Issues
CONSERVATION VICTORIES
To provide protection for Oregon’s old growth and natural treasures the O&C TRUST, CONSERVATION, AND JOBS ACT
Provides legislative protection for old growth on 2.6 million acres of public forests in western Oregon for the first time in history.
Adds nearly 150 miles of Oregon rivers to the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, including:
- 93 miles of the iconic Rogue River and its tributaries;
- 21 miles of the Molalla River;
- 19 miles of the threatened Chetco River; and
- 15 miles of Wasson and Franklin Creeks, tributaries of the Umpqua River
Protects 90,000 acres of Oregon forests as wilderness, including:
- 58,000 acres to be added to the existing Wild Rogue Wideness
- 32,000 acres of some of the last remaining old growth in Oregon’s Coast Range and permanent protection for Devil’s Staircase
Transfers more than 1,000,000 acres of mature and old growth forests from the Bureau of Land Management to the Forest Service to be managed as National Forest Lands.
Requires thousands of miles of legacy roads and logging roads in disrepair to be brought up to federal and state standards.
Repeals the contentious O&C Act of 1937 that led to the Western Oregon Plan Revisions.
Includes management restrictions on O&C Trust lands to protect clean water, terrestrial, and aquatics values, including:
- Prohibition on aerial application of herbicides and pesticides and a requirement for a public process for the development of an integrated Pest Management Plan;
- Long and short timber rotation ages to provide diversification and to encourage the recruitment of complex, early serial habitat; and
- A sustained yield requirement to prevent overcutting
Expedites land exchanges between the federal government, the O&C Trust lands, and private landowners to create larger contiguous blocks of forested land in western Oregon and to improve the conservation values of such lands.
Ensures the scientific community and general public are represented on the O&C Board of Trustees
Maintains federal ownership of all O&C lands and public access privileges.
CERTAINTY FOR COUNTIES
To uphold the federal governments’ commitment to rural and federally forested communities in western Oregon the O&C TRUST, CONSERVATION, AND JOBS ACT provides:
- Forested counties in western Oregon with a sustainable and more predictable level of revenues in perpetuity to support basic county government services like law enforcement, education, health, and transportation.
- Turns around nearly two decades of gridlock on federal forests that will help timber dependent counties in Western Oregon improve their economic and financial outlooks.
- Estimated to create thousands of new jobs in rural communities throughout Oregon and will reduce unacceptably high unemployment levels in the State.
- Moves counties away from an uncertain future of federal payments to a long-tern solution that meets the federal government’s obligation to federally forested communities while bringing jobs back to our communities and health back to our federal forests.
- Ensures legal certainty by establishing a fiduciary trust for the O&C Counties and ensures strong O&C county representation on the Board of Trustees to guarantee the Board’s fiduciary obligation to the 18 O&C Counties.
- Sets a fair standard for the federal government by requiring the Board of Trustees to provide a return from the O&C Trust lands to the American taxpayer and U.S. Treasury.
- Establishes a temporary federal loan to aid O&C Counties during transition to payments from the O&C Trust.
O&C Trust, Conservation and Jobs Act
Oregon’s rural communities cannot afford another 20 years of gridlock in our federal forest. Without a new path forward, mills will continue to disappear, forest jobs will be outsourced, counties will be pushed of the budgetary cliff, and forest health will continue to decline.
A bipartisan plan now before Congress, “O&C Trust, Conservation, and Jobs Act” would create thousands of new jobs in Oregon’s forested communities, ensure the health of federal forests for future generations, and provide long-term funding certainty for Oregon’s rural schools, roads and law enforcement agencies.
Federal support payment to rural and forested communities commonly known as “county payments” or “timber payments” that have helped support rural Oregon counties for over a decade expired on September 30, 2011. Lack of revenues from timber harvest from our federal forests or a continuation of timber payments in lieu of timber revenue will have serious consequences for Oregon families and businesses. A recent Oregon State University study found that without timber payments, Oregon’s rural counties will shed between 3,000 and 4,000 jobs. Oregon business sales will drop an estimated $385 million to $400 million. Also, Oregon’s rural counties will lose $250 million to $300 million in revenues.
