Editorials from around Oregon

Selected editorials from Oregon newspapers:

_____

The Eugene Register-Guard, Sept. 27, on University of Oregon freshmen being required to live on campus

Classes started Monday at the University of Oregon for a freshman class that includes students from all 36 Oregon counties, all 50 states and more than 100 countries. This diverse group has something new in common: With few exceptions, freshmen are required to live in on-campus housing. The new policy, adopted last year, is based on findings that students who begin their college careers living on campus earn better grades and are more likely to graduate on time. These gains are connected to less tangible but equally important social benefits.

An on-campus residency requirement for freshmen is already in place at four Oregon universities, including Oregon State University. The UO was able to join the others because of this year’s opening of the new Kalapuya Ilihi residence hall, which houses 552 students. Roger Thompson, the university’s vice president for student services and enrollment management, says the UO’s new requirement is part of a nationwide trend, with some public universities requiring that sophomores live on campus as well.

About 80 percent of UO freshmen lived in dormitories even before the new requirement took effect. But this year the percentage will rise to 92 percent. The remaining 8 percent are students who choose to stay with their families who live within 30 miles of the UO campus, and other students such as those who are married, have children or are older than typical college freshmen.

Freshmen who might have chosen to live off-campus in the absence of the UO’s new requirement have a variety of reasons for preferring that option, including cost. The UO offers room-and-board packages costing less than $10,000 to 2,000 students. It’s possible to live for less than that in shared apartments or houses, though rising rents in Eugene are narrowing the price advantage of off-campus housing.

But Thompson says students who live on campus as freshmen are more likely to graduate, and are also more likely to graduate within six years - and both types of improvement bring substantial financial benefits to students. The UO has an interest in improving student retention and on-time graduation rates as well: Each student who fails to graduate represents a lost investment, and better on-time graduation rates raise the UO’s standing in one important component of university rankings.

The academic benefits of first-year on-campus housing come about because students are in an environment that is conducive to the development of good study and attendance habits, are free of such distractions as the need to prepare meals and have easy access to support services. By the end of their first year, students have learned what it takes to be successful in college and where to find help if they need it, and are better prepared to live on their own.

The social benefits are equally important. Students living on campus can’t help forming a network of acquaintances - and, if they’re lucky, friends - that is likely to be wider and more diverse than can be established in any other living situation. They’re also more likely to be exposed to campus life outside the classroom, including cultural, recreational and political activities. By the time they move off-campus, this year’s freshmen are likely to be better integrated into the campus community than those who came before.

The UO’s new policy improves the odds that students will have a rich and successful college experience. The change is a positive one for students and the UO alike.

____

East Oregonian, Sept. 26, on free-speech rights

Too many people either don’t know or don’t care about people’s rights to express themselves as they see fit.

The Urbana police should have known better.

Because they didn’t, Bryton Mellott is $15,000 richer. It’s the best and easiest money he’ll ever make.

Mellott’s lawyers did even better, collecting $20,000 for work they did in a legal case that was impossible to lose.

For those who don’t recall - or are trying to forget - Mellott caused a ruckus on July 4, 2016.

To express his disgust and disdain for his country, he posted on Facebook a picture of himself burning the American flag. It generated an angry response, creating concerns about both his personal safety and the safety of fellow employees and customers at his workplace.

To make a long story short, Urbana police officers, relying on an inarguably unconstitutional statute, unlawfully arrested Mellott and detained him for five hours on charges of flag burning.

There’s a lesson here, one that cuts both ways in the incessant battle between those on the political left and right.

It’s all about an individual’s right to freedom of speech under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

People are free to disagree with Mellott’s viewpoint, particularly the manner in which he expressed it. But that’s as far as it goes.

Mellott has and had an absolute right to symbolically express whatever viewpoint he wishes by burning the flag. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld that expression of free-speech rights in a 1989 decision.

Free speech, particularly on college campuses, is getting a lot of attention these days, mostly because many people not only don’t understand the concept but sharply disagree with it.

So-called Antifa members, in fact, think it’s their duty to physically assault those who express views they do not share. Faces covered with masks and sometimes armed with clubs, they attack those they view as fascists in communities across the country.

The First Amendment exists to protect individuals who utter unpopular speech, characterized by some these days as “hate speech.”

Those who utter non-controversial speech don’t need protection - it’s the speech of those who dissent from the majority that needs protection.

But it’s of a piece with the long-held view of many Americans - free speech for me, but not for thee.

Everyone is entitled to have their say. Everyone is not required to listen to someone having their say, and they’re certainly free to disagree.

Mellott said he posted the picture of the burning flag “to address the issue of violence brought against members of my queer community and against every community considered to be ’other.’”

It was not exactly a well-thought-out protest against violence. But those who exercise their free-speech rights - like those who oppose others’ free-speech rights - often emphasize blind emotion, rather than clarity of purpose, in their demonstrations.

That’s their privilege in this country. Those who disagree, whatever their political perspective, need to remember that and pay the appropriate respect to a venerated American tradition.

