STATE OF OREGON 1/ote'U ' 'Pamplttet

Special Election

June 3, 1969

Compiled and Distributed by CLAY MYERS Secretary of State

Special Election, June 3, 1969 3

INFORMATION FOR VOTERS (1) Requirements for a citizen to cial election, April 4.,-June 2 qualify as a voter: (Service voters, after January Citizen of the United States. 1 of election year). Twenty-one or more years of age. Application includes: Resided in the state at least six Your signature. months. Address or precinct number. Able to read and write English. Statement of reason for ap- Registered as an elector with the plication. County Clerk or official regis­ Applications filed less than five trar at least 30 days before days before election, May 29, election. June 2, require additional state­ (2) Voting by absentee ballot. ment that: You may apply for an absentee Voter is physically unable to ballot if: get to the polls, or You are a registered voter. Voter was unexpectedly call­ ("Service voters" are auto­ ed out of the county in the matically registered by fol­ five-day period. lowing the service voting Emergencies on Election Day: procedure.) Physical disability m u s t be You have reason to believe certified by licensed practi­ you will be absent from tioner of h e a 1 i n g arts or your c o u n t y on election authorized Christian Science day. practitioner. Involuntary pub­ lic services such as firefight­ You live more than 15 miles ing to be certified by person from your polling place. in charge. You are unable by reason of Ballot, when voted by elector, physical disability to go to must be returned to County the polls. Clerk not later than 8 p.m. on You are a "service voter". election day. You are a "service voter" (3) A voter may obtain from 'liis if you are: County Clerk a certificate of In the Armed Forces or registration if he: Merchant Marine of the Changes residence within his pre­ United States. cinct, county or to another A civilian employee of the county within 60 days prior to United States, serving the ensuing election and has outside the country. not reregistered. (Certificate is A member of a religious presented to his election board.) group or welfare agency If absent from his county on elec­ assisting members of the tion day. (Certificate may be Armed Forces. presented to the election board A spouse and dependents m any county in the state. of a "service voter" who Elector may vote only for state have been Oregon resi­ and district offices.) dents and are tempor­ arily living outside the ( 4) A voter is required to reregister county in which the last if he: home residence in this Changes address by moving with­ state of the "service vot­ in his precinct or moves to an­ er" is located. other precinct or county, or his Application for the ballot may be residence address is changed filed w i t h, or mailed to the for any reason. County Clerk at any time with· Changes party registration. in 60 days preceding the Spe- Changes name. 4 Official Voters' Pamphlet

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Explanation by Committee Designated Pursuant to ORS 254.210 ______5

Argument in Favor Submitted by Legislative Committee provided by Sub- section (3) of ORS 255.421 ______6, 7

Argument in Favor Submitted by Oregonians f'Or Property Tax Relief ______8, 9

Argument in Favor Submitted by Over 65 or Almost Committee ______10

Argument in Favor Submitted by Committee to Clear the Air __ 11

Argument in Favor Submitted by Do Farmers Have a Future Committee ______12

Argument in Favor Submitted by Committee for Sensible School Budget Elections ------·------.------______------13

Argument in Opposition Submitted by Oreg.onians Against Unfair Sales Tax ------14, 15

Argument in Opposition Submitted by Legislators Against Sales Tax ______16

Argument in Opposition Submitted by United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO ------··------17

Ballot Title and Estimate of Financial Effect ______18

Constitutional Amendment, HJR 8 ______,------20, 21 Special Election, June 3, 1')69

Measure No. 1 Property Tax Relief and Sales Tax Explanation By Committee Designated Pursuant to ORS 254.210 The measure you are voting upon concerns the adoption of an amendment to the Oregon Constitution. Approval of this proposed amendment also puts into effect four legislative acts, each a part of the entire proposal. Constitu­ tional law cannot be changed without a vote of the people. Legislative acts may be changed by the legislature without a vote of the people. The para­ graphs below are keyed to the ballot title of the measure. Enacts three percent sales tax exempting food and prescription medicine. Prohibits increase without people's vote. The rate of the state sales and use tax, three percent, would be part of the Constitution and could not be increased by the legislature. All other features ·Of the sales tax are legislative acts, subject to change by any legislature. Major exemptions from sales tax include food for home consumption, feed, seed and fertilizer, services and prescription medi­ cines. The tax would be effective July 1, 1969 and includes taxing hotel­ motel accommodations. Constitutionally dedicates proceeds to reducing property taxes. Equivalent proceeds of the sales and use tax, less administrative costs and approximately $1,300,000 which must go to the Highway Fund, are constitutionally dedicated exclusively for property tax reduction by off­ sets against property taxes. Changes constitutional school property tax limitations; establishes new property tax bases which school districts cannot exceed without people's vote. Elementary and secondary school districts would receive a new tax base in 1970-71 substantially equal to the money available for their operation in 1969-70. The annual tax base increase would be 5% instead of the present 6%. Increases larger than 5% would require a vote of the people. Restricts number of school tax elections, provides uniform dates. Elementary and secondary school districts would be limited to two elec­ tions per year to cover additional operating expenses. The election dates in March and May would be uniform statewide. Increases corporate income taxes. Taxes on corporations will be increased from 6% to 7%, and on financial institutions from 8% to 9%. Resulting revenue is not part of the funds constitutionally dedicated t<> property tax relief. There is no increase in personal income tax rates. Rebates some taxes to low income families. When family income is $3,500 or less a refund of from 10% to 75% of the property taxes paid, not to exceed $300, will be made. The percent­ age of refund increases as the income decreases. Renters are assumed to have paid 25% of their rent, not to exceed $300, as property taxes. This is financed by the state general fund. Prohibits increased property taxes on homesteads of $20,000 or less after owner's age 65. Senior citizens, whose homes are valued at $20,000 or less may have their real property taxes frozen at the age of 65 so the tax will not increase. None of the above proposals will go into effect unless the constitutional amendment passes. DAVID G. FROST, Hillsboro ROBERT E. NEWBERRY, Beaverton KEITH D. SKELTON, Portland Official Voters' Pamphlet

