Thank you sir ~ you have summed up precisely what the present conditions are in our coastal areas! We can no longer afford to ignore the obvious problems that are plaguing the Coast and to continue to rely on the “ATM tourists” to suck it up and blindly pay whatever is asked of them is not a solution. Allowing the local communities greater access to the TLT money to fix the issues that naturally come with “hosting” the traveling public is a great place to start turning the tide and saving our beloved treasures before it is too late!
I agree with Mr. Hefferman (previous). 70% communities, 30% promotion. WE NEED REPAIRS; WE DON"T NEED MORE "PROMOTION". I think, by now, everyone knows where the Ocean is.
I get it—repairs are a huge deal, no argument there. But we can’t forget how much local businesses rely on promotion, especially in the slower months. People might know where the ocean is, but getting them to actually come here and spend money isn’t automatic. We need a balance—fix the roads and keep the visitors coming, so it all works together.
Thank you for your reply, Mr. Javadi. From my perspective as a Lincoln Co. resident since 1990, I beg to differ. When I moved to Yachats then, I found highway 101 was paved every 5-6 years, from one end of the state to the other. The failing grade at Moolack Beach caused a 'temporary' bridge replacement at Beverly Beach State Park and it was built with the disclosure that it was rated for an '8 year life span'. That was more than 20 years ago. No new bridge. I can't recall the last time this end of the state saw a complete paving, although they got as far north (from Ca.) as Reedsport. That was 2008, I believe. You see, over on the coast, we are considered a 'honey pot' for the state coffers. We are also small beans - out of sight, out of mind, so to speak. Now, from my other perspective, as an owner of local businesses, people come because we have an 'Ocean', with 'Whales' and 'Serenity' and 'Escape'- judging from the amount of money people THREW at us during covid, I believe that everyone knows exactly where we are. In reality, there is not 1 cent of NEED for more promotion. I have never spent money on advertising- 24 years now. You spend the money on US, the people 'on the ground'. We will take care of the rest. Thank you for the forum, Mr.Javadi. Oh, and by the way- you are going to have to give the people more money. They are running out; 'day-tripping' is all they can afford right now, although they find their way here just fine.
Seems to me that people are never happy. It used to be that the Oregon coast was falling apart because they didn’t have enough business. It was economically depressed. OK, but nowadays there’s too MUCH business? And that’s the downfall of the Oregon coast? I don’t understand… How can there be too much business? That seems like the kind of problem you’d want to have.
Not a single word about the vacation rental owners. We saved all our lives to have a second home at the coast, but have to rent it out to be able to afford it. Stop picking our pockets Every time you need more money! Look somewhere else once in a while. Yes, we have tourists pay some of the taxes, but when those fees add up too much on top of the nightly rate the bookings stop and the guests stop coming. There has been a decline of bookings in the last few years.
Tom McCall’s been dead for a very long time, but his political views of come to Oregon, leave your money, then go back home, is so beloved by politicians that they will kill the goose that lays the golden egg. You can’t live off of tourist dollars. It is like living on candy. 🍭
Good points. Communities need to understand the issues better. Tillamook County last year made rentals more difficult and this year wants to get more money from rentals by raising taxes. One hand reduces funds while the other tries to increase them, all with no real economic analysis. It is not the job of elected officials to pander to retired residents who want to keep the coast to themselves (too late), it is the job of elected officials to plan and make wise decisions. Increasing TLT percentages will ultimately reduce revenue as tourists are subject to economic pressures like we all are. Re-allocating is a great suggestion as long as there is a cap put on the tax. Otherwise short sighted counties will just get greedy.
Please be informed about the short term rental situation. Most of the homes that are successful STR's are ocean front or ocean view homes and run in the $750K to $1.5M+ range to buy. These are not considered "workforce housing" options and should not be confused with homes that should be available for local workers. In Lincoln County, these large luxury homes are now banned from obtaining a rental license and are only available for millionaires to buy. When rich people buy these homes, they are mostly used as a 2nd vacation home and they sit empty for 70-80% of the year. And the middleclass can no longer afford to buy a 2nd home at the coast if they can't rent them to supplement the costs. Lincoln County has created an elitist market where only the rich can afford these ocean front homes and have done nothing to help solve the actual housing crisis. It's a false narrative so they can point to a non-issue as an excuse for their inaction. The county put a cap on licensing almost 5 years ago and we still have a workforce housing crisis. There are 100 less licenses than there was when they banned STRs and none of those homes have gone to help the local workforce. They were all sold to the rich. And we have had the current count of STRs for decades. Folks have been renting their beach homes for generations. And I disagree, we should split the tax 30/70 and use some of the funds to create public/private projects to build more housing for locals. We need to keep and use the tax money locally, not for another tourism campaign that we don't need. My two cents.