For counties already near the financial cliff and facing depression-like unemployment, this could be the final blow. In fact, a few counties in southern Oregon may soon call for a public safety emergency and will be forced to eliminate most state-mandated services- including police, jails, courts and services that help the neediest citizens in our communities.
This should alarm all Oregonians, even those who do not live in rural communites. Failing counties will have both budgetary and quality of life consequences for the entire state. Vital county services would be severely restricted or altogether disappear. Counties will continue to release offenders and close jail beds. Pot-holed roads and structurally deficient bridges will be neglected and school funding throughout the state will be reduced.
Given the serious fiscal crisis our counties and schools face, a new approach is necessary to create jobs, help stabilize funding for our schools and communities and better manage our forest. Passage of “O&C Trust, Conservation and Jobs Act” is essential.
MYTHS AND FACTS: O&C TRUST, CONSERVATION, AND JOBS ACT
ACT MYTHS AND FACTS
MYTH: The expiration of the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act, aka “county payments, will not have a major impact on forested counties in Oregon, so a long term forest management plan is not needed.
FACT: A new study by Oregon State University found that if county payments are not extended or replaced with a long-term solution, Oregon counties will face combined revenue losses of $215 million, and lose 4,000 jobs, $400 million in business sales, and $250 million in value added economic activity. In fact, without a viable long-term solution, some rural counties in western Oregon may be forced to declare a public safety emergency or dissolve.
MYTH: Congress could solve the county payments problem by assessing a tax on raw log exports.
FACT: A tax on raw log exports is unconstitutional. Article I, Section 9, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution directly states, “No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.”
MYTH: The O&C Trust, Conservation, and Jobs Act (OCTCJA) is a bad deal for taxpayers.
FACT: Taxpayers spend $110 million per year to manage 2.6 million acres of O&C forests in western Oregon. OCTCJA would require a Board of Trustees to assume all management costs for the Trust lands, saving taxpayers tens of millions of dollars per year by reducing.fhr annual federal management costs associated with the management of western Oregon timberlands. Additionally, the Board of Trustees would be required to submit an annual payment to the United States Treasury to help pay down the federal deficit, Finally, active management will create thousands of jobs and produce net revenue for American taxpayers while ensuring county governments can provide essential county services, like law enforcement, education, health, and transportation.
MYTH: The plan would make it more difficult for private landowners to access and manage their own lands.
FACT: The plan preserves and protects all existing and valid rights of neighboring land owners, including tail hold, road access, and right-of-way agreements.
MYTH: O&C Lands will be sold to Wall Street speculators.
FACT: No O&C Lands will be sold. All O&C Lands will remain in public ownership and the public will retain access privileges.
MYTH: This plan has few conservation components.
FACT: The plan includes 90,000 acres of new wilderness, 150 miles of new Wild and Scenic river designations, and provides the first legislative protection for mature and old growth forests. The plan also excludes environmentally sensitive areas, parks and recreation areas, wild and scenic corridors, and wilderness areas from the O&C Trust lands.
MYTH: This will make it more difficult to control wildfires.
FACT: The plan would maintain the existing cooperative fire protection agreements for the O&C Trust, Forest Service and adjoining private lands.
MYTH: The Act does not provide any protection for the Northern Spotted Owl.
FACT: The plan specifically mandates that the O&C Trust Lands be managed in compliance with federal and state laws as those laws apply to private forest lands. This includes complying with ESA provisions that prohibit harm or take of threatened or endangered species. Consistent with the intent of the Northwest Forest Plan and Owl Recovery Plan, old growth forests, which serve as the best habitat for the Northern Spotted Owl, will be excluded from the management trust
MYTH: The Act undermines the Northwest Forest Plan
FACT: The intent of the Northwest Forest Plan was to provide a sustainable supply of timber while protecting habitat critical to the survival of threatened species, such as the Northern Spotted Owl and salmon. The plan strives to accomplish these intended goals – which the Northwest Forest Plan failed to achieve – by providing greater certainty about what lands are eligible for sustainable logging and what lands are to be set aside to sustain threatened species.
MYTH: OCTCJA sweetheart deal for rural Oregon counties so they don’t have to raise property taxes.
