As the chair of the Clackamas County Board of Commissioners, one of my most important jobs is to ensure that we spend public resources in ways that best benefit our residents.
Not only does that include county property tax revenues, but outside funds as well.
Due to the 2021 passage of the federal American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA), the county was allocated a total of $81.2 million. A condition of receiving those dollars is that the county is required to spend them by the end of 2026.
In early October, the board voted to approve $29 million of those ARPA funds towards a variety of projects all over the county.
The single largest investment was in libraries. We approved $9 million for the Oak Lodge Library and $6 million for the new Gladstone Library project, for a total of $15 million. I was among those in attendance for the demolition of the old Gladstone City Hall, which will be the location of the new library facility.
But that wasn’t all.
The board voted for $4 million in critical infrastructure work, in the form of stormwater repairs. That will result in the replacement of culverts, reduction of flood hazards and drainage improvements in multiple areas.
We put $4.8 million towards a multipurpose facility at the fairgrounds in Canby. That was after we had already built out the livestock barn there, using $10 million with shared funds from the legislature. This will serve to enhance livestock opportunities for area youth who participate in 4H programs.
Another previous use of ARPA funds will result in Clackamas County having the largest Oregon State University extension service in the state. The total cost of this project is $20 million. That comes from a combination of ARPA dollars and general obligation bonds that will be paid back over time.
Once completed, the extension service will emphasize sustainable vegetable, fruit and crop production, as well as cooking and preserving. This is especially important, given the skyrocketing cost of food.
And even though we’ve now made it possible for several critical projects to get started or move forward, the county still has over $12 million of those ARPA funds remaining. This will allow us to identify any possible priorities that may arise over the next four years that we have to spend those dollars.
Whenever possible, I’ve made it a point to maximize the county’s share of those ARPA funds. I’ve also sought to leverage funds provided by the members of our legislative delegation. Under my leadership, the county secured significant state funding to replace our outdated courthouse facility. Rising construction costs caused us to get creative and develop a public-private partnership to ensure that we could capitalize on that allocation of state funds.
So as you can see, many important projects will be taking place throughout the county over the next few months. They represent the board’s commitment to investing in worthwhile projects that will improve the quality of life for county residents for years to come.
For over 40 years, Clackamas County has lacked the ability to control its own destiny.
That’s how long the county and its residents have been subjected to the additional layer of government, bureaucracy, taxation and regulations that have accompanied our largely involuntary membership in Metro.
Some of the continued consequences of this unfortunate arrangement were made abundantly clear during the October 25 meeting of our board of commissioners.
It was explained to myself and my fellow commissioners that Metro plans to strip our county of much-needed developable land in order to accommodate the growth of a city in Washington County.
First, a little bit of background information is in order. The Metro council refused to expand the tri-county’s Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) a decade ago. That decision was justified on the basis that development was going to occur in Damascus, in sufficient quality to accommodate the entire area for years. That obviously didn’t happen.
Now, Metro wants to expand the UGB in Tigard by 500 acres. I’m not necessarily opposed to letting that community grow as it sees fit. But the catch is that in order to make that happen, those 500 acres need to be offset through a land swap. That would be accomplished by the removal of developable land near Damascus and Oregon City.
During the meeting, I said that it was an insult. I meant it, and I still do.
The way this has been presented, there is literally nothing in this proposal that will in any way benefit Clackamas County and its residents. Growth in one county should not come at the expense of similar opportunities in another. And no reasonable policy would ever try to pit public entities against each other in such a manner.
A lack of shovel ready industrial land has been a big issue all over Oregon for decades. We have land in the county that would be perfect for that use. The only problem is that Metro won’t allow it. Two other counties, Multnomah and Washington, have more say over this than we do, and that’s not right.
Perhaps the worst part is that nobody has thought to ask the affected property owners what they think about all of this. Having the ability to develop your property can have a huge impact on its value. Conversely, being unable to develop your land, when you could have before, can have an adverse effect on the value of your property.