Measure No. 1 Property Tax Relief and Sales Tax Argument in Favor Submitted by Legislative Committee provided by Subsection (3) of ORS 255.421 WHAT'S IT ALL ABOUT Oregon's tax structure was adequate in the past, but it is now out of balance and unable to meet the problems of the present and future. Oregon has two tax systems, (1) a local tax system which is dependent upon the local property tax, and (2) the state tax system which relies primarily on personal and cor­ porate state income taxes. The property tax and income tax are already unduly burdensome and oppressive. Oregon needs a tax structure that will work for years to come. THE PROPERTY TAX PROBLEM The problem is two fold. First, property taxes are too high NOW. Second, they continue to spiral as school, city and county budgets go UP. Fact: Since 1957, total property taxes in Oregon have increased approxi­ mately 120%; actually, every major index or standard of measurement applied to Oregon's property tax indicates that our dependence on this form of taxation is increasing each year. For example, in 1950-51, the per capita property tax in Oregon was $62.40; in 1968-69, it is $189.21. Can we keep going this way? Fact: Comparisons between our neighboring states show that Oregon's aver­ age property tax is higher than California and substantially higher than Wash­ ington. Both have a sales tax. Keep in mind that any real solution to Oregon's property tax problem has to, (1) lower the high property taxes NOW, and (2) keep a lid on them in the FUTURE. AN UNACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVE Some say that we should resolve our high property tax problems by increasing Oregon's personal income tax. To raise enough money to give 25% relief requires a 65% increase in our state income tax. Oregon's personal income tax is now the fourth highest in the nation. Such a proposal would make Oregon's income tax far and away the highest in the nation. Such a plan would produce a completely unacceptable over-dependence on the income tax. Moreover, the voters have twice rejected income tax increases by huge majorities within the last nine years. A RESPONSIBLE ALTERNATIVE A YES VOTE on the property tax relief package, Ballot Measure No. 1, is a responsible alternative to our property tax dilemma. It was developed in three sessions of the Legislature and drew upon the experience of 45 other states which have a general sales tax. A YES VOTE on Ballot Measure No. 1 would solve our unbalanced two-fold property tax problem: 25% PROPERTY TAX RELIEF First: Ballot Measure No. 1 proposes enacting a 3% sales tax with the money constitutionally dedicated for property tax relief, AND the 3% rate frozen in the Constitution. Both of these guarantees can be changed only by a vote of all the people, not by the Legislature. The sales tax will raise approximately $100 million per year. Local property taxes presently amount to $400 million per year on w statewiqe basis. This tax relief measure would reduce property taxes 25%, NOW. KEEP A LID ON EXPENSES Second: Local school districts take 65% of all property taxes, therefore any responsible alternative must deal primarily with schools. Presently, school dis­ tricts can hold, as many tax elections as they have time for, and since most school tax bases are totally inadequate, voters must approve excess levies or close the schools; (Concluded on following page) Special Election, June 3, 1969 7

