Did Second Ave. Closure Block the Tax?

An East Side reader writes:

Ron Corbett statement "Maybe the community's just not as concerned about it flooding again as the city council is.” And his claim of not knowing why voters rejected the measure is disingenuous.I've voted at Erskine Elementary for most my life, I grew up in the precinct and know it well. Erskine, Bethany, Wash and Franklin are the most reliable precincts on tax issues. Voters at Wash, Bethany, Franklin and Erskine have not voted against a single tax measure (sales tax/ bond issue) in my memory. I confirmed my memory with Linn County voting records from 1999-2011 (1999 is the earliest data on the auditor's website).In 1999 the L.O.S.T. measure for school infrastructure that had an extravagant "wish list" including skywalks for at least two schools (I can't remember all the items, but remember the skywalk for Arthur and McKinley) was defeated in a landslide. Less than 41% of CR voters approved the 10/5/99 measure, but it passed at Wash, Bethany, Franklin and Erskine. Over 60% of Bethany voters, 57.56% of Erskine voters, 54.98% of Wash voters, and 50.5% of Franklin voters approved the measure. Erskine is usually right behind Bethany in positive voting margin on tax issues.All four precincts approved the measure yesterday, but they failed to provide the cushion they have in the past elections to overcome the high no votes in other precincts. Given the margin of victory at these 4 districts is significantly lower than the March 2009 L.O.S.T. flood relief vote, Mayor Corbett and the Council should realize that the no vote in these precincts (and other Eastside precincts) had nothing to do with flood control, the Convention Center, etc. Many voters in these precincts (and other Eastside precincts) have never previously opposed a tax measure, including the 10/5/99 measure until yesterday, and it isn't because they don't care as much as the Mayor about flood control, they are angry about the closure of 2nd Ave, and the tax measure was their first opportunity to show their anger.Certainly not all voters who are angry about the closure of 2nd Avenue voted against the measure, but many voters in these 4 precincts and at other Eastside precincts stayed home, or cast their first no vote on a tax issue, because of the closure of 2nd Avenue.No Linn County precinct came close to the margin of victory the measure received at Bethany. As usual the highest level of support was at that precinct. Even though Bethany voters supported the measure at a more than 2-1 ratio, it was still an over 10% drop in support from 2009. (78.3% in 2009, and 68.1% yesterday) Presumably the no vote would have been higher at Bethany had their Council member, Monica Vernon, not worked so hard to prevent the closure of 2nd Ave. But Bethany still had 110 more no votes than in 2009. Approval at Erskine dropped more than 13% from 2009, when 73.19% voted for the tax, yesterday 58.99% of Erskine votes approved the tax. In 2009 voters at Wash approved the tax by 67.29%, that dropped to 55.38% yesterday. In 2009 voters at Franklin approved the tax by 65.48%, that dropped to 52.54% yesterday. Other Eastside districts that have passed all tax measures, except the 1999 measure, by significant margins soundly defeated the measure yesterday.Unlike the 1999 measure that was repackaged in December 2000 from a sale tax increase to be used for items voters saw as an extravagance to a 46 million dollar bond issue targeted to real school infrastructure needs, which every CR precinct approved by large margins (city wide it was passed by over 73%), yesterday's measure is unlikely to be successfully repackaged. Eastside voters who normally support tax measures did not vote against it because streets might be repaired, or because the money collected may be used for city improvements other than Westside flood control, and they didn't oppose it because it was 20 years instead of 10. They weren't angry about, or didn't cast a no vote due to their anger concerning, the convention center, or the amount of tax dollars wasted on a medical mall when the doctors were never going to relocate away from the two hospitals. Those issues may have factored into voters in precincts not accustomed to automatically approving tax measures, but a large segment of eastside residents who have never opposed tax or bond issues, cast their first no vote because they are furious with the closure of 2nd Ave. This anger has not lessened since their objections were discounted and the Council voted to proceed with the closure, they have grown.