Throughout my stint as chair of the Clackamas County Board of Commissioners, I’ve had to deal with Metro extensively. Nearly every instance has involved that organization acting contrary to the interests of the citizens and communities that I represent.
There has been talk over the years about Clackamas County someday withdrawing itself from Metro. If that ever ends up happening, it will be because of these kinds of situations. We are tired of getting the short end of the stick, and we will only put up with it for so long.
My family has called this state home for multiple generations. In fact, I still live not too far from the farm where I grew up with my parents and two siblings.
I’m a proud graduate of local schools and got my degrees from Mt. Hood Community College and Concordia University. I’ve started no fewer than three businesses here, including an historic hospitality suite in Molalla and our hazelnut farm.
I fought hard for the people of this state in multiple roles throughout my life. That started when I was executive director of the Oregon Lands Coalition. It continued during my two terms serving in the Oregon House of Representatives.
That’s why it saddens me to say that I barely recognize my beloved state anymore. Something has changed along the way, and it has not been for the better.
When I used to tell people I was from Oregon, it was always with a strong sense of pride. People would respond with a sense of wonderment. I would say that everything they heard was true. Yes, we do have majestic scenery. Yes, we grow the biggest and best trees on Earth, and they are everywhere. Yes, there is a sense of freedom that exists and persists throughout our communities.
These days, the reaction is quite different when I tell people where I’m from. They’ve all seen the national news stories about the happenings here. I sadly confirm the sad state of affairs here.
What happened, and where do we go from here?
Back when I served in the Legislature, there was still a sense of balance. Historically, the state has operated best from the center right or center left. Many of our best leaders and governors were moderates. The state government was manageable.
Most importantly, we adhered to the principles of the Oregon Way to come up with something that works for everyone.
But it all started to shift about a decade ago.
Voters decided to try another approach. They started selecting leaders with a more Portland-based perspective. They were promised that so-called “progressive” policies would lead the way forward to a brighter future. They were told that higher taxes and more government programs would solve all of their problems. They were told that if we became the first state in the country to engage in various social experiments, other states would follow our lead.
Of course, none of that has actually happened. And it hasn’t been due to a lack of money or strong political opposition. It’s because those policies have never worked anywhere else and never will.
Oregon has lost its way and needs to create a new identity. The pioneer spirit that first made it great has been replaced with a sense of entitlement and permanent government dependency. Compromise went by the wayside and rural residents find themselves and their representatives increasingly marginalized and pushed to the sidelines.
I’m not suggesting that we live in the past. But there are lessons we can learn that have served this state and others quite well. Because what we’ve been doing isn’t working, and it’s past time that we admit it.
Armchair Quarterbacks Should Stay on the Sidelines
When I ran for chair of the Clackamas County Board of Commissioners in 2020, I knew what the position entailed. I knew that once elected, I would face the task of getting a majority of my fellow commissioners to agree to take action on the top priorities we all share for the county and its residents.
Right at the top of my list was replacing the current county courthouse. This was something that had been taken up by the previous board of commissioners, but I disagreed with the direction they wanted to take the project.
The idea back then was to fund the project, which everyone agreed needed to happen, with a bond approved by the county voters. This, of course, would have raised residents’ taxes and contributed to the high cost of housing. That’s assuming that the measure would have passed, and I don’t think it would have. Knowing that, we had to come up with something better.
Rising inflation meant that even though we were able to obtain a significant financial commitment and contribution from the state, we would still have to get creating to get the project fully funded and underway. We got to work, did our research and came up with a unique public-private partnership model.
Under this model, a private company agrees to take all the financial risks that county residents would normally be saddled with under most purely public projects. They have every incentive to make sure that it is completed on time and under budget, because they’re responsible for paying for any overages or overruns that may occur.
I’m pleased to report that as of the end of September, preparations are already underway for the construction. This kind of timeline is unheard of when it comes to public projects.
Plans are being made to put up perimeter fencing. Parking arrangements are being changed to accommodate construction. Relocations of some facilities are scheduled to take place before the end of the year.