FACT: There are constitutional limitations on property tax increases in Oregon. As a recent Oregon State University study confirmed, even if counties were able to obtain voter approval to increase property, lodging, and real estate taxes, rural Oregon counties would only be able to make up 8-24 percent of the funding gap. The plan fulfills a historical commitment to federally forested communities in Oregon by creating thousands of jobs in our forests and mills, and providing a sustainable and more predictable level of revenues in perpetuity to support basic county services like law enforcement, education, health, and transportation.
MYTH: Millions of acres public forests will be converted into industrial plantations.
FACT: Private industry lands in Oregon are typically managed on a 30-40 year rotation. The plan requires at least half of the landscape to be managed on a long rotation of between 100-120 years and to be geographically dispersed across the landscape to provide ecological diversity. The plan also minimizes the use of pesticides and provides protections for old growth.
MYTH: OCTCJA would increase logging exports to China.
FACT: The plan explicitly prohibits exporting raw logs from the O&C Trust lands. The plan would continue the ban on exporting unprocessed logs from federal lands and impose penalties on businesses that violate the law and send family-wage jobs overseas.
MYTH: Revenues from logging cannot support rural counties because the timber market is so bad.
FACT: While there is still current demand for timber, it remains far below historic levels. The proposed O&C Trust would not be fully operational for two years after enactment thus providing some time for timber markets to recover. The plan requires the Board of Trustees to capitalize a Reserve Fund to balance payments to counties in years of market volatility. Finally, the plan requires the Board of Trustees to offer timber sales on a competitive basis.
MYTH: The Board of Trustees will be exempt from federal lows and the public process.
FACT: The O&C Trust Lands will be managed in compliance with federal and state laws as they apply to private forest lands in Oregon, including the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act The :general public will be represented on the Board of Trustees and meetings of the Board involving :management decisions will be open to the public.
MYTH: This plan does not address the “checkerboard” nature of the O&C Lands that have created significant management challenges-
FACT: The plan expedites land exchanges between the federal government, the O&C Trust lands, and private landowners to create larger contiguous blocks of forested land in western Oregon and to improve management efficiencies of both federal and private land.
Oregon’s once proud education system is sorely in need of repair
The erosion of efficient, effective education in our public schools concerns me greatly because it means there are fewer skilled workers entering into the workforce. As a small business owner, this tells me that I will have fewer and fewer of the skilled workers I depend upon to build my company.
The perceived decline in education throughout the United States has resulted in record numbers of parents opting to educate their children in private or charter schools, and in many cases, homeschools.
These refugees from traditional education fear that, despite the presence of many dedicated, concerned teachers, their children might not even graduate from high school. And their fears are justified. Recent statistics tell us that the percentage of students who earn their high school diplomas in four years is just 66.4% and in five years only 69.1%. For non-Asian minorities this figure is a pitiful 49.8% to 55.2%. For students with disabilities, the graduation rate is an even more dismal 41.8%. (1)
Many in our State Legislature advocate increased funding for Oregon’s schools without addressing serious structural issues imbedded in the system itself. Instead of searching for ways to set the bar higher and challenge students and educators to perform at the peak of their capabilities, these legislators have opted to lower the bar so that more children can clear it by any means possible.
Looking forward, I fear that the result of a lowered bar will be an endless cycle of diminishing returns wherein each successive generation will perform at a level at or, more likely, below the previous generation.
What to do? Let’s begin by asking the right questions. First let’s look at how we’re using the resources already in the system. With a current budget of approximately $10,000 per student per school year, we need to look carefully at how these funds are allocated. With a classroom of 25 students, what competent administrator could not provide an effective and efficient learning environment with $250,000 per classroom? This leads us to ask if the right people are controlling the allocation of funds.
If Federal and State control of our local education systems were significantly reduced and authority restored to local school boards and educators, more money could be given directly to schools and administrators, enabling them to use their judgment, based on their knowledge of local conditions, to hire the very best instructors and provide the very best educational resources for our children, who must be prepared to face an ever more complex and competition driven economy.
As the system is set up now, the stakeholders – educators, parents and children – have minimal control over the education system for which they are nominally responsible. As the system is set up now, a distant, detached bureaucracy makes life-shaping decisions for countless educators and children to whom they are not accountable. As the system is set up now, it will continue to erode the foundation of our free market economy.