____

The Oregonian/OregonLive, Sept. 26, on Portland’s arts tax needing to go back to ballot

The Portland arts tax was never about smart governance or fiscal responsibility. From its inception, the $35 tax to benefit schools and arts organizations was about getting Portland residents to pick up a tab that does not belong to them. So city officials’ admission this month that administration costs have consistently exceeded the 5 percent cap approved by voters is, unfortunately, not surprising.

Still, it’s helpful to hear Revenue Director Thomas Lannom’s unvarnished comments regarding the cap, which was highlighted as an accountability feature in the 2012 ballot measure. The 5 percent limit, he told Portland city commissioners, “polled very well in 2012 as a number to shoot for. But it was never realistic.”

The same could be said for the arts tax program itself, which promised to pay for arts and music instruction in Portland elementary schools and raise millions for the Regional Arts & Culture Council to distribute to arts groups. While the tax has fulfilled its promise to schools, it also has been so plagued with defects that the program in place now is significantly different from the one presented to voters. At the same time, those changes, which exempted tens of thousands of people, have only made the controversial tax more unpalatable. In its best year, fewer than three of four taxpayers paid the $35 bill.

Instead of trying to once again rescue the tax from its fatal flaws, the council should simply refer the amended tax to voters. As Commissioner Dan Saltzman noted, that carries the risk that voters may reject it outright. But, he said, referring the tax to voters is “the most straight-forward, straight shooting approach to it.”

Contrast that with the ideas floated by Lannom, who advised against putting the matter back to voters. He and Commissioner Nick Fish briefly outlined an idea to use $200,000 in general fund money to pay for hunting down those who have evaded the tax. Such collections efforts could bring in additional revenue - most of which would go to RACC, as Fish noted.

But is that how Portland should spend its general-fund money? RACC already gets millions from the city, in excess of arts tax revenue. Before the passage of the arts tax, in the 2012-2013 budget year, the city gave RACC a grant of $3.86 million, according to city budget office data. Compare that to 2016-2017, when the city gave RACC a grant of $4.29 million in addition to $3.3 million in arts tax money. Devoting another $200,000 to drum up more revenue for RACC seems a questionable use of money in a city facing a housing and homeless crisis. Things that, you know, are part of the city’s core responsibilities.

And then there are all the ways that this tax shows government at its mission-creeping worst.

Consider that schools do not fall under the jurisdiction of Portland city government. Rather, they are governed by independently elected school boards that set priorities and adopt budgets based on funding from the federal government, state sources, and local property taxes. Certainly, the city of Portland has its own list of problems to address with its limited money. In fact, Portland Public Schools’ general fund rivals the city’s in size. So why would the city think to take on school district responsibilities?

Secondly, the arts tax seems to engender the idea that patronage of arts education in schools entitles the city to give orders to districts. The citizen arts-tax oversight committee is recommending that the City Council direct school districts to develop a “state of the arts report” that shows the impact of the arts tax funds.

Keep in mind, the city already knows precisely how many teachers are hired and how many students are served. This report instead would capture the “indirect and tangential” benefits that stem from the arts tax. In other words, the council would insist that school districts spend their scarce time, money and resources pulling together a feel-good marketing brochure that arts tax supporters can wave to justify this poorly-designed, poorly-considered, inequitable and regressive tax. School boards should respond to that demand with a single word: No.

And finally, the city’s arts tax only muddies the school-funding picture for the public and policymakers. It’s difficult to recognize the structural problems plaguing K-12 education with such Frankenstein funding like the arts tax blurring the problem.

If Portland taxpayers believe that students at all grade levels deserve a full slate of classes - math, arts, reading, physical education, science and other opportunities - they should lobby state legislators, the governor’s office and local school boards to do their jobs. They shouldn’t fool themselves into thinking they are rescuing the school system with a limited tax, selectively imposed, that specifies arts for only certain students. Send this tax back to the ballot, City Council.

____

The Dalles Chronicle, Sept. 23, on “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”

Early this week, Susan Buce, marketing manager of the Columbia Gorge Discovery Center, was watching news reports pertaining to the Eagle Creek Fire and the devastation it had caused businesses in Troutdale and the western end of the Gorge.

Her Facebook post that the Gorge didn’t stop at Hood River caught the attention of Lisa Farquharson, president/CEO of The Dalles Area Chamber of Commerce.

Farquharson was moved to contact the KGW television station to make them aware of the plight of businesses in The Dalles that were also affected by the freeway closure.

For the first half of this month, both lanes of Interstate 84 were shut down while firefighting activities were underway. The westbound lanes are now open, but the eastbound lanes that carry traffic from the Portland-metro area will remain closed until hazardous dead trees and rolling boulders have been removed.

The fire stripped away the ground cover that kept soil stable in many areas.

Because of Farquharson’s quick action, KGW came to The Dalles Tuesday and interviewed several business owners, who addressed the seriousness of the situation.