Ballot Measure No. 1 provides new tax bases, a 5% growth factor, and a limitation on the number of school tax elections. With our schools soundly financed, voters could, if they choose, reject excess tax levies without closing schools, and will not be bludgeoned with election after election until the budgets pass. Repeat: A YES VOTE on Ballot Measure No. 1 will make it possible to vote not more than twice on specified excess tax levies. The votes will be held on special "school election" days uniform throughout the state. The schools will not shut down if the elections fail to pass. EQUITABLE TAX REFORM Despite false claims of opponents, Ballot Measure No. 1 "IS NOT REGRES­ SIVE." It exempts food and prescription drugs, the low-income earners' great­ est expense. It also excludes feed, seed, livestock and fertilizer. In addition, Ballot Measure No. 1 is not regressive because the tax relief package "freezes" the property taxes of taxpayers 65 or over who live in homes valued at $20,000 or less, AND provides for a sliding scale of partial property "tax rebates" for homeowners or renters of households having $3,500 of income or less. By these means, those least able to pay avoid any tax on necessities. Relief is given on property taxes to the old and to the low-income earners. DISTRIBUTION OF RELIEF EQUITABLE Ballot Measure No. 1 will give all taxpayers equal and uniform property tax relief throughout the state. The $100 million revenue from the sales tax which is constitutionally guaranteed for taxpayer relief will be distributed to each taxpayer at the rate of $5.58 per thousand of market value of his property, according to the latest figure from the Tax Commission. Fact: A $15,000 home assessed (market value) at a 2% tax rate will cost the taxpayer $300 in property taxes. Property tax relief of $5.58 per thousand of market value amounts to $83.70 or 24+% property tax relief. Compute your own individual case. Take your "take-home pay." Deduct from it what you pay for groceries, drugs, insurance, savings, house payments, rent, doctors, haircuts, entertainment at home, services, gasoline and car expenses, cigarettes and other non-taxed items. Whatever you have left multiplied by 3% constitutes the MAXIMUM sales tax you can pay. Compare this with 25% of what you pay in property taxes. BUSINESS PAYS Opponents argue that homeowners will receive one-third of the relief and business two-thirds. This is not correct. It is false. According to State Tax Commission figures, homeowners receive more than one-third; business about one-third; and remaining property the rest. On the other side of the coin, Ballot Measure No. 1 enacts a 16%% cor­ porate tax increase which will mean that only four states will have higher corporate taxes than Oregon. Even more significant, all business will contribute substantially to sales tax revenues since most of what business buys will be subject to the sales tax. Every sack of cement that goes into a dam, every telephone pole that is put up, every piece of machinery, each board, beam and girder that goes into a new plant will be subject to the sales tax. TOURISTS PAY Oregon consumers will not be the only ones subject to the tax. Tourists from outside the state will contribute to Oregon's property tax relief program. Oregon will join 45 other states, including all of Oregon's border states, in levying this tax on out-of-state tourists. Sales tax monies from tourists will more than three times pay for state administration of the tax package. VOTE YES ON BALLOT MEASURE NO. 1 This is the most reasonable, sensible, workable and dependable property tax relief package ever to be offered the voters of the State of Oregon. Vote for property tax relief-for long lasting tax REFORM-for tax EQUITY -to KEEP A LID on local expenses--VOTE YES on MEASURE No. 1. Sen. Anthony Yturri-Rep. Floyd H. Hart-Rep. Sam Johnson 8 Official Voters' Pamphlet

Measure No. 1 Property Tax Relief and Sales Tax Argument in Favor Submitted by Oregonians for Property Tax Relief

If you agree that property taxes are too high . . .

If you agree that if something isn't done, they will continue to spiral ...

Then, a fair sales tax is the only constructive alternative. It is the only realistic way to raise the $100 million needed to pay for a 25% cut in property taxes.

Because, here are the alternatives:

1. DO NOTHING. To do nothing (to vote no) will result in property taxes continuing to skyrocket. They have soared more than l20% since 1957. Our property tax rates are highest on the West coast. High property taxes hits hardest those least able to pay. In urban areas, high property taxes lead to neighborhood decline.

2. INCREASE INCOME TAX RATES. This could be done several ways. By eliminating the federal deduction, by adding a net receipts tax, or by simply increasing present rates. Oregon voters have said no to these proposals twice in the past nine years.

FACT: INCOME TAX RATES WOULD HAVE TO BE INCREASED 65% TO PROVIDE AN AVERAGE 25% PROPERTY TAX RELIEF!

3. A FAIR SALES TAX ... FOOD, DRUGS, SERVICES EXEMPT. It is important to look at the overall program. The fair sales tax rate is 3% -and locked into the Oregon Constitution. All revenue is constitutionally dedicated to property tax relief. Food and drugs, the significant items in low and middle income budgets, are exempt. So are services-medicAl: dental and others. Every Oregon school district receives needed tax and election reform. And there is additional property tax relief for the elderly and low income families.

(Concluded on following page) Special Election, June 3, 1969 9

ADVANTAGES OF THE OVERALL TAX REFORM PROGRAM:

1. AVERAGE OF 25% PROPERTY TAX RELIEF.

2. OVERALL PROGRAM WILL KEEP THE LID ON PROPERTY TAXES.

3. TAX REFORM, A BROADER TAX BASE. EVERYBODY SHARES.

4. A FAIR PROGRAM WITH CONSTITUTIONAL GUARANTEES.

5. PROVIDES NEEDED ELECTION AND ECONOMIC REFORM IN ALL OREGON SCHOOL DISTRICTS.

6. WILL MEAN STRONGER EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM THROUGHOUT OREGON ... WITHOUT THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL REVENUE.

