Vote YES on Measure 36-149

Election Results

A total of 4461 ballots were returned out of 10,139 active registered voters – roughly 44%.  1525 voted YES and 2883 voted NO -  roughly 35% to 65%.   This is down from the 60% or 6008 votes cast for Newberg mayor in the 2010 general election.  Get the full results, including District 1 votes, here.

To me this means that a significant proportion of voters are concerned that too much of their money is taken for spending programs they don’t want.   It also means that not enough voters are paying attention to the spending plans of the Council.  Are voters just apathetic?

Look at it another way.  You’re sitting in a room with other voters.  Those sitting to your left and to your right think you should pay for their wants.

The election outcome hasn’t altered the sources of spending pressure on our wallets.  We have just lost one way of voicing our will.  Hopefully, our Councilors will take note of our displeasure.

Additional Water Revenue Needed

At 7pm, Wednesday, November 9, I went to the Citizens rate Review Committee (CRRC) meeting.  Two other Newbergers attended.  They were deciding if they wanted to serve on the CRRC.  The people who have complained bitterly about their $200 water bills were not in attendance.

Consultant Deb Galardi presented revenue increase scenarios for debt service coverage.  Get the agenda packet with details here.

Subtract from Water Sales Revenue (about $4.5 million, constant though 2015/16) the Operating and Maintenance Costs ( $3.5 million now and $4 million in 2015.16) to get the funds available ($987,000 now and $435,000 in 2015/16)to pay principle and interest on debt (about $1.3 million).  To maintain the contractually require 1.1 ratio, additional needed revenue grows from $400,000 now to $945,000 in 2015/16.

This presentation did not include increases for capital investment, nor did it suggest cost cutting strategies.

Factors Driving Costs

The City Manager mentioned ever tightening regulatory requirements that require upgrades, and increasing costs of public employee benefits.  Seventy cents of each new revenue dollar is expected to go to employee costs and 30 cents to maintenance supplies such as new water pipes. (Some existing pipes are 100 years old).

The ever “unpopular” suggestion of reducing staff and using cheaper contract labor received only cursory attention, but doesn’t have to die.

The CRRC has no control over setting capital investment budget levels for upgrades required by the “green”-leaning EPA, State legislature, and DEQ. Question: When is our water “clean enough”?  We still have to provide food, shelter, clothing etc. for our families.  You can’t eat water that has the last part-per-billion of something removed, and you die a lot quicker from starvation and exposure to the weather.

However, the CRRC can refuse to endorse the rate increases and push back on the Budget Committee and the Council.

The final factor pushing cost is the Federal Reserve Bank and Congressional policy of inflating the money supply via debt financing of TARP and subsequent “stimulus” legislation.

We elected a new “conservative” House of representatives to control debt-financed spending, but all we get is more debt.  Meet the new boss…same as the old boss.

Going Forward

We lost Measure 36-149, but  we didn’t lose the war.  Meet the new solution…same as the old solution: elect representatives at all levels of government that care about your individual rights and not collective “rights”.

The good news is that we have at least two representatives (appointed by Mayor Andrews) on the CRRC who are looking to cut costs rather that just raising new revenue.  They are Ernie Amunson and Beth Keyser, and they are truly in “our corner”.  They need your support.

The next CRRC meeting is November 30.  See agenda here when it becomes available here

Water Bill Too High?  Do Something!

Please, go to the meeting.  Thank them personally.  Or send email to them c/o City Manager. Find out for yourself why your water bill is $200 and will go higher through 2016 if you don’t say something.  Mayor Andrews and City Manager Danicic are on the CRRC.

Public Comments are heard at the beginning of the meeting.  You have no more than five minutes each, to tell them “my water is clean enough and I need a new winter coat” or if you must, “please raise my rates 25% over the next four years”.  Or tell them “Public employee costs are too high and I’m not paying it anymore”.

YOU have  ask the CRRC to push back on the DEQ.  YOU have to ask State Representative Kim Thatcher and State Senator Larry George to push back on the DEQ.  YOU have to ask our incoming House Representative to push back on the EPA.  YOU have to ask Senators Merkely and Wyden to push back on the EPA and Presidential Executive Orders.

Otherwise, enjoy your new water bill…much higher than the old bill.