We have a firm commitment from the contractors and our project partners that construction on the new Clackamas County Courthouse will be completed in the spring of 2025.
By the end of October, supplies and personnel will be moved to the project site. Construction site trailers will be in place very soon. New water and sewer lines are going to be installed. An access road is going to be built for the site by mid-December. Temporary and permanent power will be supplied to the site by the end of January.
It’s really easy for anyone from outside of the county organization to second guess the decisions that we make as a board of commissioners. What they don’t realize is that those decisions are not made in a vacuum. They’re made after much public deliberation and the input of experts, including many of the qualified professionals that we’re proud to have on staff at the county.
I’m happy to point out to those naysayers that we aren’t just talking about replacing the courthouse, it’s actually getting done, and soon.
Even though it’s football season, I think that all the armchair quarterbacks should stay on the sidelines, where they belong. As for myself, my fellow commissioners, our county staff and our project partners—we have a courthouse to construct, plans in place and deadlines to meet.
It’s no secret that I’ve been a vocal critic of Metro throughout the multiple decades of my life as an elected public official. Even prior to my stints as a member of the Oregon House of Representatives and Clackamas County Commissioner, I wondered privately why Metro is even necessary and what we, the taxpayers, have to show for its existence and the tens of billions of dollars it has spent.
Metro officials don’t like that I took the agency to task upon becoming chair of the Clackamas County Board of Commissioners after finding out it was charging our residents way more for trash collection services than it was costing to provide them. They don’t like that I’ve spoken out against every one of their ill-conceived efforts to wrangle more money out of us to solve problems that Metro helped create in the first place. And they sure don’t like that I’m willing to lead the discussion about having the county leave Metro for good.
Given all of that, it’s not surprising that some Metro officials would see fit to attack me and the county in some local media outlets.
A report was released at the end of August on the first year of spending for the tax that Metro voters approved in 2020 to help the homeless.
That tax has thus far raised $209 million between all three Metro counties. The share allocated to Clackamas County totals $43 million. We have spent $3 million of that, or about 6.6 percent.
The Metro council president and another council issued a statement saying that a committee will look into the reasons Clackamas County has yet to spend most of that money. The simple fact of the matter is that we don’t yet have the infrastructure in place to properly and responsibly manage spending that amount of dollars.
It’s prudent management to not spend money before you have it, just because you expect to receive it at some point. The county could certainly have started incurring costs in anticipation of those dollars eventually becoming available.
We could have started hiring staff and paying out salary and benefits. But what would have happened if the county didn’t receive the funds, or was allocated less than we thought we would be getting? Those employees wouldn’t have had much to do, and the county will have wasted money.
The county’s reason for holding off was in place for a reason. Something similar had already happened.
Voters had approved a Metro ballot measure in 2018 in the name of affordable housing. The county was promised a large sum of money after it passed, except that didn’t happen. Estimates of how much it the measure was going to bring in were wildly off. Had the county moved forward quickly with building up the infrastructure to implement it, we would have been left holding the bag.
Spending money before you have it is like putting the cart before the horse. And that is an approach that Clackamas County will never take, as long as I remain chair of its board of commissioners.
Many of the most important public policy debates these days are the result of fundamental disagreements on what, exactly, rights are.
Some people are quickly to declare everything they want to be a “right,” meaning that the rest of society must provide it to them, regardless of the social or economic costs.
But lost amid those demands is any discussion about the responsibilities that are supposed to accompany the rights that we actually do have. The unfortunate consequences of that mentality are prevalent all around us in the Portland metropolitan area and throughout Oregon.
This concept of rights without responsibilities produces disastrous results that undermine the quality of life for everyone. Take Oregon’s continued experiment with drug legalization as an example.
Voters were hoodwinked into passing Measure 110, due largely to the promise that drug addicts would be better able to access the treatment they need. But here we are, nearly two years later, and that help has never materialized. The state completely dropped the ball on getting those substantial financial resources out the door and into the communities that have to deal with the aftermath of what has become a drug free-for-all.
Some district attorneys, including the one in Multnomah County, doubled down on this by refusing to prosecute certain kinds of crimes.
