Cascade CounterPoint

The Portland School Board (PPS) wants voters to approve a construction bond measure of $1.8 billion in May. If approved, the measure would authorize the Board to impose taxes on all properties within the district to pay the principal and interest on bonds for the next 30 years. The total cost of debt service would likely be $3.5 billion or more.

In any bond campaign, advocates are saying to voters, “trust us.” Should we trust the school board?

No.

Voters approved a $1.2 billion school bond measure in 2020, which allocated $311 million to rebuild Jefferson high school. Four years later, the budget has been increased to $491 million, but there is no school.

The 2020 bond also included $60 million to create something called the Center for Black Student Excellence. None of the money has been spent, and no one at the district can even explain what the Center will be, who will operate it, or how many students it will serve.

In 2022, the state legislature gave PPS $120 million to relocate Tubman middle school. The money hasn’t been spent, and the district now admits there are no available sites for a new school in NE Portland.

The school board needs to show that it can manage money before asking voters for more.

What if all parents could choose schools based on where their children learn best, regardless of neighborhood zoning or income level? With school choice, they can. School choice programs allow education funding to follow students to the schools or learning services their families choose. It puts parents, not bureaucracies, “in the driver’s seat” of education, helping families customize schooling to meet students’ specific needs and circumstances.

Educational choice for K-12 students continued to expand in 2024. With new laws passed, 75 programs are on the books in 33 states, Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico. According to EdChoice (a nonprofit that promotes educational choice), more than 22 million students are eligible to participate in a private school choice program—about 40% of all students nationwide. More than one million students currently participate in a private school choice program.

Each state’s approach to school choice empowers parents to choose the best options for their children. States can learn valuable lessons from each other’s policy approaches as they craft programs that suit the needs of their own families and voters.

Children are unique, with different talents, interests, and learning styles. A school that works well for one child doesn’t necessarily meet the needs of another. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if students could go to school where they learn best? Universal school choice is the gift that keeps giving, for today’s students and for the future.

At a December 17th meeting of the Joint Legislative Committee on the Interstate Bridge Replacement, legislators were promised that the proposed light rail service to Vancouver, WA would arrive every 6.7 minutes during weekday rush hours.

We don’t need to guess whether this forecast will be wrong. We already know it.

Before the Yellow Line opened in 2004, TriMet promised that peak-hour trains would arrive every 7.5 minutes by 2020.

That never happened. In fact, the Yellow Line only arrives every 15 minutes, 50% below what was promised.

Not only did TriMet planners give the wrong forecast for levels of service, they weren’t even close on the ridership estimates. TriMet predicted 35,320 weekday riders on the Yellow Line by 2020. Actual ridership is 10,611, 70% below the forecast.

The transit agency for Vancouver already offers express bus service to Portland, which is a superior ride compared to light rail. Spending $3 billion to add rail will be a waste of money.

The legislature should cut light rail from the project while it still can.

In 2021, Sherwood School District opened the largest high school in Oregon. At 350,000 square feet, Sherwood High accommodates 2,000 students.

The 73-acre campus includes a 600-seat performing arts center, a football stadium complex, and seven multipurpose sports fields.

The total cost was $186 million, paid for by Sherwood taxpayers.

The Beaverton School District is currently rebuilding Beaverton High School with a capacity of 1,500 students, at a cost of $253 million.

The Portland School District is preparing to rebuild Jefferson, Ida B. Wells, and Cleveland high schools at an average cost of $362 million dollars per school. Each of the three schools will have a capacity of 1,700 students, though Jefferson enrollment is only 459.

The School Board is planning to ask for the money in a May, 2025 bond measure. The details are still under discussion, but the bond must be referred to the ballot by February 28.

Since the new Portland schools will be the most expensive schools ever built in state history, voters should be asking:

What do the school boards of Sherwood and Beaverton

 If PPS Board members can’t answer that question,

The Board of Portland Public Schools has been working to craft a district-wide policy regarding cell phone use at school. During the Policy Committee’s December 2 meeting, board members discussed a draft policy that would require personal electronic devices to be “off and away” during the school day, including lunchtime and in hallways, “so that the device cannot disrupt students or the learning environment.”

During Monday’s discussion, board members said many educators support clear and enforceable restrictions on cell phone use. They cited learning disruptions, technology addiction, and students cutting classes to be on their phones. School staff who testified in support of a phone-free school day described their experiences with class interruptions and behavior-related safety problems. Board member Patte Sullivan said, “Of all the emails I’ve received [from teachers], nothing…has said we don’t want restrictions. They really want restrictions. They want to teach.”

Sometimes freedom requires saying “no” to one thing to say “yes” to something that’s more important. Unrestricted use of electronic devices at school has degraded the academic environment and students’ social experiences. Setting limits on technology use will help give students the freedom to focus on what’s more valuable and important. Creating distance between students and screens would put the focus back on learning, which is what school is all about.

