It is with some regret that I urge a “no” vote on the Bend-La Pine Schools proposed local option levy, Measure 9-167. The regret comes from a 30+ year career in public education including a turn as a school district chief financial officer. I’ve seen and lived with the effects of funding instability in Oregon. It can be disheartening, but this is not one of those instances. Here are the reasons I recommend a “no” vote.

The first reason for a “no” vote is cost. The tax burden for public education is already high. The current tax levy for the school district is $6.47 per $1,000 taxable assessed value (operating budget plus construction bonds). For a home with the median taxable assessed value of $238,750, the 2023-2024 tax due was $1,545. The proposed local option levy would increase this base amount by $239 to a total of $1,784. This is a 15.5% increase which is arguably unreasonable.

In addition, our median homeowner also paid a property tax of $189 to support other public education agencies including Central Oregon Community College and the High Desert Education Service District. The total tax for public education would therefore be $1,972. Remember, this is for a property with the median taxable value. For a home with a taxable value of $500,000, the total education property tax would be in the neighborhood of $4,128. Check your 2023-2024 tax statement and contemplate your assessed value which will, in most cases, rise 3% per year.

The second reason for a “no” vote is allocation priorities. Based on the information on the school district website, www.bend.k12.or.us/district/news-events/2024-levy, the new resources would be used to fund enhancements, not essential educational programs. For instance, expensive career-technical program enhancements are planned even though such programs are more efficiently provided by our community college. While the various proposed enhancements would be nice in a perfect world, the benefits don’t justify the cost to taxpayers.

It’s also important to keep in mind that local option resources are for general operating purposes. There is no requirement that the funds raised be used for the advertised purposes. Future district budget processes will ultimately determine how any new local option resources would be spent.

The third reason for a “no” vote is the total tax burden. Here the focus is on total property taxation within the city of Bend — a great and expensive place to live. In recent years, taxpayers have approved many generous levies for the library, parks and recreation, as well as the recent city local option levy allocated to the fire department. The net effect of these actions has been a major increase in the tax burden on property owners.

Again, using our median taxable assessed property value of $238,750, the total property tax liability for 23-24 was about $3,817. When the city local option tax comes into effect and if the Schools local option tax is approved, property tax liability would increase to $4,189. A significant $372 annual increase. (Never mind the impact of the looming transportation fee expected to soon rise to $180 per year.)

Many, if not most, taxpayers will experience financial hardship if this levy passes. While there are many civic-minded property owners with ample resources prepared to support the tax increase, the interests of the working class need to be considered in order to keep Bend a diverse, thriving community.

In the final analysis, a “no” vote on Measure 9-167 is warranted.

Do you have a point you’d like to make or an issue you feel strongly about? Submit a letter to the editor or a guest column.