Similarly, the state legislature passed House Bill 3115 during the 2021 session. That bill has the net effect of making it harder for local governments to enforce vagrancy. It even goes one step further and creates a cause of action against cities, leaving them open and vulnerable to lawsuits if they try to keep their streets free of drug addicted homeless people.
All of this misplaced compassion has served to only erase the stigma that has traditionally come with deliberately making the same bad decisions over and over again. How did this happen? Too much emphasis on the incorrect perception of what “rights” truly are, and no talk about personal responsibility.
But that doesn’t mean the results aren’t real. Overdoses on dangerous drugs like fentanyl are skyrocketing in this state. Soft-on-crime policies mean that businesses in downtown Portland would rather relocate elsewhere that continue to board up their storefronts every time they’re victimized by vandals who will never be prosecuted for it.
Every effort has been made to shield these people from the consequences of their actions. But instead, those consequences are felt by everyone else. And every indication is that many of them have finally had enough.
The people of San Francisco, hardly a bastion of conservatism, eventually got tired of their public safety being eroded by their district attorney’s refusal to do his job and recalled him from office. A pair of “reform” candidates ran for district attorney’s offices in neighboring Washington and Marion counties, and both lost.
The bottom line is that our rights do not derive from the government. They are inherent, and it is the role of government to protect and preserve them.
But with those rights comes responsibility. We are free to do as we choose, as long as we are responsible enough in our conduct that we don’t interfere with anyone else’s rights.
Until we, as a society, have a better understanding of the relationship between rights and responsibilities, we will continue to see some segments of our population engage in the same kinds of destructive behavior that we’ve seen turn Portland into a shell of its former self. If, however, we start to recognize that those rights are accompanied by responsibility, we can maintain the same kind of ordered liberty that made this the greatest country on Earth.
I remain optimistic that we can find our way back to those values, and responsibly enjoy the rights that we were all born with as Americans.
Housing is, and has been, one of the top issues for the citizens of Clackamas County for years now. The simple fact of the matter is that the amount of available housing has not kept up with the demand created by the constant influx of new residents to the county and the region.
Basic economics dictates that when the supply does not keep up with the demand, the costs are going to increase. And that’s exactly what we’ve seen happen over time.
One of the biggest reasons for the lack of housing supply is the lack of available, buildable, developable residential land. That is actually regulated by Metro, which controls the urban growth boundary for the entire Portland region.
But rather than acknowledge that it’s been part of the problem, Metro has doubled down and used it as an excuse to expand its authority, add layers of taxation and create new programs to further justify its existence.
By Metro’s own admission, the region is a minimum of 48,000 homes short of meeting the current demand. However, rather than working constructively with builders and other people and companies in that industry, Metro has opted to join in, despite its lack of any expertise in the area.
Since the crisis was already so profound by 2018, Metro put an affordable housing bond on the ballot for voters to consider. I was opposed to it from the start and have not changed my position in the four years since.
The stated purpose of the bond was to generate $652 million to create homes for 12,000 people. But according to Metro’s 2022-23 fiscal year budget, the affordable housing fund includes a total appropriation of $329 million. Of that, over $276 million is allocated for planning, development and research. Now, maybe that will eventually result in people getting roofs over their heads. In the meantime, though, it represents a huge amount of tax dollars that is not currently going towards helping the people who need it the most.
As if that wasn’t enough, Metro floated another housing-related proposal in the May 2020 primary election. It was pitched to voters as a supportive housing services measure to be funded by higher taxes on businesses and the personal income taxes of high earners. I was also opposed to this proposal.
Voters in two counties approved the measure. Clackamas County voted NO yet we are yoked together with the larger metropolitan counties with a tax we didn’t want and results that are questionable. What do they have to show for it now, over two years later? Very little, as far as I can tell.
Metro’s current 2022-23 fiscal year budget shows the supportive housing services fund with total appropriations of $240 million. Of that, $217 million is budgeted for planning, development and research.
