus, it’s the smallest city in the final 20. The competition is for a five million dollar award to provide innovative services. Springfield’s entry was a proposal for a mobile health care program. By utilizing sophisticated technology, this program can lower the cost of emergency medical responses even as it relieves pressures on Lane County Ambulance Services, thus saving both tax dollars and taxpayers’ money.
Economic development and innovation are and will continue to be key areas of focus for Springfield.
Springfield continues to create both attractive business opportunities and an ever increasing quality of life for its citizens because we think creatively and work hard to convert our dreams to reality. Our vibrant community is focused on accomplishments and dedicated to improving every aspect of city life.
Sean VanGordon is a Springfield City Councilor representing Ward 1
Rep. Richardson: Rethinking education funding
Author: Christiana Mayer
By Taxpayer Association of Oregon Lawmaker Profile
Right now public education in the United States is behind such countries as Ireland, Estonia and Poland. It is clear that something needs to be done. Representative Dennis Richardson believes that local control over public education is a crucial part of reforming education and making sure that our children get the education that they need.
“Reform education by returning education control to the lowest level – The level closest to the student. And ensure that funding follows the student,” said Richardson.
Taxpayers are constantly told that in order to have a good public education system more money is needed for our schools. Several bills to reform the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) have been introduced in the current legislative session to find more money. Most school districts blame the escalating cost of PERS as one reason why they have had to trim budgets. Some of the ideas being talked about in the State Capitol are the PERS reform plan to limit the cost-of-living adjustments to the first $24,000 of a retiree’s benefits, which saves $400 million a year. Another PERS reform plan, to limit cost of living adjustments for higher end users, would save $225 million a year. Unfortunately Representative Richardson does not believe that meaningful PERS reform will pass this legislative session.
For example, there are two different state departments that are directly involved in public education. The Department of Education and the Teacher Standards and Practices Commission create a series of hoops and barriers for teachers according to Representative Richardson. It is a layer of bureaucracy that keeps dollars out of the classroom. Since Salem is always looking for ways to put money in the classroom perhaps the functions of these two departments could be combined.
Parents need to take a greater interest in the education of their children and that will help change the system. Citizens should run for school board positions and volunteer in the public schools to make sure that they understand how the system works.
Reprinted with permission from Oregon Catalyst
Dennis Richardson, of Central Point, represents District 4 in the Oregon Legislature.
Lane County Board of Commissioners Chair Sid Leiken comments on Governor Kitzhaber’s letter to the Federal Delegation regarding future management of the O and C lands of Western Oregon
I would like to express my thanks to Governor John Kitzhaber for convening a group of Oregon stakeholders to take on the exceedingly tough public policy issue of how to best manage the O and C lands of Western Oregon. He has clearly prioritized this issue. His willingness to put into writing his expectations for our Congressional leaders should be appreciated by all of Lane County’s citizens, especially given the huge amount of federal land that surrounds our communities.
His letter to the Oregon delegation of the United States Congress summarizing the work of his panel could not have come at a better time. Literally today, Lane County received its last check from the federal government with dollars that came as a result of the Secure Rural Schools Act, first passed into law in 2000 under the leadership of Senator Ron Wyden. Notably, that check held back $500,000 of O and C revenue due to an un-expected and un–appreciated maneuver by the Department of the Interior. These are the very dollars that Lane County would be able to use for critical public safety services and their elimination is precisely why the Board of County Commissioners has been discussing putting a modest property tax proposal in front of the voters of Lane County.
The Governor clearly understands the tough road ahead for our federal delegation. These lands are unique to western Oregon, and their fate lies in the hands of the entirety of the US Congress. With Senator Wyden’s historic advocacy for the communities of Western Oregon and the more recent and courageous bi-partisan plan created by House members DeFazio, Walden, and Schrader, Governor Kitzhaber’s recommendations provide a foundation that should quickly lead to collaboration amongst the entirety of the federal delegation. Speaking with one voice united between the House and the Senate is crucially important given the rancourous nature of the current political environment in Washington DC.
It remains my belief that a way forward can only be charted if there is a sense of shared responses from local, state, and federal partners. Governor Kitzhaber states “Oregon state and local governments should share in the responsibility to fill any gap which may remain between timber revenues and the funding level required to keep counties fiscally viable.” I know that both the Governor and our delegation are aware that Lane County is contemplating a local money measure that would fund jail beds and youth services. Our residents also know that this new revenue will not cover the entirety of our public safety structure. I am willing to take the first step to place the shared response the Governor speaks to squarely on our shoulders. In doing so, I am confident that if we are successful there will be even more reason for the state and the federal government to act. Allowing some responsible degree of harvest to return to these forests is an absolute must.