Yours in Liberty,
Hank Grum

This just in from Pat Haight – ed.

WHAT BETTER PLACE FOR THE ANIMAL SHELTER THAN RIGHT WHERE IT IS! The property on 9th & Blaine is in the city limits. The property is paid for and zoned right. The water and sewer is there. Larry Hindman’s valuation report says the city isn’t using all of the site (obviously)..so why not build to fit the site? What must be done to get this project underway?

1. Blaine Street leads leads thousands of people to the animal shelter and CPRD’s skate park on a gravel street! How embarrassing for the City! Who fixes the street? Maybe CPRD should have paved the street (driveway) in the first place? Maybe P & W RAILROAD or the City? Maybe all 3? Grade and blacktop how much? 1 blk? 2 blks? CHEAPER THAN the animal shelter having to repay the city for the Sandoz Rd. property? Probably so!

2. There would be no money to borrow from the wastewater treatment fund nor any other fund nor re-payments to be made “WITH INTEREST” from our General Fund. The funds for building the animal shelter could be easily tracked in one fund rather than in the current 3 or 4 funds!

3. START. Revise one of the existing plans to fit the Blaine Street property. (What better place for it than where it’s been for the last 40 years)! IN THE MEANTIME..Remove the “STORAGE SHED” building. GRADE THE PROPERTY. FENCE IT. BUILD the NEW FACILITY. WE’LL ALL BE THERE TO HELP GET IT DONE! STOP…and START WITH THIS PROJECT NO. 1 (because it should be first on every list)…JUST START AND GET IT DONE !! HOW SIMPLE CAN IT BE!

Like Spaulding Pulp & Paper who donated this property in the 70’s and most likely continues to have an interest in what the City does with the property, today most everyone in Newberg has a substantial financial interest not only in the Blaine Street property but also in the welfare of the animals being housed there and for those who must work there. Like NIKE once said, “JUST DO IT!” My message to the council is it’s time to START the job. We will all be there to help finish it!

“One of the reasons the City uses the Citizens’ Rate review Committee (CRRC) is to provide an open and administrative basis to help avoid the vulnerability of it [the water rate hike] being a legislative action.”

– Mayor Andrews, Nov 10, 2009, page 1, Citizens’ Rate Review Committee minutes available on Newberg City website

It is no accident that the City Council imposed the Public Safety Fee of $3 per household by Quasi-Judicial Order. It is also no accident that the City Council imposed the water, sewer, and storm rates averaging 11% this and 13% next year by Administrative Resolution. They deliberately avoided the use of Legislative Ordinance to evade the ability of a citizen to file a referendum against these revenue actions. The Oregon State Constitution (Article IV, section 1(5)) grants to citizens referendum and initiative powers only with respect to municipal legislation.

The Evil LOC Model Charter

In 2004, the League of Oregon Cities (LOC) published their model charter. It is designed to neutralize citizen oversight, via the referendum and initiative process, of the City legislative process, and to broaden the implied power of the council by stripping away any reference to specific functions such as police, fire, street maintenance and library service. Thus the model charter is only nine pages long. The Newberg City Charter (available on City website) is a nine page copy of that charter. We citizens foolishly adopted this evil charter in 2006. Hindsight is 20/20.

The model charter briefly states that Legislative power is exercised via Ordinance, Administrative power via Resolution, and Quasi-Judicial power via Order. The charter itself gives no indication what subject matter falls under which type of power. The footnotes provided by the LOC clearly indicate their intent to avoid the citizen use of the referendum power. (Model Charter for Oregon Cities by Thomas Sponsler & LOC, available from City Attorney Terry Mahr, or on LOC website if you are a paid subscriber.)

Studies in Evasion

The Newberg City Council established the CRRC by Ordinance. (See 32.70, Municipal Code, Newberg City Website). The function of the CRRC is to make utility rate recommendations to the Newberg City Council. The Ordinance also stipulates that the adoption of the rates be effected by Resolution rather than by Ordinance. Thus the Newberg Council made it impossible for a citizen to file a referendum against the rate hikes.

The City Council established, by Ordinance, the procedure to study the need for additional police officers. The city wanted to hire an additional seven officers. The budget provided funds for four of the seven officers. The remaining three would be funded via a Public Safety Fee (PSF). The Ordinance stated the Council would implement the PSF via Order rather than by Ordinance. Again, this procedure precludes the filing of a referendum by citizens.