Everyone agrees that housing is a huge issue around here. It’s become expensive, and we also have a homelessness crisis that has been exacerbated by the state’s poor mental health systems and an increasingly carefree approach to dangerous drugs like heroin, meth and fentanyl.
Metro has promised voters that, with enough of our tax money, it will help solve these problems. Its budget has well over half a billion dollars for affordable housing and supportive housing services. Just under half a billion dollars is set aside in its two funds for those programs for planning, development and research.
We’re well past the point of needing to have something to show for the many millions of tax dollars that have flowed into Metro’s coffers under the guise of helping with the housing crisis. Unfortunately, I fear that even if some of these projects that are being planned, developed and researched start to materialize, it will still be too little, too late for the countless residents who struggle with high housing costs and homelessness.
This has been a rough year for households all across the United States, Oregon and Clackamas County.
Reckless federal spending policies have reduced the value of the dollar and caused the worst inflation in four decades. The results are hitting all of us right in the pocketbooks through higher costs for basic essentials like groceries and gas.
Statewide, a lack of housing inventory supply, restrictive land use policies and misguided rent control legislation all mean that housing remains unnecessarily expensive, with no end in sight. The state government continues to balloon, with record revenues flowing into state coffers due to countless tax increases passed by the legislature the past several years.
That’s the bigger picture. Luckily, there are things we can do at the local level to contain the costs of living for Clackamas County residents. And in the last two years of being chair of the board of commissioners, I’ve put my money where my mouth is, each and every time, just like I said I would.
From the beginning, I’ve taken the stance that there should be no new taxes unless they’re approved by voters. This is nothing new; it’s exactly what I did even back when I served as a member of the Oregon House of Representatives. My bottom line stance has always been that we have too many taxes, that are too high, from the state and from Metro. I’ve consistently sought to lessen that burden for our county residents.
In 2020, I campaigned on referring the county’s vehicle registration fee to voters. I took office in early 2021 and made every effort to do that. But I needed my fellow commissioners to make it happen and three of them balked at the idea of letting the people decide on it.
Fine and fee increases later came before the board. They passed on a 3-1 vote, and I was the only commissioner present that day to oppose it.
Metro has consistently proven to be a poor steward of tax dollars. When it wanted to raise the fees it charges to collect garbage by 16 percent, I refused. But I was outvoted, 3-2.
Similarly, I campaigned against a ludicrous proposal for the county to take out bond debt to fund the construction of a new courthouse facility. Although I agreed on the need to replace the building, I disagreed with the approach that was being suggested.
As commissioner, I voted to accept the funding match from the Oregon Legislature and the state judicial department for construction of a new courthouse on the county’s Red Soils campus.
I still stand behind this decision and feel it’s in the county’s long-term interests. While it’s true that we’re going to have to take a hard look at the budget to help pay for this much-needed project, the courthouse will last us at least 50 years. The way I look at it, we can either pay for programs with questionable results, or we can invest in ensuring that our criminal justice system has an adequate facility in which to provide its critical functions. If anything, this will force us to determine which county services are most important and eliminate anything that is harder to justify spending taxpayer dollars on.
Like any family, the government needs to take a realistic approach to budgeting. This is what I’ve done as chair of the Clackamas County Commissioners, and it’s what I’ll keep doing for as long as I continue serving in this position.
For many years now, it’s become increasingly obvious to Clackamas County residents and leadership that the current courthouse would someday need to be replaced.
The courthouse was constructed in 1936, nearly 100 years ago. Clackamas County had fewer than 50,000 residents back then. By contrast, it’s on track to have ten times that amount if growth projections and trends continue.
When I ran for chair of the county board of commissioners in 2020, I pledged that I would look into the best way of getting this critical project done without raising taxes. The former board floated the idea of putting a bond before voters, which likely would have failed.
I’m pleased to announce that we have come up with a unique plan to get this much-needed project done.
Although the courthouse replacement was originally estimated to cost $189 million, runaway inflation threatened to balloon those costs exponentially over time. We were able to secure nearly $100 million from the state and had to capitalize on that. Doing nothing would have just left those significant dollars on the table, a decision that would have hurt the county and its taxpayers in the long run.