The education crisis currently facing Oregon is not terminal if the challenges we face are addressed immediately. However, it will take organized and strategic efforts to unclench the fist of an increasingly sclerotic education system and return to local communities the responsibility, authority and resources required to provide educational excellence.
Chris Gergen is a Springfield based financial advisor and is the author of The Quality Paradigm: Why You and Your Business Need it to Succeed. He blogs at Be Epic.Daily. He can be reached via email at [email protected].
(1) Source: http://www.ode.state.or.us/news/announcements/announcement.aspx?ID=7273&TypeID=5
VanGordon: Four Ways to Turn Land Into Lane County Jobs
Lane County has lived with terrible economic news for the past three years. This recession has been deep, devastating, and personal. The recession exposed some serious, local economic flaws, but they are not new. They were already there. During the housing boom making money was easy, and it created strong economic growth. Either the economic boom hid our problems or we chose not to do anything about them.
We can’t fix the national economy, but we can make Lane County more competitive. Our economy is in the process of changing. Goods, services, and capital can move almost seamlessly between markets and regions. We are in a competition, and we have to make Lane County more competitive to succeed. Lane County is at a cross-roads. If we don’t do anything, then eventually the economy may grow enough to create low-wage jobs and the unemployment rate will go down. Our other choice is to work on creating smart economic policy that allows our private sector to be competitive for family wage jobs.
Jobs are created in the private sector. However, government policy impacts a community’s ability to create jobs and attract new businesses. In a series of articles I will share my thoughts on how to transform Lane County into an export-focused economy. I want to focus on manufacturing goods and providing services outside of Lane County. If we sell more goods outside the area, we create jobs.
Proper land use planning is the basis for solid economic growth. In the metro area there is a shortage of land to site businesses and residences on. Even if we attracted an employer requiring a large lot of land the metro area would have a tough time finding a location for that business. Lane County is less competitive in attracting new businesses because we don’t have locations that are ready for businesses to locate to. This is a serious disadvantage. Local governments have a variety of land use plans and procedures which can be used to address these problems.
Here are land-use issues that I believe will have an impact on our ability to build new businesses in the area, and my thoughts on them. These are all in the process of being completed. In the short term, effective land use planning provides certainty to the business community that there is space to locate or expand in the area.
- Springfield’s expansion of its Urban Growth Boundary to add 600 acres of commercial land to the city
By developing along I-5 Springfield businesses will be able to move goods to markets cheaply, which translates into a competitive advantage. From an economics perspective it makes no sense to continue to add larger industrial lots farther east. In the long term, I would like to see Springfield include part of Seavey Loop. If Springfield expands towards Seavey Loop it may make more sense for Springfield to also serve the Lane Community College (LCC) basin. Springfield may serve LCC cost effictively, and in the long term the LCC area may offer flat land for the city. A major challenge to growth in Springfield is the availability of flat land that isn’t farming land. Ideally, we would choose to expand in such a way so as to protect agricultural interests.
- Springfield’s completion of the Glenwood Refinement Plan including the Franklin Blvd. Expansion
The Glenwood Refinement Plan is the land use plan that outlines development guidelines for Glenwood. Without completing the plan extensive development of the Glenwood riverfront is impossible. While currently underdeveloped, it is centrally located in the metro area between downtown Springfield and the University of Oregon. It will provide an ideal multi-use location to live, work, and shop. It also provides a natural freeway entrance to the University of Oregon. As the University of Oregon continues to expand I hope it takes advantage of the opportunities that Glenwood provides.
- Eugene’s completion of the Envision Eugene Project
The Envision Eugene Project is Eugene’s review of its urban growth boundary. My opinion is that Eugene should expand toward the airport. I want Lane County to be able to compete for aviation and export businesses. Additional commercial land near the airport could open Lane County up to those type of businesses.
- Lane County’s work to develop Goshen
Could a freight-rail terminal be built in Goshen? Imagine moving our goods from trucks onto trains or vice versa. Freight rail isn’t as politically popular as passenger high speed rail, but it makes sense. Rail is a very cost efficient way to move commercial goods to the market. When businesses have more options for moving heavy freight it will lower the impact on our road system.