The PSF was added to to the water bill with the additional stipulation that if the amount paid did not cover both the water rates and the PSF, the water bill was considered to be not paid-in-full. Water service could be shut off.

Habit Forming Behavior

Would the Newberg City Council conclude that this was a handy way to impose new taxes (excuse me, fees and charges) and enforce collection? The CRRC and Affordable (low-income, subsidized) Housing Committee (AHC) have agreed to join forces to impose a “utility rate surcharge” to finance an Affordable Housing Trust Fund (AHTF). The fund would finance the waivers of system development charges (SDC). These charges are substantial. Take the Habitat for Humanity project on Main St. Newberg waived about $21,000 in SDC, while the Newberg School board waived $2000 worth of Construction Excise Tax.

The minutes(available on City website) from the December 9. 2009 Affordable Housing Action Committee, a subcommittee of the AHC, reveals the plan to impose the new tax on overburdened Newberg taxpayers. Barton Brierly stated, “The Phase I committee recommended that the entire city share in the burden of the fee [system development charges - SDC] reductions, rather than have it fall on specific segments of the population… There are different ways that [it] could be distributed though sewer and water rates”. (emphasis mine.)

Further, “Chair Stuhr stated the City needs to be careful how much of these costs is being pushed down to the payers. She suggested running the calculations backwards to see what the general population will accept and what that looks like”.

On February 3, 2010, Barton Brierly, Newberg Planning and Building Director, issued a memorandum (available at City Hall) to the Affordable Housing Action Committee. “The Fees/Finance Subcommittee met with the Citizens Rate Review Committee (CRRC) at their December 11, 2009 meeting. The two committees discussed possible SDC reductions for affordable housing. In order to further discuss this issue, it was decided to appoint two members of the CRRC to meet along with the Fees/Finance subcommittee.”

There Might Be a Lesson Here!

The meetings were to be held after the recent water rate hikes. The City website has shown cancellations for AHC Fees/Finance meeting since August. I have been complaining at Newberg Council meetings about the proposed AHTF ever since I became aware of it at the AHC open house last June 9.

Can one dare to hope that showing up at meetings and testifying has an effect?

Yours in Liberty,

Hank Grum

This just in from Pat Haight. -ed.

In a recent conversation discussing Newberg’s  government..as broke as they obviously are (and not because of the economy but because of their extravagant disregard for our money)..someone mentioned that the City’s determined effort to convince us that after we have already had to pay an inflated price for our own housing in this town that now we should pay for someone else to have more “affordable housing” than we’ve got sounded like “altruism!”
I answered saying there’s only one reason Newberg doesn’t have “affordable housing” and that is because the city charges a builder an outrageous amount of as much as $50,000 in fees! A few years back builders didn’t have a problem paying the city’s fees because they could pay the fee, build the house, sell it at an inflated price and make a hefty profit..but today what builder can pay the city’s fee, build an “affordable” house and still make a profit? Maybe somebody should define the word “affordable!”
Nevertheless on hearing the word “altruism” with regard to the city I have to admit I had to reassure myself of “altruism’s” definition and now after reading the following I have to wonder where the City is going..and/or where they are taking us!
Wikipedia provided this..

“Friedrich Nietzsche held that the idea that it is virtuous to treat others as more important than oneself is degrading and demeaning to the self..the idea that others have a higher value than oneself hinders the individual’s pursuit of self-development, excellence, and creativity. [6] However, he did assert a “duty” to help those who are weaker than oneself. [7]

Ayn Rand held that one should pursue rational self-interest, and viewed altruism as an evil moral philosophy. She states that:
What is the moral code of altruism? The basic principle of altruism is that man has no right to exist for his own sake, that service to others is the only justification of his existence, and that self-sacrifice is his highest moral duty, virtue and value.

Do not confuse altruism with kindness, good will or respect for the rights of others. These are not primaries, but consequences, which, in fact, altruism makes impossible. The irreducible primary of altruism, the basic absolute, is self-sacrifice—which means: self-immolation, self-abnegation, self-denial, self-destruction—which means: the self as a standard of evil, the selfless as a standard of the good.