In mid-November, the Portland City Council approved a 1.3-mile extension of the Portland Streetcar in Northwest Portland to service anticipated housing development near the Montgomery Park building.

Council members assumed that the streetcar is a critical mobility option for Portland residents, but the facts suggest otherwise. According to TriMet, monthly ridership in 2024 has been 39% lower than ridership during 2018, despite a rise in population during that period.

The Streetcar is simply irrelevant to most residents. It’s a low-speed, low-capacity, high-cost method of travel that doesn’t go many places. Even for those who love trains, the Streetcar is not practical for most trips.

Historically, Streetcar construction has been paid for by various sources including property owners, parking revenues, and grants. Federal money is always the linchpin. Portland expects to submit a large grant request to the federal government no later than June of next year; but with the election of Donald Trump, those subsidies might not be available.

The Portland Tribune recently reported that Oregon elementary students’ academic proficiency remains “significantly lower than pre-pandemic levels.” It also noted that while every state “experienced a decrease in average assessment scores,” “compared to every other state, Oregon was third last for improvement in reading test scores….”

All children deserve effective educational options that will help them succeed in school. Here are three ways state leaders can help K-12 students get their education back on track when Oregon’s 2025 Legislative Session begins in January:

To really improve education outcomes in Oregon, we need to make it possible for families to enroll their children in the schools that best meet their academic needs and goals.

On November 21, the Oregon Environmental Quality Commission is scheduled to adopt a carbon rationing scheme known as the Climate Protection Program.

The regulation will set a statewide cap on the emissions of human-caused carbon dioxide, and then steadily reduce the cap over time. By 2040, most fossil fuels will be outlawed.

The effects of this cap will be swift and painful. Based on experience in Washington and California, the DEQ regulation will increase the cost of gasoline sold in Oregon by at least 25 cents/gallon, and possibly as much as 45 cents.

None of this will benefit drivers, and it won’t even benefit the environment. Carbon rationing will force fuel suppliers to rely on corn-based ethanol and other agricultural commodities, which will vastly increase the amount of land, water and fertilizer needed to produce automotive fuel.

The Climate Protection Program was ordered by former Gov. Kate Brown, who is no longer in office. But elected officials who ARE in office should note that the number one message from voters in the recent election was that they can’t afford the rising cost of consumer goods.

If state legislative leaders are smart, they will tell DEQ to drop the carbon tax. Elections matter, even in Oregon.

Is more money the answer to Oregon’s abysmal K-12 academic rankings? 

The Heritage Foundation annually releases an Education Freedom Report Card, which ranks states according to

Oregon ranks at or near the bottom of all states in each category, including 51st overall and 35th in return on investment for education spending. Oregon students’ National Association of Education Progress (NAEP) scores rank 42nd in the country, even though Oregon spends above average per pupil annually (the 21st-most

In early October, the Portland Tribune reported that Oregon elementary students’ academic proficiency remains “significantly lower than pre-pandemic levels, with only 31% of all Oregon students testing at proficiency in math, 43% in English and 29% in science.” The Tribune noted that while every state “experienced a decrease in average assessment scores…between spring 2019 and 2022,” “compared to every other state, Oregon was third last for improvement in reading test scores….”

All children deserve effective educational options that meet their learning and developmental needs. Spending more money—in the same district schools that haven’t helped students succeed for decades—isn’t the answer. To show we’re serious about improving education outcomes, Oregon should reinstate graduation requirements, provide school choice including open enrollment across public school districts, and minimize time and expenditures focused on non-academic services and initiatives.

Thirty years ago, an iconic goal of liberal activists was to offer a free breakfast for all public school students, regardless of family income.

In response, Congress authorized a three-year pilot program to test the effects of universal free meals for students.

In 2004 the USDA Economic Research Service published the results of what it called the “definitive data on the impact of universal-free breakfast participation.” The study compared gains in standardized test scores for reading and math for universal-free breakfast participants and nonparticipants, and found “no significant differences.” 

Nonetheless, today more than 90% of Oregon public schools provide both a free breakfast and a free lunch to all students. Activists hope to make it 100% of students in 2025.

If they succeed, it’s unlikely that they will stop there. The next demand will be universal free dinners as well. It doesn’t matter that subsidized meals are unnecessary for most families, or that state intervention undermines the role of parents.

From the standpoint of advocates, the primary goal is to make as many services as possible free to students, whether it’s food, computers, or birth control.

Parents aren’t considered to be important. In fact, they are treated as a nuisance in such matters as school discipline or gender pronouns.

Parents who care about their children should continue to feed them breakfast at home, and pack them a lunch. “Free” is not always a good price when it comes to developing moral character in children.