For local governments, completing these land use planning projects is a critical economic policy. It is the first step toward re-inventing our local economy. We will have available land to expand our business and commercial base. We will have the room to attract the types of businesses that create family wage jobs, provide benefits, and protect the middle class. Like I said, this is the first step.
In future articles for Lane Solutions I will discuss the importance of education, the University of Oregon, Health Care, and international trade in creating Lane County jobs.
Sean VanGordon
Springfield City Council, Ward 1
PERS REFORM ONLY WORKS WITH A FIREWALL AGAINST LEGAL CHALLENGES
Voters are ready for PERS reform. Essential services such as prison beds, law enforcement, and school days, are being sacrificed while PERS expenditures skyrocket. During 2009-2011, PERS spending will amount to approximately $825 million. That spending is set to increase by $495 million to $1.3 billion in 2011-2013.[i] It is clear that the system is broken. We must introduce legislation to fix the growing problems pertaining to the overall “PERS machinery.” We must eradicate wasteful spending while ensuring that public workers receive retirement benefits as promised.
Passing PERS reform is only half the battle. In the past, Oregon courts have overturned PERS reforms by invoking the Contract Clauses of both the Federal and Oregon Constitutions. To paraphrase, the Contract Clauses say that the state can’t pass laws that impair the obligations of existing contracts.[ii] The Oregon Supreme Court has consistently held that PERS members have “vested contractual rights in pension benefits.”[iii] Accordingly, the Federal and Oregon Contract Clauses serve as substantial barriers to PERS reform.
Nevertheless, courts have recognized a legal distinction between legislation that “impairs” a contract and legislation that merely “breaches” a contract between public employees and the State.[iv] The Oregon Supreme Court will allow legislation that breaches contracts, but will invalidate laws that impair contracts.[v] The Oregon Supreme Court has determined that legislation that impairs existing contracts are “statutes that prevent both performance of the contract and compensation to the nonbreaching party.”[vi] Well-drafted legislation can get around this distinction and merely result in a “breach” of contract, rather than unlawful “impairment” of the obligations of the contract.
As we move forward in our effort to curtail inefficient government spending, we must introduce reforms with this legal distinction in mind. There is no doubt that opponents of reform will bring legal challenges, but well-drafted legislation can and will survive.
[i] 2011-13 Estimated State Agency Payroll
2009-11 Salaries and Wages = $5,850,731,907 ($825,251,701 = Total PERS expenses, 2009-11)
(Source: Legislative Fiscal Office)
Assumed growth in State payroll expense = 3.75% (Assumptions: 2.75% inflation + 1% Real Wage Growth)
(Source: PERS Actuary)
$5,850,731,907 X .0375 = $219,402,446.51 (Assumed increase in State payroll for 2011-13.)
$5,850,731,907 + 219,402,446.51 = $6,070,134,353.51 (Total anticipated State payroll for 2011-13.)
2011-13 Estimated State Agency PERS Calculations
$6,070,134,353.51 x .098 = $ 594,873,167 (9.8% for 2011-13 State’s employer contribution rate)
$6,070,134,353.51 x .06 = $ 364,208,061 (6% Employee’s IAP paid by State for State employees.)
$6,070,134,353.51 x .0595 = $ 361,172,994 (5.95% paid by State on Pension Obligation Bonds.)
(9.8% + 6% + 5.95% = 21.75%) = $1,320,254,222 (Total anticipated PERS costs for 2011-13 )
$1,320,254,222 – 825,251,701 = $495,002,251 (Additional PERS costs for 2011-13 State Budget)
Note: “The rate components are as follows: 9.8% (2011-13 employer contribution rate) + 6.0% (member
IAP contribution) + 5.95% (POB service cost).” ”… a 21.75% total cost basis.”
(Source: PERS Administration—3-11-2010 Email to Rep. Richardson—emphasis added.)
[ii] Hughes v. State, 314 Ore. 1, 33 (1992) (citing Taylor v. Multnomah County Deputy Sherriff’s Retirement Board, 265 Ore. 445, 450 (1973)).
[iii] Hughes v. State, 314 Ore. 1, 33 (1992) (citing Taylor v. Multnomah County Deputy Sherriff’s Retirement Board, 265 Ore. 445, 450 (1973)).
