Portland’s attitude toward taxation reminds me of the bumper sticker: “How can I be overdrawn? I still have more checks.” With a parking fee increase, Portland will simply increase the disincentive for those of us living outside the City to visit — not exactly the economic result the City needs.
Actually I believe the solution is a bit more than "new leadership", and the likelihood of "honest discussions" in our City and County Governments seems unlikely to me. The unspoken elephant in the room is our deeply flawed, so-called "Charter Reform" which has placed decision making in a radically untenable process (thanks to Julia Meier and Candace Avalos among others). Witness the continuous gridlock that has marked the first year of the new form of government's functioning, along with the hyper-partisanship (looking at you, DSA) dominating our supposedly "nonpartisan" city elections.
This is a design feature, not just a flaw. Until multi-district, ranked choice voting is eliminated, and the Mayor is given a real tie-breaking vote, nothing can possibly change for the better.
Dan Ryan and Eric Zimmerman were the only two who voted against this, just fyi to everyone who will be weighing this (among all the other hits to our pocketbooks) when they vote.
I would like the city to disclose how many positions have been eliminated under the new charter. The plan was sold to the voters, in part, as a way to eliminate duplication across the departments. Michael Jordan, and now Raymond Lee were supposed to reorganize staffing levels in order to reduce expenses. Anyone know the change in FTE? The council certainly didn't address this issue during their budget deliberations. For example, how many positions in PBOT are there that don't actually repair and maintain roads?
The city apparently has added 1,000 positions (!!) from June 2022 (charter vote was November 2022) and late 2025. In the just approved budget, there are 57 communications, 37 equity, and 37 public engagement staff * for just 4 service areas despite supposed centralization of these functions.
* so-called public engagement staff, since much of the engagement seems to not be intended to engage all of us, or, witness the secret decisions about the Lincoln statue pedestal, not involve any engagement whatsoever except for a select small number of insiders.
Thank you, Bob. The city also hires outside facilitators for some committees--one would think public engagement staff would (or should) be qualified to handle those meetings. Of the 57 communication staff, are any of them IT employees? Those positions would be critical to making sure the technology works correctly.
As you have pointed out correctly in past posts, the city should have started its post-charter budget process using a zero-based budgeting model. Jordan wouldn't have had the stomach for it since he was long-time politician on the verge of retirement. But Raymond Lee could for FY 27-28. Until we see a clear, public-friendly organizational chart that includes FTE with the underlying rationale for job duties, none of us can be certain that the most critical pieces of the charter mandates have been met.
I’ve never understood the city’s obsession with meeting facilitators. While they may be helpful in some circumstances, certainly the city has enough six figure bureau and department heads who can run a meeting! In any cards, $240/hour facilitators should be forced on any committee that doesn’t want one!
This demand for more money, again, in the face of a multi-million dollar deficit, a boots on the ground campaign citizens have taken up to pay for safety on our streets (our council should make THIS issue #1!), and a cave in by our mayor to the demand for hundreds of millions of dollars for a stadium re-do. What industry, what business, what economic infrastructure is hiding behind the curtain that funds these increases? oh, wait - don't look at the man behind the curtain... only levers, dials and a lot of b.s.
Downtown Portland is desperately in need of recovery and revitalization. SO, Portland city government decides it's a good time to RAISE parking rates. They are so out of touch with reality that it is breathtaking.
Let’s not forget that Portland increased its citywide rideshare surcharge from $0.65 to $2.00 per trip. The fee applies to all Uber and Lyft rides that begin or end within the city limits and is widely considered one of the highest flat-rate local rideshare surcharges in the country. And don’t even get me started on Oregon’s Paid Family Leave tax.
I suspect much of the nickel-and-diming we experience from local government is driven, at least in part, by Baumol’s cost disease—the economic theory that labor-intensive services become more expensive over time because worker productivity improves very little. At the same time, citizens routinely expect government to provide more services. The combination of rising labor costs and expanding public expectations puts constant pressure on local budgets, often leading to higher taxes, fees, and surcharges.
