County places tax on May ballot.

Byline: Matt Cooper The Register-Guard

The Lane County commissioners voted Wednesday to put their recently enacted income tax on the May 15 ballot, recognizing the likely success of a petition drive to let voters decide the fate of the tax.

A 3-2 majority said the county faces a fiscal emergency that can't await the outcome of the petition process, which, if successful, would force a public vote on the tax no sooner than the fall. At the same time, board Chairman Faye Stewart said he doubts voters will approve the tax in May.

"My gut feeling is it may not pass," Stewart said after the board vote. "It's going to be a real uphill battle to get it to pass."

Stewart and Commissioners Bill Dwyer and Bobby Green voted to put the tax on the May ballot. The same trio voted in February to enact the 1.1 percent income tax rather than put it on the ballot, but their reversal Wednesday reflects the importance they place on using the tax to avoid cutting hundreds of jobs if Congress discontinues $47 million in annual timber payments.

The enactment of the first-ever countywide income tax sparked a citizens' drive to put the tax up to a vote of the people.

Petitioners collected more than 6,500 signatures Saturday, and elections officials said 97 percent of them appear valid - well over the 5,577 necessary to force a public vote on the tax.

The signatures won't be confirmed for more than a week.

If Congress doesn't renew the timber money, Stewart said the board's only way to avoid cutting services and laying off 250 workers before July 1 is to put the tax on the May ballot and hope voters approve it.

Stewart said the board majority acted to satisfy citizens who want to vote on the tax. But Bob Hooker, a chief petitioner for the effort to put the tax up to a vote, said the board should have repealed the tax because voters rejected an income tax for public safety in November.

Hooker echoed the words of Commissioner Peter Sorenson, who wanted to repeal the tax and said putting it before the voters is like `poking them in the face with a hot poker and saying, `you're going to vote on this, you're going to vote on this.' '

"The right thing would have been to repeal it, because that's what the people of Lane County wanted," said Hooker, adding that his group will publicize problems with the tax.

Santa Clara resident Carole Grappo, a vocal critic who says the tax would be too hard on low-income earners, said the board should have postponed the public vote until the fall to allow more time to engage citizens on the issue.

Sorenson and Commissioner Bill Fleenor wanted to repeal the tax, deferring to what Fleenor called "outrage" over its enactment. They sought a community discussion over the county's fiscal dilemma.

"This is not the best time to go ask the voters of Lane County to approve something that the commissioners want," Sorenson said. "We need to build some trust with the taxpayers."

But the board majority said that without the federal money or a tax to replace it, the cuts to critical county services are too severe.

"Imagine being a senior citizen in Lane County and your only contact with the outside world is getting a hot meal once a day," Green said. "That program is in jeopardy. That's how serious this is."

Green has endured some of the meanest criticism for voting to enact the tax, noting that one caller said "you're the first black person I ever voted for - you'll be the last."

He rejected assertions that the board failed to prepare for an end to the federal money, citing years of county and citizen efforts to address the fiscal dilemma.

The board also voted 4-1, with Sorenson dissenting, to refer a charter amendment to the May ballot that would cap the income tax at 2 percent, dedicate money to public safety and regularly audit that spending.

If approved, the tax would start July 1 and would ensure the preservation of current service levels if the federal money isn't renewed, but would not pay to restore or add services. The rate would be reduced by the amount of timber money received from the federal government.

Oregon's federal lawmakers are confident that Congress will provide at least one more year of payments, but the money is part of an Iraq war-spending measure that has split Capitol Hill and prompted a veto threat from the White House.

Even with the federal money or a tax to replace it, the board must cut $3 million to $5 million by July 1 to cover a gap between costs and revenue, officials said.

Support for the tax may be hindered by the fact that the commissioners have missed the deadline to include information on it in the voters' pamphlet, Stewart said. But the county might provide unbiased information leading up to the vote, he added.

"What we're going to need is a real grass-roots effort from citizens if they want to get it passed," Stewart said.