What we did instead was create a 30-year public-private partnership, in which a company will finance, build and maintain the facility. The county will own it and pay the company an annual fee.
The company will assume all of the risks. And under this model, there is less chance of change orders and cost overruns, both of which are common in public projects.
After extensive research, county officials discovered that the costs involved in this approach are around ten percent less than those using a more traditional model of construction. As it is, the bid for this $313 million project came in at $40 million less than competing bids. We haven’t even started yet and are already saving money.
Better yet, we’re on track to break ground on this new 215,000 square foot facility next year. Once it is completed, it will meet the county’s current and future needs.
The first payment to the company won’t be due until 2025, so we will have adequate time to adjust the county’s budget accordingly.
Some people may question why this was necessary in the first place. The fact of the matter is, the courthouse is often described as obsolete. It carries significant erosion and seismic risks.
Courts are an essential service mandated by state law. Aside from that, people have the right to timely trials. That is a need the county is increasingly unable to meet, and that is a huge problem.
I’m glad that we were able to meet the many challenges and come up with something that can serve as a model to other jurisdictions. This will be the first courthouse in Oregon constructed using this public-private partnership model. Hopefully, it will not be the last.
Holding ourselves accountable. An 18 month check-in.
Long before I ever served in any public office, I believed in holding elected officials accountable for upholding the promises they made while campaigning for their positions.
All these years later, I still feel the same way. This is especially true now that I’ve spent years serving as a state legislator and county commissioner. I don’t only hold myself to the same standard that I hold other elected officials to; I hold myself to a higher one.
That being said, it’s been around a year and a half since I took over as chair of the Clackamas County Board of Commissioners. I was officially sworn into that position in January 2021.
I’m proud of what I’ve been able to accomplish in that time.
There has certainly been no shortage of challenges. COVID restrictions were still in place when I assumed the chair position. The county was also still reeling from the catastrophic wildfires that swept through the area in the summer of 2020. Weeks into my term, we faced ice storms that left thousands of our residents without power, some for weeks on end.
We got through each one of those. I decided to use those various emergency situations as a learning experience to show the work that needs to be done to prepare the county and its residents for future natural disasters.
As of July 1, the county will be operating under the second fiscal year budget prepared under my leadership as chair.
Before then, the emphasis of the county’s budget was taxes and fees so it can continue its trajectory of unsustainable growth. We have held the line on increased fees but frankly not all my commissioners agree with me, and some have passed. I began getting involved and attending meetings because I was concerned that despite the increased spending, county residents were not receiving more or better services. In other words, we were constantly being asked to pony up with very little to show for it.
I jettisoned that approach because it simply wasn’t working. Instead, we set about prioritizing the county’s spending to focus on the services that are most important to its taxpaying residents. For the rest of my term, county government will be focused on identifying County Core Services. I believe our government should not try to be all things to all people but look at what government can do best and leave the rest to the private sector. Your county government will look differently. More on this to come.
The budget is back on the right track, and it’s going to stay that way.
When I was campaigning for the chair position in early 2020, people would tell me their concerns about Metro. They would ask me what Clackamas County is getting out of the countless dollars that end up in Metro’s coffers. I told them I would work to hold that agency accountable.
I’ve stood up to Metro and opposed its attempts to increase the tipping fee charges to our residents for trash pickup. Metro has also tried to double what it charges for that service, and I’ve resisted.
I also defended the bodily autonomy of Clackamas County employees while other government agencies were trying to fire workers over their vaccine status. Our employees were offered religious exemptions for vaccines, and not even one of them lost their job for this under my watch.
Lastly, the county has been working to address citizen concerns resulting from the homelessness crisis. We’ve been removing abandoned RVs from county roads and have increased sheriff’s deputy patrols and arrests along the county’s northern border with Portland.
We’ve managed to accomplish much in the last 18 or so months, but I still feel like I’m just getting started. Thanks for your support; it’s something I don’t ever take for granted.