You make some fair points—many STVRs are high-end homes that wouldn’t be workforce housing anyway. But the issue isn’t just about those individual homes, it’s about the broader market effects.
First, (and if I’m wrong then please correct me) because STVRs are income-producing assets, they’re valued and priced differently than if they were sold as primary residences. That pushes up housing costs across the board, making it harder for local families to buy homes.
Second, when we assess housing needs for things like expanding urban growth boundaries or applying for grants, we have to count all existing homes in our inventory—including STVRs. That makes it look like we have more housing available than we actually do, which then makes it harder to justify new development under our land use laws.
So while the number of licenses may have gone down, the impact of STVRs on housing availability is still very real. I agree that we need to use more of the TLT funds locally, and investing in housing solutions should absolutely be part of that conversation.
Real estate doesn't work that way. There are different markets and demographics for different categories of homes. As a capitalist, I'm sure you know that what drives a market is supply and demand. If you look today, there are dozens of million plu$ homes for sale on the central coast. And right now, a wealthy buyer can get a pretty good deal (mostly because the market has gotten soft and smaller since middleclass buyers can no longer afford these beach homes - if they can't short term rent them)
There are only a handful of homes for sale in the $350K-$500K range. That's where working class people are buying. Since homes priced in this range are virtual non-existent to buy, that drives up the market price; high demand, low inventory. And when one of these homes does go up for sale, sellers are getting top dollar for homes in this price range. Build more homes in this range and the price goes down. Pretty simple.
And If you look at the real numbers of the housing market, STR's account for only a fraction of the total inventory, not enough to move the market. Especially in the Jumbo class. Again, it's just a false narrative to blame STR's for the lack of affordable housing. STR's should not be put in the "affordable" class of homes. It's apples and oranges.
Last, you can't stop people from buying 2nd homes but by limiting their use, the county has inadvertently created an elitist market where only the rich can now buy beach homes. And would you rather have these ocean front home sit empty for 70/80% of the year or help bring visitors and tourist dollars to the coast?
I agree that supply and demand drive the market, but STVRs don’t exist in a vacuum—they influence those dynamics in ways that aren’t always obvious. The issue isn’t just that every STVR could have been workforce housing; it’s that they shift incentives in ways that make housing more expensive across the board.
First, STVRs are income-generating properties, which means they’re valued differently than homes purchased as primary residences. Investors looking for short-term rental income can outbid local buyers, driving up competition. This isn’t just an issue for oceanfront mansions—higher-end buyers getting priced out move into the mid-tier market, squeezing supply at every level.
Second, when counties conduct a Housing Needs Analysis (HNA) to assess housing supply, they have to count all homes in the market—including STVRs. This creates a misleading picture, making it look like there’s more housing available than there actually is. Since Oregon’s land-use laws require an HNA to justify expanding urban growth boundaries (UGB), this can delay or prevent new home construction, even when demand is clearly outpacing supply.
No one’s saying people shouldn’t be able to buy second homes. The real issue is whether our policies around STVRs are striking the right balance—ensuring we support tourism while also making sure working families and locals aren’t priced out of the communities they help sustain. That’s the conversation we need to be having.
Sounds like a potential Maui/Lahaina, Pacific Palisades problem. Not taking care of the infrastructure. Try to get fire trucks through poorly maintained roads. Where is all the cash from growing and taxing sales of pot going? I thought that was a panacea, or that was how my county commish saw it.
You're hurting me :-). I'm doubting your cred as a Republican. Well done.
I think you have good idea about changing the split on the TLT tax. I think you should go further and split it 70% for local government, 30% to promote tourism.
Another thorny issue is STR. I'm somewhat opposed in general. I don't want to see communities become campgrounds, but property rights?? I do believe in caps.
