Hogan, Molly
Hogan is the Welcome Home Coalition’s director. Portland is where she resides.
Voters in the Portland area made a strong message four years ago when they approved a regional tax proposal on corporations and high earners to pay for services aimed at reducing homelessness. This pledge acknowledged that more than just a roof is necessary for stable dwelling. To help people stay in housing for an extended period of time, case management, rent assistance, mental health care, and addiction therapies may be necessary.
However, the unpleasant truth is that homelessness still exists in spite of these and other government efforts in the development of affordable homes. Implementation inefficiencies are partly to blame for this. That’s not all, though. Rents are still rising too quickly. According to a U.S. Governmental Accountability Office report, there is a 9% increase in homelessness for every $100 increase in rent. Furthermore, the epidemic put more strain on social service institutions. Rent hikes, medical crises, and other factors force some people into homelessness even as our new financing helps others find housing.
In order to adapt to the evolving needs of our homeless response system, representatives from Metro regional government, which oversees the Supportive Housing Services tax, have recently been in talks with companies and a few nonprofit organizations about potential changes to the law. Voters may see a new measure on the May ballot.
This plan has been discussed by the Welcome Home Coalition, a coalition of dozens of housing justice-focused groups and individuals in the Portland area. We strongly disagree with plans to lower the present tax rate, even while we support a number of the solutions being discussed that would increase efficiency and allocate funds for the purchase and development of affordable homes. Any rate cut, which we feel would jeopardize the effectiveness of current programs, should be rejected by metro councilors.
Metro levies a 1% tax on personal income over $125,000 for individuals and $200,000 for couples filing jointly under the Supportive Housing Services legislation. Additionally, it taxes net income at a rate of 1 percent for companies that make more than $5 million in sales.This translates to $10 a year for a single individual earning $126,000.
Multnomah, Washington, and Clackamas counties get the funds via Metro and make decisions on how to use them to reduce homelessness.
We agree that reforms are necessary, and we generally support suggestions to strengthen regional alignment and coordination among counties, as we explained in a letter to the Metro Council earlier this month. We are in favor of raising the tax payers’ income criteria to reflect inflation. We also concur that Metro should clearly outline regional standards for spending these funds for long-term housing solutions rather than temporary fixes.
In order to support the long-term rental subsidies and services that those dollars pay, we also recommend extending the collection period to at least 25 years and using some of the proceeds to finance the development of more affordable homes.
However, because it would undermine the very programs and services that are starting to have an impact, we oppose the proposal to lower the tax rate on high-income households to 0.9% in 2026 and to 0.75% in 2031. individuals’s confidence that service providers can fulfill their promises is also impacted, in addition to the possible decrease in the number of individuals who can be treated.
Less than 10% of homes in the Portland area earn enough money to be subject to this tax, according to figures from Metro.
In 2031, a couple earning $250,000 annually would only save $10 a month thanks to the planned reduction, but tens of millions of dollars that could be used to support thousands of elderly people would be lost overall. Voters prioritize affordable homes and services over tax breaks for rich earnings. According to recent polling conducted on behalf of Building Power for Communities of Color, 69% of Portland voters stated that increasing homelessness services was a high or top priority, while only 23% responded that lowering taxes on those making over $125,000 was a high priority.
Donald Trump, the president-elect, is also suggesting substantial cuts to federal support for social safety nets, housing, and health care, as well as enormous tax incentives for the wealthiest. Replicating this community divestment locally will have negative effects on everyone’s well-being since more families will lose their homes and health care. More than ever, we must preserve our local revenue sources and progressive tax systems to strengthen our defenses against growing disparities made worse by decisions made at the federal level.
Existing renters will be on the verge of eviction and additional neighbors would be left without a place to live if present funding is cut. To maintain and increase the general welfare and well-being, we must remain a nation where those who can afford to pay contribute fairly. Let’s keep the marginal tax at 1% and ensure that all of our neighbors have a warm winter because income inequality is becoming out of control in our country.
Note: Every piece of content is rigorously reviewed by our team of experienced writers and editors to ensure its accuracy. Our writers use credible sources and adhere to strict fact-checking protocols to verify all claims and data before publication. If an error is identified, we promptly correct it and strive for transparency in all updates, feel free to reach out to us via email. We appreciate your trust and support!