[iv] Kopilak, David, Hughes v. State: Breaching Statutory Contracts Without Violating Oregon’s Contract Clause, 72 Or. L. Rev. 487, 488 (1993).
[v] Ibid.
[vi] 72 Or. L Rev. at 500 (citing Hughes, 314 Ore. at 31).
Two Paths for Oregon’s Economy: Innovation and Creative Leadership or Sustained Mediocrity and Lack of Will Power
Oregon stands at an economic crossroads. Changes sweeping the global marketplace and a disturbing set of economic and fiscal trends at home offer us a choice between two futures.
One path presents an Oregon defined by thriving businesses that lead their industries in ideas, innovation and design, market reach, and staying power. This path heralds a future of good paying jobs that resist migration and sustain local economies and communities.
On the other path, Oregon becomes strictly a regional consumer market and a branch-office outpost for industries whose key ideas, research, decisions, innovations, and initiatives occur elsewhere. It becomes a commodity producer whose industries pay average or lower wages and are always vulnerable to cheaper sources of labor and supply elsewhere.
Healthy Communities Initiative envisions the growth and success of leading edge, traded sector industries – clusters of allied businesses that ring up sales outside Oregon and create good paying jobs that buoy local communities. While all Oregon companies improve the state’s economic well-being and quality of life, we stress traded-sector industries because they pay high wages; and by selling their products and services outside Oregon they bring in fresh dollars that fuel local businesses and tax revenues.
Traded sector industries tend to cluster. They draw competitive advantage from their proximity to competitors, skilled workforces, specialized suppliers and a shared base of sophisticated knowledge about their industry. In the 1970s Oregon’s largest industry cluster was forestry and wood products. Oregonians, urban and rural, enjoyed high wage jobs in this industry. Today, while still a world leader in timber and agriculture, Oregon has an array of innovative industry clusters. These include natural resource industries, advanced manufacturing, high tech, footwear and sports apparel, and clean technology.
While the destiny of these industries is in their own hands, it is critical that Oregon’s leaders pursue initiatives to create the environment that helps our traded sector industries succeed. The initiatives we recommend and support can improve the culture of innovation. They can enhance the work skills of our people, boost the quality of life that drives talented people to Oregon, and strengthen business infrastructure needed for productivity and competitiveness.
Despite the remarkable economic diversification described above, in recent years Oregon has fallen off course. After a surge in the 1990s, Oregon’s per capita income has been declining compared to the national average for the past twelve years. Per capita income is the total income earned in the state divided by the population. It is a key measure of economic well-being and determines how much money is available to spend on schools and other public services.
In recent years Oregon’s unemployment rate has tracked well above the national average. Moreover, the boom and bust economic cycles have been particularly hard on Oregon companies and workers.
Declining per capita income, combined with exploding costs for health services and prisons, has crowded out investments in education – especially higher education. Because education and income are inextricably linked, this trend could push down personal incomes even further.
Looking forward, Oregon’s challenges are greater. An aging population will continue to put upward pressure on spending for human services. The legacy costs of a poorly conceived public pension system have come due. And the continued rise in health care costs is unsustainable for both the private and public sectors.
Our unbalanced and unstable tax system continues to be a drag on high-wage job growth. With the passage of Measure 66, Oregon has the dubious distinction of having the highest capital gains tax and second highest income taxes in the nation. This policy discourages investors and high wage earners from locating here. Yet without a sales tax or an adequate reserve fund Oregon still lacks the ability to provide stable funding for public services.
Oregon is trapped in a “Circle of Scarcity.” Breaking this circle is the single most important task for Oregon’s business, elected, and community leaders to tackle together.
The challenges Oregon faces are immense. They can only be addressed if Oregon’s business, elected, labor and community leaders work together.
Eliminating PERS for Legislators and Judges Takes Away Conflict of Interest
PERS was created in 1945 to provide retirement benefits to Oregon’s public employees. Legislators and judges were not eligible to join PERS. Everyone affected by PERS was fairly represented when PERS laws were made and PERS disputes were decided by neutral judges. That, however, began to change in the 1970’s. By 1984, the legislators had changed the law so that they could retroactively join PERS and judges automatically became PERS members. Thereafter, PERS members have made all of the PERS laws and they have decided every PERS lawsuit. That is the problem with PERS.