Totally agree that repairs are critical, but let’s not forget the importance of off-season promotion. Sure, the ocean isn’t going anywhere, but attracting visitors during the quieter months takes effort. That’s when local businesses need the boost the most, and targeted promotion is what fills hotel rooms and keeps restaurants buzzing when the summer crowds are long gone. A balanced strategy ensures we’re not just fixing what’s broken but also keeping our coastal economy thriving year-round.
Big talker here, but maybe we could promote cultural events. The Rockaway Writers Rendevous April 25-26 will bring visitors. Nicholas Kristof will be there as keynote speaker.
Concerts in the blimp hangar?? Environmental conferences at Creamery space??
Yes, there are a lot of issues that need to be addressed in coastal communities. However, local and state officials need to understand that these difficult and complex issues go way beyond tourism.
As a hotelier along the Oregon coast, I believe state and local government representatives need to be fairer in their assessment of the TLT.
While I am not sure of the statistics in Tillamook and Clatsop counties, I would be surprised if they were materially different than our experience on the central Oregon coast. Which means that a vast majority of visitors are fellow Oregonians. In our case, 90% reside within a 2 hour drive. In a very real sense, the TLT is a quasi-sales tax on our fellow citizens.
The dramatic "blame the tourists for crime" is a gross overstatement of what is actually taking place in our communities. Guests of hotels and short-term rentals, rarely generate a drain on law enforcement. For every 100,000 hotel nights, our experience has been less than 0.01% have necessitated any law enforcement involvement. Unfortunately, when we classify people who come from more than 30 miles away as tourist, even when they are not generating any TLT, such as those just passing through, or the unhoused, we can easily misconstrue to the unknowing public what is actually taking place.
Looking at the numbers, more money is spent by our guests on dining, local activities, and events than is spent on hotel stays. And, much more money is spent by visitors on such activities that never stay overnight, and don't generate a dime of TLT.
Why don't we tax these tourism related activities if tourism is really the bane of our communities? Because, not only do citizens not want to spend more of their own money on these local activities they participate in, but, they are not confident their elected officials are spending their money wisely.
The TLT is an easy target. It is easy to add a 2% increase to fund some future unidentified "tourism" related project such as the Lane County Board of Commissioners did recently. It's easier to ask for more money, or a greater split of the pie on something based on emotional reaction than actually taking a good hard look at the numbers.
As a state representative, you have responsibility to look at a problem and possible solutions based on a thorough understanding of a situation, and not just generate some "not in my backyard (NIMBY)" battle cry.
I've often thought there shoud be an extra gas tax along 101, as coastal roads are high-maintenance roads and we really need some safety improvements. But that penalizes the locals unless there's some kind tax compensation. Ugh. I guess the TLT is the best way, but it needs to support ALL the services tourists use: roads, water, sewer, police, fire, .. WRT B&B, Palm Springs recently limited the number of B&B rentals in each of 4 or 5 districts of the town. It made a big difference. RE prices fell dramtically in those areas.
I want to say this does not need to be made into a bill. The chamber board and the city council need to come to an agreement on how things will be spent. Our chamber agreed to give the city anything left over at the end of the year to be spent on this very issue, toilets, parking, housing, road repair. We know these are issues that plague the coastal communities and a willing to work with city council to find a solution. But we all want to know that the funds are going to be spent how they say they will on both sides. Transparency is an absolute must between chamber members and city councilors. We are so small on the coast we need to come together and fix the greater need. Yes we don't need more tourism so to speak, however if our businesses don't have that tourism they fail. This happened only a few years back where we lost many many businesses along the coast because tourism slowed. I understand and respect where you are coming from. However maybe conversation between these entities needs to happen first rather than changing a bill or law.