Do not hide behind such superficiality as whether you should or should not give a dime to a beggar. That is not the issue. The issue is whether you do or do not have the right to exist without giving him that dime. The issue is whether you must keep buying your life, dime by dime, from any beggar who might choose to approach you. The issue is whether the need of others is the first mortgage on your life and the moral purpose of your existence. The issue is whether man is to be regarded as a sacrificial animal. Any man of self-esteem will answer: “No.” Altruism says: “Yes.”[8]”

Whether altruism or not in considering the City’s preposterous
$50 million dollar debt and the fact they are giving our real property away and waiving the building fees for others..fees they need to pay THEIR debt..and all for the sake of BENEFITING SOMEONE ELSE..the question we must ask ourselves is how much longer can we afford to be the “sacrificial animals” for the City of Newberg’s government?

Editor’s note: I phoned the city, and a clerk told me the sample fees document shows $25,000 in permits (which includes SDC’s) for a 2,000 sq. ft. house.

See Newberg: http://www.newbergoregon.gov/building/permit-fees

Water, water everywhere (on the golf course) but not a drop for drink? This just in from Pat Haight, ed.

How GREEN is it ?

“During fiscal year 2007-08, the City began to construct a facility to treat  wastewater for irrigation purposes. The project also involved obtaining a new generator for emergency power at the Wastewater Treatment Plant. The TOTAL COST of the project is anticipated to be $8,625,626 million!”

This Just in From Pat Haight – ed.

WHAT GOES HERE?

For many, many years of Newberg’s existence the City has provided copies of minutes of all city meetings, ordinances, resolutions, etc. at the Newberg Library.  Taking up only a couple of short shelves these public records were invaluable for students and/or anyone studying this town..anyone interested in its history..as it once was..as it has become and as it is becoming or anyone merely researching or tracking information.

Recently I went to the library to read the city council minutes of a 2008 meeting..  continue reading…

An affordable house or apartment used to mean one whose mortgage or rent you can pay without your family going hungry, naked or without transportation to work or school.  Perhaps you had to settle for less than three bedrooms and two baths.  Denser neighborhoods with smaller lots and housing units equals lower-cost housing.  It’s a fact-of-life for growing cities.  The City Council is considering zoning changes to accommodate these needs.

But that’s not enough for the Newberg Affordable Housing Committee (AHC).  Housing is another arena for socialists to “redistribute the wealth”.  continue reading…

Did you read the Graphic article about the City’s plight with their upcoming budget..Wed. May 26..pgs.1 and 2 ? You might not agree but I found some statements by City Manager Dan Danicic to be off the wall so to speak and I can’t help wondering who is feeding him his information!
For one he says, “In trying to put together this year’s budget, we had to make some changes BECAUSE WE KNEW we weren’t going to have enough revenue!”  Unbelievable!   continue reading…

Newberg, Oregon
Home of George Fox University?
During the city council meeting Monday night June 7 the council will have an important decision to make.  George Fox University has asked the Council to approve newly-designed banners for the downtown area which say..Newberg..Home of George Fox University.  George Fox has always provided the banners .. but it seems to me  these newly-designed banners will serve to promote  the University at a time when the downtown area needs all the help it can get and I’m wondering if the new banners wouldn’t be more of an asset to the downtown retailers if they invited people to stop and shop..an idea  I hope the council considers before it votes.

Regardless you have to admit we don’t always know where our city council is coming from (or going to) but one thing is certain i.e.  when the council votes on this one we’re finally going to find out where their heart is!

“…under the rule of law, the private citizen and his property are not an object of the administration of government, not a means to be used for its purposes”.

Frederick A. Hayek, , The Constitution of Liberty, University of Chicago Press,Chicago, 1960, page 213.

A Tangled Tale

Oh where to begin! Raise the water rates because we don’t have the revenue to pay off the loan for the $1.9 million property, which the Waste Treatment Fund bought,  to expand the waste treatment plant.  But now we have extra property on which to build the new animal shelter. So the General Fund will borrow $87,000 from the Waste Treatment Fund to pay back 87,000, plus interest, to the Waste Treatment Fund on behalf of the Animal Shelter so money from the privately donated funds for the Animal Shelter Building won’t have to be used.

But Wait, There’s More! continue reading…