Skip to main content
Numbers tell stories. Turn to any page in Multnomah County’s three-volume adopted budget and you’ll find a tale—about the rise of fentanyl, the condition of libraries, the tug of war between labor and management, the mood of voters and, most of all, the poverty that local officials seem powerless to alleviate. Last week, WW staff writer Anthony Effinger played storyteller, weaving an account of the county’s accounting (“What’s in Our Wallet?” March 18). He annotated some key numbers in the county budget to highlight how taxing and spending have changed over the past decade. Here’s what our readers had to say:
Harley Leiber, via wweek.com: “Anthony, thank you for this much needed analysis. It clearly lays out how much money there is flowing into the annual county budget and generally what it’s for. And where the constraints on spending are, i.e., a petting zoo on Waterfront Park would either come out of the general fund or Phil Knight would need to set up a 100-year grant.
“With federal cuts in the pipeline for homeless services we will most certainly see more late-stage chronically homeless in tarp, tent, pallet, and cardboard structures dotting the city. How the city/county addresses this increase will be very challenging. One thing is certain; there aren’t enough cans lying around for people to collect for redemption to offset the problem. Something in the general fund will need to be cut.”
Terry J. Harris, via Bluesky: “This is a great explainer of the MultCo budget and how it’s evolved this past 10 years. None of this should be surprising to anyone paying even a little bit of attention: There’s a structural gap between revenue and expenses, and we spend a ton of money on social services. One more thing, though…
“What doesn’t show up very clearly in the annual budget(s) are assets the county owns that are in decline and will need to be dealt with eventually. The county doesn’t really have a plan for most of them.
“There are HUGE capital projects, just over the budget horizon, that are unfunded. The badly needed new facility for the county’s animal shelter is sitting ON the horizon, but gets pushed out yet another year, without FY27 funding, and still without a financing plan for the $55 to $85 million project. Meanwhile, Multnomah County Elections needs a new facility. A grand jury thinks Multnomah County needs new jail facilities. Funding problems are delaying the earthquake-ready Burnside Bridge replacement. (Note well: Only the Sellwood and Tilikum Crossing bridges are currently designed to be seismically resilient.)
“The point being: None of those big and necessary capital projects show up in the context of the county’s (structurally challenged) annual budget until the county decides to start funding them. And it can’t do that until it figures out how.”
Simmery, via Reddit: “I’d be curious to see the difference in how much money goes to administrative staff, including nonprofits, versus 10 years ago. Probably hard to break down, I imagine.
“Edit: and how much goes to consultants.”
Tas50, in reply: “If those services are important we should be doing them in-house with full accountability. Throwing money at nonprofits for essential services is just outsourcing, and it doesn’t matter if it’s for-profit or nonprofit, it’s just wasted overhead.”
PDXResi, via wweek.com: “This might be a hard pill to swallow for many people like myself who are small government minded, but in today’s day and age I’m not sure we can trust contract workers to handle and provide quality services for a reasonable price. It might be time to make a lot of [this] third-party-contracted work government agencies so then we can at least manage the outcomes and even reduce costs. We will need real leadership in place, but it might help.”
Mondor, via Reddit: “Amazing in-depth article that I feel like most voters in Portland should read.
“There is a real unintended consequence with all these ballot measure levies for specific purposes; when other areas are strapped for cash, they can’t pull from these buckets. Maybe a better system is to have [officials] come up with proposals for new services and how to fund them rather than these restrictive ballot measures?
“Either way, I had no idea how our budget was managed and was very interested to learn about it!”
Malikudono, in reply: “I agree to an extent. If the voters specifically agreed to a tax increase to help fund the zoo, I would be pretty pissed if that money was taken away to fund building a new arena for a billionaire.”
Jack Bogdanski, via wweek.com: “But there’s plenty of money for the Blazers!”
Letters to the editor must include the author’s street address and phone number for verification. Letters must be 250 or fewer words. Submit to:
P.O. Box 10770
Portland, OR 97296
Email: amesh@wweek.com