I assume you favor the 50/50 going back to 2003 increases as opposed to net new increases if ORS320 was changed tomorrow? With more funds available to communities that already use the TLT as an ATM what is to stop municipalities from just increasing TLT when they want to raise funds. Cannon Beach did a 1.5% TLT increase in 2024 only to have locals vote down the project the 70% was allocated for, really they were chasing the 30% for needed City Hall and Police Station IMO. Clatsop County chased the 30% in 2019 to fund jail operations (and are talking about another 2% TLT increase currently). Do you know what the per inmate allocation of funds is for each county jail inmate that comes from Cannon Beach? What are your thoughts regarding non-TLT ways to have visitors contribute to local communities they visit? Overnight visitors are the minority in terms of volume yet we rely on them to fund almost everything. Each community has different needs and the ORS320 rules from 2003 are outdated, but in your proposal what stops one industry and one segment of the visitor population being singled for future funding increases? I appreciate you seeking balance and understanding the business perspective of this issue. After all pretty much all businesses on the Oregon Coast are local businesses and we don't want to end up like Colorado in the early 90s. https://longwoods-intl.com/archives/rise-and-fall-colorado-tourism/
Some of the problems have been exacerbated by too cozy relationships between government and developers, which is keenly suffered in Pacific City, where the Pelican Pub has expanded into Hotel, condos, shops, and high end restaurants that have taken over the public parking lot and now forces locals trying to use our own beach to pay $10 to park there. All the local parks that the local communities of Woods, Cloverdale, and Pacific City carved out of their development for their use have been taken over by state and county governments that now force us to pay a fee to use the parks we created.
This is theft. The developers of the Pelican tried to take away our airport to produce 'low income housing' that would turn into high priced condos in three years. That would have been theft. What actual low income housing is available is jacking up rents as fast as the law allows, and using every rule-bending trick in the book to jack them up faster.
Get the locals back their parks that they made for their use, and figure out a way to charge tourists and not charge local residents, or we're going to make private parks you won't have any say about or access to. Quit cozying up to developers and robbing local residents, or we'll primary you right out of a job. The coastal woodlands we've preserved and use for our recreational purposes had better not become cash cows for county and state governments or we'll keep county and state governments off our private lands. This crap has gone too far. There isn't one park locals in S. Tillamook County can use without paying for parking - and we already pay for that parking by paying property taxes!
Yeah, I’m a Republican. But honestly, this isn’t about party stuff—it’s about figuring out what works for the coast. We all want the same thing: strong communities and a coast that thrives. That’s what really matters.
Thank you sir ~ you have summed up precisely what the present conditions are in our coastal areas! We can no longer afford to ignore the obvious problems that are plaguing the Coast and to continue to rely on the “ATM tourists” to suck it up and blindly pay whatever is asked of them is not a solution. Allowing the local communities greater access to the TLT money to fix the issues that naturally come with “hosting” the traveling public is a great place to start turning the tide and saving our beloved treasures before it is too late!
I agree with Mr. Hefferman (previous). 70% communities, 30% promotion. WE NEED REPAIRS; WE DON"T NEED MORE "PROMOTION". I think, by now, everyone knows where the Ocean is.
I get it—repairs are a huge deal, no argument there. But we can’t forget how much local businesses rely on promotion, especially in the slower months. People might know where the ocean is, but getting them to actually come here and spend money isn’t automatic. We need a balance—fix the roads and keep the visitors coming, so it all works together.
Thank you for your reply, Mr. Javadi. From my perspective as a Lincoln Co. resident since 1990, I beg to differ. When I moved to Yachats then, I found highway 101 was paved every 5-6 years, from one end of the state to the other. The failing grade at Moolack Beach caused a 'temporary' bridge replacement at Beverly Beach State Park and it was built with the disclosure that it was rated for an '8 year life span'. That was more than 20 years ago. No new bridge. I can't recall the last time this end of the state saw a complete paving, although they got as far north (from Ca.) as Reedsport. That was 2008, I believe. You see, over on the coast, we are considered a 'honey pot' for the state coffers. We are also small beans - out of sight, out of mind, so to speak. Now, from my other perspective, as an owner of local businesses, people come because we have an 'Ocean', with 'Whales' and 'Serenity' and 'Escape'- judging from the amount of money people THREW at us during covid, I believe that everyone knows exactly where we are. In reality, there is not 1 cent of NEED for more promotion. I have never spent money on advertising- 24 years now. You spend the money on US, the people 'on the ground'. We will take care of the rest. Thank you for the forum, Mr.Javadi. Oh, and by the way- you are going to have to give the people more money. They are running out; 'day-tripping' is all they can afford right now, although they find their way here just fine.
Seems to me that people are never happy. It used to be that the Oregon coast was falling apart because they didn’t have enough business. It was economically depressed. OK, but nowadays there’s too MUCH business? And that’s the downfall of the Oregon coast? I don’t understand… How can there be too much business? That seems like the kind of problem you’d want to have.