“Having 84 cut off was like an artery being severed off,” said Steve Light, owner of Freebridge Brewery.

He and other business owners urged people to make the trip east, even via detour.

“We still have the doors open,” said Light. “We’re serving beer, producing food. Please come to The Dalles.”

That appeal went out to thousands of viewers, thanks to Farquharson’s efforts.

We believe it is safe to say that our local chamber is one of the most dynamic in the region.

Farquharson and staff have gotten The Dalles mentioned, or garnered stories, in the Smithsonian magazine and many other publications.

Between January 2015 and March 2017 alone, the Dalles has been commented upon or covered in 129 stories in varied publications.

An article in Road Runner Magazine alone would have cost $40,700 in advertising dollars, said Farquharson, who hosted the riders and photographers a couple years ago.

This exposure for the community has been circulated to 11 million in printed form and online to 81 million during 2016-17.

Perhaps the biggest proof that the chamber’s marketing and promotional campaigns are effective - including staging the Northwest Cherry Festival and promoting the Fort Dalles Fourth, Cruise the Gorge and Columbia Gorge Fiber Festival - is the boost in lodging tax revenue since Farquharson took the helm in 2012.

The proof’s in the pudding when you look at the numbers.

A Sept. 18 report by Dean Runyan Associates on behalf of Travel Oregon shows that travel spending in Wasco County grew by $116 million in 2016.

According to the firm, direct travel spending in our county increased by 6.9 percent compared with 2015’s $108.5 million.

Spending in the northern sector of the county totaled $73.1 million, and in South County $42.9 million.

Overnight visitors represented the biggest slice of travel spending, about $77 million in 2016.

Accommodations topped the commodities purchased list, capturing $37.4 million, followed by food service at $29.5 million.

Arts, entertainment and recreation garnered $16.1 million in visitor spending (14.2 percent), followed by retail sales at $13 million (11.5 percent) and food stores at $10.6 million (9.4 percent).

Overnight travelers spent about $146 in Wasco County per person, averaging $67 per day over a 2.1-night length of stay.

Farquharson believes those numbers can be boosted even higher, because occupancy rates at local motels only average 47 percent in the winter, and 80 percent in August, a peak travel season.

With her high level of enthusiasm, it continues to be disturbing that Mayor Steve Lawrence and some city council members seem intent on stripping the chamber of funds, when it is really the only entity in town with a long enough reach to garner national attention in the marketing and media realm.

This year Lawrence was successful and the chamber lost $28,704, money that it had used for hospitality training, attending trade shows, professional development training and conferences.

While the mayor and council seem focused on channeling funding toward Main Street to revitalize the downtown area, there is already the Columbia Gateway Urban Renewal Agency in play to help with that cause.

If you have two agencies focused on the downtown, then it only seems fair to support the chamber’s efforts on behalf of the entire town.

The chamber is the official visitor’s center for the city and it excels at that job. So, why would Lawrence and the council initiate a process that could end up in another cut to the $215,140 given to the chamber by the city in room tax funds?

At Monday’s meeting, plenty of people were present from organizations who appeared interested in a slice of that pie.

However, room taxes that are meant to put “heads in beds” should not be used to clean streets or for any purpose not directly tied to tourism.

Bottom line, people who aren’t familiar with an area are unlikely to call city hall for information about where to stay and what to do while in town. It is a cultural practice to look up the chamber at your chosen destination, or access its website, to find out more about available services.

Once again we find ourselves saying, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”

____

Baker City Herald, Sept. 22, on audit of Portland School District spending

We’re pleased that Oregon Secretary of State Dennis Richardson seems to share our distaste for the practice of public agencies using tax dollars to sue people who ask for records to which they’re legally entitled.

The Associated Press, in a story published in an issue of the Herald last week, reported that this problem is not limited to Oregon. The story examined several cases, including the lawsuit the Portland School District filed in April against a parent activist and a journalist who sought public records about district employees who had been put on paid leave.

Richardson responded by announcing that his agency, which is responsible for auditing public agencies, will examine the Portland School District’s spending. Richardson told The Oregonian that he ordered the audit in part based on complaints from Portland residents who are upset about the lawsuit.

Portland School District officials argue that they filed the lawsuit not to retaliate against the people who sought public records, but because Oregon’s 1973 Public Records Law is not clear. The district contends that the only way to clarify whether the records are exempt from public disclosure is to sue.

We disagree.

The law includes appeal provisions that require legal experts - typically the local district attorney - to review contested public records requests.

In the Portland Schools case, for instance, the school district denied the records request from the citizen and the journalist. The two requesters appealed that denial, and Multnomah County District Attorney Rod Underhill, after reviewing the state law, overruled the district and ordered it to release the records.

In other words, Multnomah County’s top legal official decided that in this case the law indeed is clear, and the record regarding school employees on paid leave are not exempt from public disclosure.

Considering the school district’s stubbornness in this matter, we eagerly await the results of the state audit, and we hope Richardson remains vigilant in examining how public dollars are spent.