7. ADDITIONAL RELIEF FOR LOW INCOME HOME OWNERS AND RENTERS.

8. PROTECTION FOR SENIOR CITIZENS THROUGH A "FREEZE" ON PROPERTY TAXES.

9. INCREASE BY 16%% CORPORATE INCOME TAXES.

10. NO INCREASE IN PERSONAL INCOME TAXES ... PROTECTION AGAINST NEED FOR INCREASING PERSONAL INCOME TAX RATES IN THE FUTURE.

11. WE CATCH THE.TOURISTS!!! (OVER 7 MILLION OF THEM LAST SUMMER)

OREGONIANS FOR PROPERTY TAX RELIEF COMMITTEE John H. Carkin, Chairman 10 Official Voters' Pamphlet

Measure No. 1 Property Tax Relief and Sales Tax Argument in Favor Submitted by OVER 65 OR ALMOST COMMITTEE

VOTE YES

Residents of Oregon who are retired and living on a fixed income or expect to be within a few years have a vital stake in the passage or defeat of this tax measure. Do not accept anyone else's statement of what is good for you. Here are the facts: 1. Property TAXES have INCREASED over 100% in the past 10 years. Left alone this trend will surely continue. 2. A "Yes" vote on this matter would give you approximately 25% tax relief on your home of less than $20,000 value. They never could go higher than they are this year or the year you become 65 years old . . 3. People on fixed incomes buy essentials. FOOD AND DRUGS and many other essentials are EXEMPT from this tax. 4. If your income is less than $3,500.00 per year you will get a REFUND FROM the STATE to OFFSET your TAXES. 5. If you believe: (a) froperty taxes are too high

(b) Inflation will continue., (c) Education costs (salaries, etc.) will continue to climb Then you should VOTE "YES" to let the tourists and buyers of luxury items help pay the cost. Join us in putting a ceiling on property taxes for people who are retired on fixed incomes.

OVER 65 OR ALMOST COMMITTEE William J. Braun, Chairman 534 N.E. 23rd Street Salem, Oregon Special Election, June 3, 1969 11

Measure No. 1 Property Tax Relief and Sales Tax Argument in Favor Submitted by THE COMMITTEE TO CLEAR THE AIR

VOTE YES NO man is average. There is no AVERAGE FAMILY. In three minutes you can figure for yourself how you come out with the property relief/sales tax combination. DON'T BE EMOTIONAL. BE REALISTIC. DO THIS SIMPLE ARITH- METIC. List and add together the following items: 12 x monthly Mortgage payment __ _ 12 x monthly food budget ______12 x monthly gas and oil costs ______, ______Estimate of annual Doctor, Dental and drug bills _ Cost of all annual insurance policies (house, life, car and education) ______All savings ______------TOTAL Subtract yearly take home pay ______Multiply the balance by .03 which is the maximum sales tax you could pay. This is all you could pay because it is all you've got. Now, write down cash value of your home and multiply the number of thousands of dollars by $6.00. That is your property tax relief. Take your pick. The last amount in a lump sum or the first amount a few pennies at a time. Do your arithmetic and you will agree with us that a "Yes" vote is logical when the air has been cleared. THE COMMITTEE TO CLEAR THE AIR Mrs. E. D. Schmitt, Secretary 2323 Harrison Milwaukie, Oregon 12 Official Voters' Pamphlet

Measure No. 1 Property Tax Relief and Sales Tax Argument in Favor Submitted by DO FARMERS HAVE A FUTURE COMMITTEE

Oregon property TAXES have JUMPED OVER 100% in just 10 years.

Property taxes do not go down when crops fail or prices drop.

All farmers know what HIGH TAXES and LOW PRICES do to the inde­ pendent farmer.

While property TAXES SOAR, farm PRODUCTS HAVE DROPPED; some over 50% in the same period. HJR 8 will assure property tax relief ranging up to 25% and LET THE TOURISTS AND CORPORATIONS pay the differ­ ence through a sales tax on all purchases.

The farmer, like others, pay NO SALES TAX ON FOOD, DRUGS or services as well as NO TAX ON FEED, SEED AND FERTILIZER.

If you agree that property taxes are too high and that Oregon needs a revenue source based on ability to pay, join us in VOTING YES on Measure No.1 June 3.

DO FARMERS HAVE A FUTURE COMMITTEE Joe Hobson, Chairman Joe Hobson Ranch Ontario, Oregon Special Election, June 3, 1969 13

Measure No. 1 Property Tax Relief and Sales Tax

Argument in Favor Submitted by COMMITTEE FOR SENSIBLE SCHOOL BUDGET ELECTIONS

VOTE YES

Today when you are asked to vote on school budgets you need to be an expert to know how much is above the 6% limitation and how much has been voted year after year as operating funds.

A "Yes" vote on HJR 8 June 3 will give every school district a new base using this year's operating budget, and limiting their economic growth to 5% per year not 6%. Going to a vote of the people only when they need more than the 5%.

School districts will be allowed two and only two elections per year and these will always be on the same day over the whole state. No more confusion, doubt and ignorance about where and when is the budget election and what does it mean.