I don’t like increased taxes, but we seldom demand that government stop doing things. Instead, we tend to ask it to do more. For example, given modern vehicle technology and emissions controls, is it still necessary to require cars to undergo DEQ emissions testing? Whether the answer is yes or no, the larger point is that governments rarely eliminate programs once they are created. We are generally much better at adding new responsibilities than reevaluating whether older ones are still necessary.
It is the highest in the country (or was when approved last year). I always get a chuckle when the DSA/Peacocks claim to support working families, and then approve higher taxes and fees/ one after another.
I have lived in Northwest Portland on Overton Street between 20th and 21st for 18 years. Parking was free when I moved here, and over the years, to get my friends to visit me on my side of the river, I would buy visitor parking passes. First, they were $1, then $1.50, then $2, and last year $2.50. As of July 2026, they are close to $13. That is an unbelievable upcharge. I will never buy another one, and they are also dated, so I lost about $65 on parking passes that went unused this past year.
So question- how does it land with you that the Portland city council changed the parameters of the Portland Arts tax without the voters? Is this precedent setting for other taxes? Why didn't they address the administration and costs of this tax? If they had addressed the admiratives costs, they would not have had to raise the tax, even with the income buffers instituted.
Mitch Green didn’t pay his property taxes. Do as I say not as I do.
He was too busy defunding public safety and promoting the DSA Peacock agenda.
Which doesn't include making life easier for middle class taxpayers, as we're apparently not an historically marginalized community.
Portland’s attitude toward taxation reminds me of the bumper sticker: “How can I be overdrawn? I still have more checks.” With a parking fee increase, Portland will simply increase the disincentive for those of us living outside the City to visit — not exactly the economic result the City needs.
Thank you TWO gentlemen. Your attentiveness to, and passion for, the management of our city is truly appreciated.
I am a new resident but I am empathetic to long standing ones for whom this news is further evidence of how far Portland has fallen.
The solution(s) seem to be new leadership and honest discussions about what Portland can truly afford.
Cutting taxes would spell relief.
Cutting taxes means certain services need to be reduced, eliminated or made more efficient.
Government does not police itself. Leaders DO.
Actually I believe the solution is a bit more than "new leadership", and the likelihood of "honest discussions" in our City and County Governments seems unlikely to me. The unspoken elephant in the room is our deeply flawed, so-called "Charter Reform" which has placed decision making in a radically untenable process (thanks to Julia Meier and Candace Avalos among others). Witness the continuous gridlock that has marked the first year of the new form of government's functioning, along with the hyper-partisanship (looking at you, DSA) dominating our supposedly "nonpartisan" city elections.
This is a design feature, not just a flaw. Until multi-district, ranked choice voting is eliminated, and the Mayor is given a real tie-breaking vote, nothing can possibly change for the better.
Did anybody on the council vote against these increases?
Dan Ryan and Eric Zimmerman were the only two who voted against this, just fyi to everyone who will be weighing this (among all the other hits to our pocketbooks) when they vote.
I’m surprised Clark didn’t as she usually votes in the name of common sense.
The Growing Cost of Living in Portland
Estimated Annual Impact for a Typical Portland Household
Tax / Fee Increase
Estimated Annual Cost
Transportation Utility Fee $144
Street Damage Restoration Fee $100–150*
Parks Levy Increase +$130
Arts Tax Increase (2 adults) +$30
Water & Sewer Rate Increases ~$75–125*
Electric Rate Increases ~$75–150*
Flood Safety Benefit Fee $14
Higher Parking Costs ~$100–250*
Permit & Transaction Fee Increases. Varies
Estimated Additional Annual Cost
Typical Portland Household: Approximately $700–$1,000+ annually
Households with regular downtown commuters: $1,000–$1,500+ annually
*Estimates vary depending on household size, assessed value, utility usage, and commuting patterns.
I would like the city to disclose how many positions have been eliminated under the new charter. The plan was sold to the voters, in part, as a way to eliminate duplication across the departments. Michael Jordan, and now Raymond Lee were supposed to reorganize staffing levels in order to reduce expenses. Anyone know the change in FTE? The council certainly didn't address this issue during their budget deliberations. For example, how many positions in PBOT are there that don't actually repair and maintain roads?