Not a single word about the vacation rental owners. We saved all our lives to have a second home at the coast, but have to rent it out to be able to afford it. Stop picking our pockets Every time you need more money! Look somewhere else once in a while. Yes, we have tourists pay some of the taxes, but when those fees add up too much on top of the nightly rate the bookings stop and the guests stop coming. There has been a decline of bookings in the last few years.
Tom McCall’s been dead for a very long time, but his political views of come to Oregon, leave your money, then go back home, is so beloved by politicians that they will kill the goose that lays the golden egg. You can’t live off of tourist dollars. It is like living on candy. 🍭
Good points. Communities need to understand the issues better. Tillamook County last year made rentals more difficult and this year wants to get more money from rentals by raising taxes. One hand reduces funds while the other tries to increase them, all with no real economic analysis. It is not the job of elected officials to pander to retired residents who want to keep the coast to themselves (too late), it is the job of elected officials to plan and make wise decisions. Increasing TLT percentages will ultimately reduce revenue as tourists are subject to economic pressures like we all are. Re-allocating is a great suggestion as long as there is a cap put on the tax. Otherwise short sighted counties will just get greedy.
Please be informed about the short term rental situation. Most of the homes that are successful STR's are ocean front or ocean view homes and run in the $750K to $1.5M+ range to buy. These are not considered "workforce housing" options and should not be confused with homes that should be available for local workers. In Lincoln County, these large luxury homes are now banned from obtaining a rental license and are only available for millionaires to buy. When rich people buy these homes, they are mostly used as a 2nd vacation home and they sit empty for 70-80% of the year. And the middleclass can no longer afford to buy a 2nd home at the coast if they can't rent them to supplement the costs. Lincoln County has created an elitist market where only the rich can afford these ocean front homes and have done nothing to help solve the actual housing crisis. It's a false narrative so they can point to a non-issue as an excuse for their inaction. The county put a cap on licensing almost 5 years ago and we still have a workforce housing crisis. There are 100 less licenses than there was when they banned STRs and none of those homes have gone to help the local workforce. They were all sold to the rich. And we have had the current count of STRs for decades. Folks have been renting their beach homes for generations. And I disagree, we should split the tax 30/70 and use some of the funds to create public/private projects to build more housing for locals. We need to keep and use the tax money locally, not for another tourism campaign that we don't need. My two cents.
You make some fair points—many STVRs are high-end homes that wouldn’t be workforce housing anyway. But the issue isn’t just about those individual homes, it’s about the broader market effects.
First, (and if I’m wrong then please correct me) because STVRs are income-producing assets, they’re valued and priced differently than if they were sold as primary residences. That pushes up housing costs across the board, making it harder for local families to buy homes.
Second, when we assess housing needs for things like expanding urban growth boundaries or applying for grants, we have to count all existing homes in our inventory—including STVRs. That makes it look like we have more housing available than we actually do, which then makes it harder to justify new development under our land use laws.
So while the number of licenses may have gone down, the impact of STVRs on housing availability is still very real. I agree that we need to use more of the TLT funds locally, and investing in housing solutions should absolutely be part of that conversation.
Real estate doesn't work that way. There are different markets and demographics for different categories of homes. As a capitalist, I'm sure you know that what drives a market is supply and demand. If you look today, there are dozens of million plu$ homes for sale on the central coast. And right now, a wealthy buyer can get a pretty good deal (mostly because the market has gotten soft and smaller since middleclass buyers can no longer afford these beach homes - if they can't short term rent them)
There are only a handful of homes for sale in the $350K-$500K range. That's where working class people are buying. Since homes priced in this range are virtual non-existent to buy, that drives up the market price; high demand, low inventory. And when one of these homes does go up for sale, sellers are getting top dollar for homes in this price range. Build more homes in this range and the price goes down. Pretty simple.
And If you look at the real numbers of the housing market, STR's account for only a fraction of the total inventory, not enough to move the market. Especially in the Jumbo class. Again, it's just a false narrative to blame STR's for the lack of affordable housing. STR's should not be put in the "affordable" class of homes. It's apples and oranges.
Last, you can't stop people from buying 2nd homes but by limiting their use, the county has inadvertently created an elitist market where only the rich can now buy beach homes. And would you rather have these ocean front home sit empty for 70/80% of the year or help bring visitors and tourist dollars to the coast?
I agree that supply and demand drive the market, but STVRs don’t exist in a vacuum—they influence those dynamics in ways that aren’t always obvious. The issue isn’t just that every STVR could have been workforce housing; it’s that they shift incentives in ways that make housing more expensive across the board.