With elections on the same day the proponents and opponents of school budgets can run a sensible campaign of dissemination of views and the meri· torious arguments will be more likely to prevail.

Once and for all, let's vote to end the confusion and give our school budgets a level of fiscal responsibility. These are the benefits in the tax vote June 3. Vote "Yes" for Property Tax Relief through constitutionally limited sales tax of 3% with food and drugs being exempt. Vote "Yes" for a New School Tax Base. Vote "Yes" for a lower limit on increased costs without a vote of the people. Vote "Yes" for taxing of tourists and travelers to help lessen Oregon's tax burden.

COMMITTEE FOR SENSIBLE SCHOOL BUDGET ELECTIONS Harold Edmunds, co-chairman 2085 University Street Eugene, Oregon J. W. Edwards, co-chairman Terwilliger Plaza Portland, Oregon 14 Official Voters' Pamphlet

Measure No. 1 Property Tax Relief and Sales Tax Argument in Opposition Submitted by Oregonians Against Unfair Sales Tax

IT'S YOUR MONEY - DON'T LET THEM TAKE IT OREGON DOES NOT NEED A SALES TAX Oregon's Constitution says we can't spend more than we have. The legisla­ ture must find funds for the coming two years before it adjourns. This has been done. Oregon's 1969-71 money needs have been met. YOU CAN'T AFFORD A SALES TAX The sales tax would cost the average Oregon family of four $119 a year, including the cost of a car or other major purchases. After spending $119, the average homeowner would get about $61 worth of property tax "relief." (See tables on page 16.) You can't afford THAT kind of "relief"! For every $100 you may get in property tax "relief" you'll pay $200 in sales tax! If you rent your home or apartment, and earn more than $3500, you will get no tax "relief" of any kind from a sales tax. But you will have to PAY a 3% sales tax on almost everything you buy. You will get ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in return. INDUSTRY WILL GET MOST OF THE TAX "RELIEF" Business, industry, and commercial properties would get two-thirds of any property-tax "relief." It is estimated that a sales tax would raise about $98 million a year. Only $31 million would go as "relief" to homeowners ... BUT HOMEOWNERS AND RENTERS WOULD PAY $75 MILLION IN SALES TAXES-for a NET LOSS of $44 million! THE SALES TAX CAN GO UP The sales tax is NOT limited to 3%! Any LOCAL taxing government could INCREASE the sales tax. The state would HAVE TO ACCEPT the respon­ sibility for collecting it! FOOD AND DRUGS ARE NOT EXEMPT UNDER THE CONSTITUTION Any future legislature can ADD a sales tax on FOOD AND DRUGS-for any reason-WITHOUT A VOTE OF THE PEOPLE. SALES TAX UNFAIR TO MERCHANTS Oregon businessmen will get to keep 1% of the sales taxes they collect. But it would cost them 3.25% . to 20% to COLLECT that tax! It can cost as much as $20 to collect $100 of sales taxes. For all his trouble, the small merchant gets to KEEP ONE DOLLAR! SALES TAX UNFAIR TO FARMERS Farmers will pay 3% more for their farm gasoline, and hundreds of dollars more for tractors and other expensive equipment. If the farmer can figure out how to pass his higher costs along to the consumer, we will end-up paying an indirect sales ta:!t on food, which they tell us is exempt from sales taxation! SALES TAX UNFAIR TO OREGON BORDER CITIES Our businessmen would lose several hundred million dollars each year in income from shoppers who now come to Oregon from Idaho, California, and Washington-TO ESCAPE SALES TAXES in their own states! (Concluded on following page) Special Election, June 3, 1969 15