Oregon will have $3 billion less to spend in 2011 – 2013 then it had in 2009 – 2011. But laws passed by PERS legislators guarantee that this shortfall will not reduce the money paid to PERS. The PERS budget for 2011 – 2013 has been increased by $1.1 billion, to $7.5 billion. PERS members have also decided that during the 2011 – 2013 biennium the people of Oregon will pay over $870 million to pick up employee PERS contributions for PERS members. That money could have been used to provide services to all Oregonians but instead it will be used for PERS members only. This is what happens when PERS members have total control over the PERS decision making process and it is a serious problem.
The solution to the PERS problem is to remove legislators and judges from PERS. Legislators are the elected representatives of the people, not hired employees, and they should not receive employee benefits. Judges should have their own independent retirement plan, just like they did prior to 1984. These changes would restore the fairness that existed when PERS was established in 1945 and they would end decades of financial abuse that has cost the people of Oregon billions of dollars.
Article written by Daniel Re
Unnecessary Regulations Strangle Job Growth and Business Expansion
Nearly every day in Lane County the unemployed stream into local businesses looking for work. They can’t pay their mortgages. They can’t pay their bills. They can’t feed their families. They don’t have health insurance. Their jobs are being choked off as the manufacturers, industries, farms, ranches, trucking companies and others who employed thousands here with good family-supporting wages, benefits and vacations, are just quitting.
We need good quality of life regulations. But excessive regulations are unnecessarily limiting the use of our best assets: our natural resources and population of willing workers.
The key areas in which we could expand our economic development are private businesses and industries consisting of manufacturing, construction, agriculture, transportation and other industries noted below. Oregon and Lane County are unique in that they possess the natural assets that could pull us out of our economic doldrums. We can grow and make products; we can add to their value; we can sell and ship them across the nation and around the world. Local entrepreneurs and established businesses will create real jobs – if we just get out of their way.
Take agriculture, which has been one of the larger and more stable sources of employment for workers in the region. Before the 2009 recession, Oregon’s agriculture industry was linked to a workforce of 214,511 full or part-time jobs & $25.8 billion in sales. Oregon’s agricultural exports grew 71.6% and comprised one of the top two export industries through the first quarter of 2008 on a year-over-year basis.
Often, private job creation is hobbled by excessive planning processes and resulting regulations. Region 2050 Problem Solving Program, Envision Eugene, LTD’s West Eugene EmX, Lane Livability Consortium and Smart Communities Project just to name a few. Lane Livability Consortium alone proposed 193 scheduled meetings over the next three years as it plans to duplicate and triplicate efforts of local elected governments in an effort to create a spaghetti-like tangle of regulations and processes. The strategy seemed to be to overwhelm citizens with thick reports and paperwork, then burden them with a multitude of monotonous meetings that accomplish little.
The past two decades have generated a record number of rules, regulations, fee increases, taxing districts, overlay zones and additional government controls. We need good regulations that help maintain our high quality of life. Traditional blue-collar workers, who once earned a living wage of about $50,000 per year from manufacturing industries or trades, are losing their jobs in record numbers, in part because their employers – the job providers – simply cannot comply with unnecessary, burdensome regulations and still stay in business. The table below shows the loss of jobs in manufacturing and trades over the last five years here in Lane County.
Since the early ‘80’s, which marked the beginning of spotted owl litigation, our government, state and local agencies and regulators have continued to aggressively restrict and tax the private businesses that create jobs. These private industries and businesses used to purchase millions of dollars of local consumables each year, putting even more people to work. Now they are downsizing, closing or moving out of Oregon. These employers are being forced away because it can be more profitable doing business elsewhere. We need these jobs back. We need to encourage our Job Providers while maintaining reasonable quality of life regulations.
Our Job Providers are not on strike. They simply gave up and sought out more hospitable business environments.
Cindy Land
Eugene, OR
| Population Estimates: |
|
||||||||||||
| http://www.co.lane.or.us/Departments/BCC/Documents/Budget10-11/AdoptedOverview2010.pdf |
|
||||||||||||
| http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=kf7tgg1uo9ude_&met_y=population&idim=county:41039&dl=en&hl=en&q=lane+county+population#ctype=l&strail=false&nselm=h&met_ | |||||||||||||