First, STVRs are income-generating properties, which means they’re valued differently than homes purchased as primary residences. Investors looking for short-term rental income can outbid local buyers, driving up competition. This isn’t just an issue for oceanfront mansions—higher-end buyers getting priced out move into the mid-tier market, squeezing supply at every level.
Second, when counties conduct a Housing Needs Analysis (HNA) to assess housing supply, they have to count all homes in the market—including STVRs. This creates a misleading picture, making it look like there’s more housing available than there actually is. Since Oregon’s land-use laws require an HNA to justify expanding urban growth boundaries (UGB), this can delay or prevent new home construction, even when demand is clearly outpacing supply.
No one’s saying people shouldn’t be able to buy second homes. The real issue is whether our policies around STVRs are striking the right balance—ensuring we support tourism while also making sure working families and locals aren’t priced out of the communities they help sustain. That’s the conversation we need to be having.
That's not my STR. This is my beach home:
https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/115-NW-Lois-Ln-Yachats-OR-97498/60376723_zpid/
Sounds like a potential Maui/Lahaina, Pacific Palisades problem. Not taking care of the infrastructure. Try to get fire trucks through poorly maintained roads. Where is all the cash from growing and taxing sales of pot going? I thought that was a panacea, or that was how my county commish saw it.
What about the Paradise, CA fire? Here you go. People couldn’t get permits to rebuild, so they pulled in mobile homes to move back home. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/camp-fire-paradise-california-rebuild/
And government promoting high density housing increases risk of high dollar fire damage and death. Grrr these lessons fall on plugged political ears!
You're hurting me :-). I'm doubting your cred as a Republican. Well done.
I think you have good idea about changing the split on the TLT tax. I think you should go further and split it 70% for local government, 30% to promote tourism.
Another thorny issue is STR. I'm somewhat opposed in general. I don't want to see communities become campgrounds, but property rights?? I do believe in caps.
Totally agree that repairs are critical, but let’s not forget the importance of off-season promotion. Sure, the ocean isn’t going anywhere, but attracting visitors during the quieter months takes effort. That’s when local businesses need the boost the most, and targeted promotion is what fills hotel rooms and keeps restaurants buzzing when the summer crowds are long gone. A balanced strategy ensures we’re not just fixing what’s broken but also keeping our coastal economy thriving year-round.
Big talker here, but maybe we could promote cultural events. The Rockaway Writers Rendevous April 25-26 will bring visitors. Nicholas Kristof will be there as keynote speaker.
Concerts in the blimp hangar?? Environmental conferences at Creamery space??
Yes, there are a lot of issues that need to be addressed in coastal communities. However, local and state officials need to understand that these difficult and complex issues go way beyond tourism.
As a hotelier along the Oregon coast, I believe state and local government representatives need to be fairer in their assessment of the TLT.
While I am not sure of the statistics in Tillamook and Clatsop counties, I would be surprised if they were materially different than our experience on the central Oregon coast. Which means that a vast majority of visitors are fellow Oregonians. In our case, 90% reside within a 2 hour drive. In a very real sense, the TLT is a quasi-sales tax on our fellow citizens.
The dramatic "blame the tourists for crime" is a gross overstatement of what is actually taking place in our communities. Guests of hotels and short-term rentals, rarely generate a drain on law enforcement. For every 100,000 hotel nights, our experience has been less than 0.01% have necessitated any law enforcement involvement. Unfortunately, when we classify people who come from more than 30 miles away as tourist, even when they are not generating any TLT, such as those just passing through, or the unhoused, we can easily misconstrue to the unknowing public what is actually taking place.
Looking at the numbers, more money is spent by our guests on dining, local activities, and events than is spent on hotel stays. And, much more money is spent by visitors on such activities that never stay overnight, and don't generate a dime of TLT.
Why don't we tax these tourism related activities if tourism is really the bane of our communities? Because, not only do citizens not want to spend more of their own money on these local activities they participate in, but, they are not confident their elected officials are spending their money wisely.
The TLT is an easy target. It is easy to add a 2% increase to fund some future unidentified "tourism" related project such as the Lane County Board of Commissioners did recently. It's easier to ask for more money, or a greater split of the pie on something based on emotional reaction than actually taking a good hard look at the numbers.