SALES TAX WON'T BE PAID "MOSTLY BY TOURISTS" Don't believe the argument that tourists will pay a large share of our safes tax. Not true. WE'LL PAY IT. Only 5% of tlie sales tax would be paid by tourists. WE WILL PAY 95 PER CENT! The sales taxes we collect from tourists will not even be adequate to pay back the costs of collecting them! Why drive-away tourists? They're our fastest growing industry, and every dollar they spend here turns over SEVEN TIMES in Oregon! A SALES TAX WOULD NOT PROVIDE REAL PROPERTY TAX "RELIEF" What little tax relief some Oregonians might get would be temporary (and remember, the average homeowner would pay $119 in sales tax to get $61 in tax "relief"). School districts will continue to need more money. So will fire districts, cities, counties, colleges, law enforcement, fire protection, etc. Regardless of any temporary savings during the FIRST year of a sales tax, WITHIN ON}i: TO THREE YEARS, PROPERTY TAXES PROBABLY WOULD BE BACK AT THEIR PRESENT LEVEL-AND OREGON WOULD BE STUCK WITH A SALES TAX! SALES TAX HITS POOR AND MIDDLE-INCOME FAMILIES Oregonians who can LEAST AFFORD more taxes will pay MOST of THIS UNFAIR SALES TAX. NEARLY EVERYTHING WILL BE TAXED-from restaurant meals to household necessities-adding another 3% to the sky­ rocketing cost of everyday living! People in the lower /retired-income, middle-income, and upper-middle-in­ come groups will pay the greatest percentage of their income JUST TO LIVE. Only people in very high-income brackets and who own property worth a great deal can "come out ahead" under this bad and inequitable plan for "tax relief." SALES TAX UNFAIR TO SENIOR CITIZENS In Oregon, Social Security payments are not now being taxed by the state. The unfair sales tax would take up to 3% of your Social Security away from you. SALES TAX ADDS TO COST OF INSTALLMENT BUYING Anyone making a credit purchase would pay a 3% sales tax-PLUS PAY­ ING INTEREST ON THE SALES TAX! . SALES TAX PROVIDES NO PROPERTY TAX "RELIEF" FOR 1969-70* Because of the operative dates of the proposed sales tax, only three-fourths of sales tax revenues will be collected and available by. even 1970 - 71. This means we would be PAYING sales taxes long BEFORE anyone gets any prop­ erty tax "relief'! A sales tax would be very bad for Oregon. How can we get genuine property tax relief? . There are many alternatives to a sales tax . . . and most of them have been available to the 1969 Legislature. They would provide genuine property tax relief for Oregonians most in need of it-renters and owners of homes and farms. These alternatives are ready for legislative action. They can be passed into law within weeks, once this unfair sales tax "package" has been defeated soundly. IT'S YOUR MONEY. DON'T LET THEM TAKE IT AWAY FROM YOU. VOTE "NO" ON JUNE 3RD. NO SALES TAX FOR OREGON! (*As of the official deadline for submitting this material, House Bill 1791 had not been passed into law. If that measure has become law, sales tax proceeds will be available to offset some pr()perty taxes during 1969-70.) OREGONIANS AGAINST UNFAIR SALES TAX Edward J. Whelan, President, Oregon AFL-CIO, Co-Chairman Allen Wheeler, Master, Oregon State Grange, Co-Chairman Ross L. Fanning, City Councilman, Gresham, Co-Chairman Lee Irwin, Treasurer, 1219 S. W. Main Street, Portland, Oregon 97205 16 Official Voters' Pamphlet

Measure No. 1 Property Tax Relief and Sales Tax Argument in Opposition EFFECT OF SALES TAX PACKAGE ON TOTAL TAXES IN OREGON' ( Find cost of Sales Tax in Table I ) (Find Property Tax Relief in Table II) ( Difference between the two is the ) ( change in total taxes ) TABLE I Estimated COST of 3% Sales Tax Annually' Personal Income Family Size (Persons) TABLE U 1 2 4 6/over Property Tax RELIEFJ Under - $ 1,000 $ 30 $ 31 $ 33$-36--- True Cash Property $ 1,000 - 1,999 42 44 45 47 Value of Tax 2,000 - 2,999 50 53 58 62 Property Reduction$-17__ _ 3,000 - 3,999 66 68 75 79 $--s-;ooo 4,000 - 4,999 76 79 86 90 5,000 28 5,000 - 5,999 82 86 94 100 6,000 33 6,000 - 6,999 100 103 110 114 7,000 39 7,000 - 7,999 107 112 119 123 8,000 45 8,000 - 8;999 110 118 128 . 132 9,000 50 9,000- 9,999 118 130 140 147 10,000 56 10,000 - 10,999 121 131 146 153 11,000 61 11,000 - 11,999 125 139 154 160 12,000 67 12,000 - 12,999 129 145 164 167 14,000 78 13,000 - 13,999 133 150 170 175 16,000 89 14,000 - 14,999 137 156 176 184 18,000 100 15,000 - 15,999 145 160 181 189 20,000 112 16,000 - 16;999 154 168 187 198 22,000 123 17,000 - 17,999 163 172 193 208 24,000 134 18,000 - 18,999 172 179 199 216 26,000 145 19,000 - 19,999 181 187 205 223 28,000 156 20,000 and over 190 197 217 230 30,000 167 32,000 179 34,000 190 36,000 201 38,000 212 40,000 223 'Source of information: Oregon State Tax Commission 1,000,000 5,580 'Includes estimates for purchase of automobile ~$5.58 for each $1,000 true cash value in first full year of operation

The above information supplied by and paid for by the following: Sen. Jack Bain, Portland Rep. Gwen T. Coffin, Enterprise Sen. Cornelius C. Bateson, Salem Rep. George F. Cole, Seaside Sen. John D. Burns, Portland Rep. Richard 0. Eymann, Springfield Sen. Vernon Cook, Gresham Rep. Dick Groener, Milwaukie Sen. Edward N. Fadeley, Eugene Rep. Harl Haas, Portland Sen. Al Flegel, Roseburg Rep. Fred W. Heard, Klamath Falls Sen. Ted Hallock, Portland Rep. Norman R. Howard, Portland Sen. W. H. Holmstrom, Gearhart Rep. Richard L. Kennedy, Eugene Sen. Berkeley Lent, Portland Rep. Philip D. Lang, Portland Sen. R. E. Schedeen, Gresham Rep. Grace Olivier Peck, Portland Sen. Betty Roberts, Portland Rep. Wally Priestley, Portland Sen. Glen M. Stadler, Eugene Rep. Jack Ripper, North Bend Sen. Don S. Willner, Portland Rep. Frank Roberts, Portland Rep. Harvey Akeson, Portland Rep. Keith D. Skelton, Portland Rep. J. E. Bennett, Portland Rep. Bill Stevenson, Portland Rep. Jason Boe, Reedsport Rep. Wayne Turner, St. Helens Rep. Bill Bradley, Portland Rep. Howard Willits, Portland Rep. Elizabeth Browne, Oakridge Special Election, June 3, 1969 17