Agree? Disagree? Comment below, as always, or if you want to go more in-depth like this reader did, email me at

I've voted at Erskine Elementary for most my life, I grew up in the precinct and know it well. Erskine, Bethany, Wash and Franklin are the most reliable precincts on tax issues. Voters at Wash, Bethany, Franklin and Erskine have not voted against a single tax measure (sales tax/ bond issue) in my memory. I confirmed my memory with Linn County voting records from 1999-2011 (1999 is the earliest data on the auditor's website).

In 1999 the L.O.S.T. measure for school infrastructure that had an extravagant "wish list" including skywalks for at least two schools (I can't remember all the items, but remember the skywalk for Arthur and McKinley) was defeated in a landslide. Less than 41% of CR voters approved the 10/5/99 measure, but it passed at Wash, Bethany, Franklin and Erskine. Over 60% of Bethany voters, 57.56% of Erskine voters, 54.98% of Wash voters, and 50.5% of Franklin voters approved the measure. Erskine is usually right behind Bethany in positive voting margin on tax issues.

All four precincts approved the measure yesterday, but they failed to provide the cushion they have in the past elections to overcome the high no votes in other precincts. Given the margin of victory at these 4 districts is significantly lower than the March 2009 L.O.S.T. flood relief vote, Mayor Corbett and the Council should realize that the no vote in these precincts (and other Eastside precincts) had nothing to do with flood control, the Convention Center, etc. Many voters in these precincts (and other Eastside precincts) have never previously opposed a tax measure, including the 10/5/99 measure until yesterday, and it isn't because they don't care as much as the Mayor about flood control, they are angry about the closure of 2nd Ave, and the tax measure was their first opportunity to show their anger.

Certainly not all voters who are angry about the closure of 2nd Avenue voted against the measure, but many voters in these 4 precincts and at other Eastside precincts stayed home, or cast their first no vote on a tax issue, because of the closure of 2nd Avenue.

No Linn County precinct came close to the margin of victory the measure received at Bethany. As usual the highest level of support was at that precinct. Even though Bethany voters supported the measure at a more than 2-1 ratio, it was still an over 10% drop in support from 2009. (78.3% in 2009, and 68.1% yesterday) Presumably the no vote would have been higher at Bethany had their Council member, Monica Vernon, not worked so hard to prevent the closure of 2nd Ave. But Bethany still had 110 more no votes than in 2009. Approval at Erskine dropped more than 13% from 2009, when 73.19% voted for the tax, yesterday 58.99% of Erskine votes approved the tax. In 2009 voters at Wash approved the tax by 67.29%, that dropped to 55.38% yesterday. In 2009 voters at Franklin approved the tax by 65.48%, that dropped to 52.54% yesterday. Other Eastside districts that have passed all tax measures, except the 1999 measure, by significant margins soundly defeated the measure yesterday.

Unlike the 1999 measure that was repackaged in December 2000 from a sale tax increase to be used for items voters saw as an extravagance to a 46 million dollar bond issue targeted to real school infrastructure needs, which every CR precinct approved by large margins (city wide it was passed by over 73%), yesterday's measure is unlikely to be successfully repackaged. Eastside voters who normally support tax measures did not vote against it because streets might be repaired, or because the money collected may be used for city improvements other than Westside flood control, and they didn't oppose it because it was 20 years instead of 10. They weren't angry about, or didn't cast a no vote due to their anger concerning, the convention center, or the amount of tax dollars wasted on a medical mall when the doctors were never going to relocate away from the two hospitals. Those issues may have factored into voters in precincts not accustomed to automatically approving tax measures, but a large segment of eastside residents who have never opposed tax or bond issues, cast their first no vote because they are furious with the closure of 2nd Ave. This anger has not lessened since their objections were discounted and the Council voted to proceed with the closure, they have grown.

todd.dorman@sourcemedia.net.