The city apparently has added 1,000 positions (!!) from June 2022 (charter vote was November 2022) and late 2025. In the just approved budget, there are 57 communications, 37 equity, and 37 public engagement staff * for just 4 service areas despite supposed centralization of these functions.
* so-called public engagement staff, since much of the engagement seems to not be intended to engage all of us, or, witness the secret decisions about the Lincoln statue pedestal, not involve any engagement whatsoever except for a select small number of insiders.
Thank you, Bob. The city also hires outside facilitators for some committees--one would think public engagement staff would (or should) be qualified to handle those meetings. Of the 57 communication staff, are any of them IT employees? Those positions would be critical to making sure the technology works correctly.
As you have pointed out correctly in past posts, the city should have started its post-charter budget process using a zero-based budgeting model. Jordan wouldn't have had the stomach for it since he was long-time politician on the verge of retirement. But Raymond Lee could for FY 27-28. Until we see a clear, public-friendly organizational chart that includes FTE with the underlying rationale for job duties, none of us can be certain that the most critical pieces of the charter mandates have been met.
I’ve never understood the city’s obsession with meeting facilitators. While they may be helpful in some circumstances, certainly the city has enough six figure bureau and department heads who can run a meeting! In any cards, $240/hour facilitators should be forced on any committee that doesn’t want one!
Further erodes public confidence? I didn’t know we had any confidence left.
Agreed. And is it too soon to ask, how about enforcing payment on our public transportation? Oh, I get it…less expensive to just raise rates.
This demand for more money, again, in the face of a multi-million dollar deficit, a boots on the ground campaign citizens have taken up to pay for safety on our streets (our council should make THIS issue #1!), and a cave in by our mayor to the demand for hundreds of millions of dollars for a stadium re-do. What industry, what business, what economic infrastructure is hiding behind the curtain that funds these increases? oh, wait - don't look at the man behind the curtain... only levers, dials and a lot of b.s.
Downtown Portland is desperately in need of recovery and revitalization. SO, Portland city government decides it's a good time to RAISE parking rates. They are so out of touch with reality that it is breathtaking.
Let’s not forget that Portland increased its citywide rideshare surcharge from $0.65 to $2.00 per trip. The fee applies to all Uber and Lyft rides that begin or end within the city limits and is widely considered one of the highest flat-rate local rideshare surcharges in the country. And don’t even get me started on Oregon’s Paid Family Leave tax.
I suspect much of the nickel-and-diming we experience from local government is driven, at least in part, by Baumol’s cost disease—the economic theory that labor-intensive services become more expensive over time because worker productivity improves very little. At the same time, citizens routinely expect government to provide more services. The combination of rising labor costs and expanding public expectations puts constant pressure on local budgets, often leading to higher taxes, fees, and surcharges.
I don’t like increased taxes, but we seldom demand that government stop doing things. Instead, we tend to ask it to do more. For example, given modern vehicle technology and emissions controls, is it still necessary to require cars to undergo DEQ emissions testing? Whether the answer is yes or no, the larger point is that governments rarely eliminate programs once they are created. We are generally much better at adding new responsibilities than reevaluating whether older ones are still necessary.
It is the highest in the country (or was when approved last year). I always get a chuckle when the DSA/Peacocks claim to support working families, and then approve higher taxes and fees/ one after another.
The problem is, fees tend to be a very regressive form of tax. Not sure how DSA reconciles that conflict.
Exactly.
I have lived in Northwest Portland on Overton Street between 20th and 21st for 18 years. Parking was free when I moved here, and over the years, to get my friends to visit me on my side of the river, I would buy visitor parking passes. First, they were $1, then $1.50, then $2, and last year $2.50. As of July 2026, they are close to $13. That is an unbelievable upcharge. I will never buy another one, and they are also dated, so I lost about $65 on parking passes that went unused this past year.
So question- how does it land with you that the Portland city council changed the parameters of the Portland Arts tax without the voters? Is this precedent setting for other taxes? Why didn't they address the administration and costs of this tax? If they had addressed the admiratives costs, they would not have had to raise the tax, even with the income buffers instituted.