As a state representative, you have responsibility to look at a problem and possible solutions based on a thorough understanding of a situation, and not just generate some "not in my backyard (NIMBY)" battle cry.
I've often thought there shoud be an extra gas tax along 101, as coastal roads are high-maintenance roads and we really need some safety improvements. But that penalizes the locals unless there's some kind tax compensation. Ugh. I guess the TLT is the best way, but it needs to support ALL the services tourists use: roads, water, sewer, police, fire, .. WRT B&B, Palm Springs recently limited the number of B&B rentals in each of 4 or 5 districts of the town. It made a big difference. RE prices fell dramtically in those areas.
I really like the idea of a 50/50 split
I want to say this does not need to be made into a bill. The chamber board and the city council need to come to an agreement on how things will be spent. Our chamber agreed to give the city anything left over at the end of the year to be spent on this very issue, toilets, parking, housing, road repair. We know these are issues that plague the coastal communities and a willing to work with city council to find a solution. But we all want to know that the funds are going to be spent how they say they will on both sides. Transparency is an absolute must between chamber members and city councilors. We are so small on the coast we need to come together and fix the greater need. Yes we don't need more tourism so to speak, however if our businesses don't have that tourism they fail. This happened only a few years back where we lost many many businesses along the coast because tourism slowed. I understand and respect where you are coming from. However maybe conversation between these entities needs to happen first rather than changing a bill or law.
I assume you favor the 50/50 going back to 2003 increases as opposed to net new increases if ORS320 was changed tomorrow? With more funds available to communities that already use the TLT as an ATM what is to stop municipalities from just increasing TLT when they want to raise funds. Cannon Beach did a 1.5% TLT increase in 2024 only to have locals vote down the project the 70% was allocated for, really they were chasing the 30% for needed City Hall and Police Station IMO. Clatsop County chased the 30% in 2019 to fund jail operations (and are talking about another 2% TLT increase currently). Do you know what the per inmate allocation of funds is for each county jail inmate that comes from Cannon Beach? What are your thoughts regarding non-TLT ways to have visitors contribute to local communities they visit? Overnight visitors are the minority in terms of volume yet we rely on them to fund almost everything. Each community has different needs and the ORS320 rules from 2003 are outdated, but in your proposal what stops one industry and one segment of the visitor population being singled for future funding increases? I appreciate you seeking balance and understanding the business perspective of this issue. After all pretty much all businesses on the Oregon Coast are local businesses and we don't want to end up like Colorado in the early 90s. https://longwoods-intl.com/archives/rise-and-fall-colorado-tourism/
The 70% promotion 30% communities was negotiated by ORLA. How do you propose to get them to agree to a lesser amount for promotion?
Some of the problems have been exacerbated by too cozy relationships between government and developers, which is keenly suffered in Pacific City, where the Pelican Pub has expanded into Hotel, condos, shops, and high end restaurants that have taken over the public parking lot and now forces locals trying to use our own beach to pay $10 to park there. All the local parks that the local communities of Woods, Cloverdale, and Pacific City carved out of their development for their use have been taken over by state and county governments that now force us to pay a fee to use the parks we created.
This is theft. The developers of the Pelican tried to take away our airport to produce 'low income housing' that would turn into high priced condos in three years. That would have been theft. What actual low income housing is available is jacking up rents as fast as the law allows, and using every rule-bending trick in the book to jack them up faster.
Get the locals back their parks that they made for their use, and figure out a way to charge tourists and not charge local residents, or we're going to make private parks you won't have any say about or access to. Quit cozying up to developers and robbing local residents, or we'll primary you right out of a job. The coastal woodlands we've preserved and use for our recreational purposes had better not become cash cows for county and state governments or we'll keep county and state governments off our private lands. This crap has gone too far. There isn't one park locals in S. Tillamook County can use without paying for parking - and we already pay for that parking by paying property taxes!
Get this fixed, or we will find someone that can.
To the person who wrote this.
What political party do you belong to?
Yeah, I’m a Republican. But honestly, this isn’t about party stuff—it’s about figuring out what works for the coast. We all want the same thing: strong communities and a coast that thrives. That’s what really matters.
Thank you for your honesty I appreciate it.
I believe your answer is exactly why I signed up for your email newsletter in the first place.
I agree with you also. Keep up the good work for this beautiful state we call home.