Student.JPG
Will public education in Oregon truly benefit from the revenue to be raised by Measure 97? The author argues there's no guarantee it will.
(Randy L. Rasmussen/Staff)
By Stephen Marc Beaudoin
Every Oregon child deserves access to an equitable public education.
We have persistently low graduation rates, major student achievement disparities and real holes in our cradle-to-career continuum.
Unfortunately, Measure 97 gets us no closer to solving these important problems. And that's why I'm voting no on it.
Measure 97 is a $6 billion tax on Oregon sales and, if passed, would be the largest tax increase in Oregon history.
What does that mean for middle-class folks like me? It likely means higher prices for groceries, gas, medical expenses and other basics. Because of the compounded nature of the tax - which taxes gross sales of Oregon businesses, not gross profits - businesses will be left with no choice but to either raise prices or slash jobs. Or both.
But what's most important to me is this: I'm voting no on Measure 97 because the measure does absolutely zero, nothing, to ensure students and schools get the resources they need to succeed. There is no plan for implementation, there are no measurements for success, and there are no investment strategies or plans for the projected $6 billion of revenue that would be raised in the next biennium from the tax.
I don't believe you verifiably and equitably improve public education and other human services simply by throwing no-strings-attached money at it.
Our graduation rates are astonishingly and persistently low; they're lowest for students of color and students with disabilities. Our schools are crumbling; many are laced with toxic chemicals. We have a persistent, and growing, school to prison pipeline that is a dark stain on our state. Measure 97 is silent about how $6 billion will actually solve any of these urgent challenges.
My commitment to students and schools takes a back seat to nobody. I grew up in a scrappy lower-middle income family that held on by our fingernails; my parents were special education teachers in the 1970's. My entire life's work has been about supporting people to reach their fullest potential in the world. I'm an advocate for people with disabilities, and I volunteer countless hours as the board chair of the Multnomah Education Service District.
And I'm a nonprofit executive director. Beyond the negative impacts of Measure 97 on families and our economy, there's an entirely unstudied series of negative impacts from the measure looming for the nonprofit sector. Just as the cost of business will go up for businesses, which will pass it along to the consumer, the cost of doing business - especially our core operational expenses - for nonprofits will rise, as well. The local nonprofit agency I lead serves people with disabilities. Where will we find the revenue to account for these rising costs? Surely we won't pass it along to our undeserved clients?
Of course I'm frustrated with persistent disparities and challenges faced by our schools and our students. And I will continue to champion equitable solutions that are planful, thoughtful and community-sourced.
A year ago, I would never have imagined that I'd be opposed to Measure 97. But after careful consideration and digging deeper, this is where my reason, my conscience and my values have led me.
Measure 97 fails every test of reasonableness. For me, as a school board chair, it fails the most important test of all: It makes no promise and offers no plan, period, that our students and schools will - in an equitable manner - get what they need to reach their fullest, brightest potential.
It is the wrong solution for the very real problems we face.
Stephen Marc Beaudoin is the board chair of the Multnomah Education Service District. His piece represents his own opinion, not that of his agency.