Measure No. 1 Property Tax Relief and Sales Tax Argument in Opposition Submitted by United Steelworkers of America, AFL·CIO

VOTE "NO" AGAINST THE UNFAIR SALES TAX

1. THE UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO REPRESENTS EMPLOYEES IN ALL PHASES OF THE METALS INDUSTRY IN MANY AREAS OF OREGON.

2. OUR ECONOMIC STATUS IS SIM£LAR TO THE ECONOMIC STATUS OF OTHER WAGE EARNERS, SMALL FARMERS, SMALL BUSINESS­ MEN, ORDINARY RENTERS AND ORDINARY HOME OWNERS; ALL TAX PAYING CITIZENS OF OREGON.

3. THE LEGISLATIVE EDUCATION COMMITTEE OF THE UNITED STEEL­ WORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO HAS STUDIED THE PROPOSED "SALES TAX" PROGRAM IN ITS ENTIRETY AND CONCLUDES THAT ITS BASIC DESIGN IS TO SHIFT THE TAX LOAD OF OREGON FROM THOSE BEST ABLE TO PAY ONTO THOSE LEAST ABLE TO PAY.

4. THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE WHOLE STATE OF OREGON FOR THE FUTURE RESTS UPON AN OVERWHELMING "NO" VOTE ON JUNE 3, 1969.

UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO 3661 S.E. 34th Avenue, Portland, Oregon 521 Lyon Street, Albany, Oregon 18 Official Voters' Pamphlet

BALLOT TITLE

PROPERTY TAX RELIEF AND SALES TAX- Enacts three percent sales tax exempting food and prescription medicine. Prohibitsl increase without people's vote. Constitutionally dedicates YES 0 proceeds to reducing property taxes. Changes constitutional school property tax limitations, establishes new property tax bases which school districts cannot exceed without people's vote. Restricts number NO D of school tax elections, provides uniform dates. Increases corporation taxes. Rebates some income taxes to low income families. Prohibits increased property taxes on homesteads of $20,000 or less after owner's age 65. ESTIMATE OF FINANCIAL EFFECTS: The passage by the people of HJR 8 would make operative three state revenue measures. House Bill1055 (Corporation Tax Increase) would increase the rate of taxation from 8 to 9 percent on the taxable income of banks and other financial corporations as defined by ORS 317.055 and 317.060. The tax rate on all other corporations would be raised from 6 to 7 percent of taxable income. The resulting increase would add approximately $6 million annually to the General Fund in the first year. House Bill 1126 (Exemptions and Refunds) would enable the head of household with less than $3,500 of annual household income to obtain a refund from the General Fund via the income tax return that would offset a portion of the property tax he had paid to the county. For the purposes of this Act, 25 percent of an individual's rent would be considered as property tax. Annual cost to the General Fund would be approximately $7.7 million, plus an administrative cost of $125,000. HB 1126 would also provide that the taxes on a senior citizen homestead valued at $20,000 or less could not be in­ creased, and would appropriate $800,000 for the purpose of offsetting the tax dollar reduction because of the freeze. House Bill 1127 (Sales and Use Tax) would impose a three per­ cent retail sales and use tax exempting food, drugs, and other specific items. On an annual basis, approximately $97.7 million would be collected by retail and other businesses. From the amount col­ lected, approximately $1.2 million would be retained by the sellers as a vendor discount, and approximately $1.3 million would be allo­ cated to the Motor Vehicle Use Tax Account, leaving approximately $95.2 million for the Sales Tax Receipts Account of the General Fund. The state would collect the sales tax monies primarily by quarter­ years. The monies would then be credited tD the Local Property Tax Relief Account. The sales and use tax collections for the first fiscal year ending June 30, 1970 (three quarter payments) would be in excess of $71 million. The estimated cost for the administration of the sales tax for the fiscal year 1969-70 would be about $1.5 million. Special Election, June 3, 1969 19 ------

