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.
We also endorse using some funds to finance more affordable housing construction and to extend the collection period to a minimum of 25 years to support the long-term rental subsidies and services that those dollars fund.
However, we do not support the proposal to reduce the tax rate on high income households to 0.9% in 2026 and to 0.75% in 2031, because it would erode the very programs and services that are just beginning to make a difference. 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.
The proposed reduction would save a couple making $250,000/year just $10 a month in 2031; yet would result in a collective loss of tens of millions that could serve thousands of elders. Services and affordable housing are top priorities for voters; tax cuts for high earners are not. Recent polling commissioned by Building Power for Communities of Color shows that just 23% of Portland voters said cutting taxes on individuals earning over $125,000 was a high priority, while 69% said expanding homelessness services was a high or top priority.
In addition, President-elect Donald Trump is proposing massive tax breaks for the wealthy and steep cuts to federal funding to health, housing and social safety nets. If we replicate this community divestment locally, we will all pay the consequences with more families losing their housing and health, diminishing the community well-being for all. Now more than ever, we need to maintain our progressive tax structures and local revenue streams to shore up our defenses against rising inequities exacerbated by federal choices.
A reduction in existing funding will leave more neighbors sleeping out in the cold and current renters teetering into eviction. We need to continue to be a place where those who can afford to pay contribute their fair share to ensure and expand public good and well-being. Income inequality is reaching a boiling point in our society, so let s maintain the 1% marginal tax and make sure all our neighbors stay warm through every winter.
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!