ON THE FOLLOWING TWO PAGES

THE FULL TEX1' OF THE

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO

BE VOTED ON APPEARS 20 Official Voters' Pamphlet

Measure No. 1 CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT Be It Resolved br the Legislative Assembly of the State of Oregon: Paragraph 1. The Constitution of the State of Oregon is amended by creating a new section to be added to and made a part of Article XI and to read: Section lla. (1) As used in this section, "school district" means a district providing public education or educational services in any of the elementary and secondary grades, as defined by law, and includes such a school district that also operates a community college. (2) Notwithstanding section 11, Article XI of this Constitution and except as provided in subsections (6) to (9) of this section, no school district shall exercise the power to levy an ad valorem tax in any year so as to raise a greater amount of revenue than its tax base, as defined in subsections (3) to (5) of this section. The portion of any ad valorem tax levied in excess of any limitation imposed by this section shall be void. After June 30, 1970, there shall be offset against any tax levied by the school district for any year an amount equal to all of the school support of the school district for that year, as defined by law. (3) The tax base of a school district for years following 1970-1971 shall be its tax base for the preceding year plus an additional amount specified in sub· section ( 4) of this section, except that a new tax base may be approved by a majority of the legal voters of the school district voting at an election, held on the date specified by paragraph (b) of subsection (6) of this section, on the question submitted to them in a form specifying in dollars and cents the., amount of the tax base otherwise in effect under this section and the amount of the new tax base submitted for approval. A new tax base so approved by the voters shall apply to the levy for the first fiscal year next following its approval and thereafter shall increase as any other tax base authorized under this section. The tax base of a school district may not exceed any amount that has been prescribed by the Legislative Assembly under paragraph (a) of sub· section (8) of this section unless a new tax base thereafter is approved as provided in this subsection. A tax base is not reduced because a school district levies a lesser amount than permitted by such tax base, or because amounts are offset against the levy of the school district under subsection (2) of this section. (4)Except as provided under subsection (8) of this section, the tax base of a school district shall increase each year by an amount equal to five percent of the tax base of the school district for the year immediately preceding the current year. (5)The tax base of a school district for the year 1970-1971 shall be: (a) The operating levy of the school district, as limited by law, for the year 1969-1970; plus (b) The school support of the school district for the year 1969-1970, as de-, fined by law; plus (c) The receipts of the school district from the County School Fund tax levy for the year 1969-1970; plus (d) Five percent of the sum of paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of this sub- section. • (6) Notwithstanding section 11, Article XI of this Constitution, and sub­ sections (2) to (5) of this section, a school district may levy an amount in excess of its tax base if such amount is approved by a majority of the legal voters of the school district voting on the question submitted to them in a form prescribed by law. An election for this purpose shall be held at a time specified by law. However, after December 31, 1969, and except as otherwise prescribed by law: (Concluded on following page) Special Election, June 3, 1969 21

(a) Not more than two such elections shall be held in any odd-numbered year. (b) Not more than one such election shall be held in any even-numbered year, and then only if the question of establishing a new tax base was submitted to and not approved by the voters of the school district voting at the state-wide primary election in that year. However, two such elections may be held if the school district did not, for the fiscal year immediately preceding the fiscal year with respect to which the election is being held, levy an amount in excess of the tax base of the school district in effect during such preceding fiscal year. (7) Notwithstanding section 11, Article XI of this Constitution, and sub­ sections (2) to (5) of this section, during the. year following an annexation, merger or consolidation, the tax base of a school district shall be determined in a manner consistent with this section as prescribed by law. (8) Notwithstanding section 11, Article XI of this Constitution, and sub­ sections (2) to (5) of this section, the Legislative Assembly by law may prescribe: (a) Tax bases for school districts that are lower in amount than those o-ther­ wise determined under this section; and (b) A method for increasing the tax bases for school districts to reflect increases in the number of resident pupils therein, or to establish or increase a tax base for any taxing unit to permit the raising of revenue to be used as an offset against levies made by school districts. (9) The limitations imposed by this section do not apply in the case of: (a) Levies for the retirement of bonded indebtedness and payment of the interest thereon; (b) Serial levies to raise revenue for purposes other than school operating purposes authorized by the voters of a school district in the manner prescribed by subsection (6) of this section for a specified period; or (c) Levies to raise revenue to be used as an offset against levies made by school districts. (10) Notwithstanding section 1, Article IV of this Constitution, House Bills 1055 (corporation tax increase), 1086 (school election dates), 1126 (property tax exemptions and refunds) and 1127 (sales and use tax), as passed by the 1969 regular session of the Legislative Assembly, shall become law on the effective date of this amendment. ( 11) Except as required by section 3, Article IX of this Constitution, amounts at least equal to the proceeds from any state-imposed general retail sales and use tax that may be in effect in this state, less credits, refunds and administra­ tive costs, shall be applied exclusively for property tax reduction by way of an offset against ad valorem taxes, in a manner provided by law. (12) The Legislative Assembly shall not enact any law that imposes a gen­ eral retail sales and use tax at a rate exceeding three percent, unless such law is submitted to the people for their approval or rejection as in the case of other referred measures under section 1, Article IV of this Constitution. Precinct Name or Number will appear on the Mailing Label

BULl< RATE U.S. Postage PAID Portland, Oregon Permit No. 815