Portland’s parks and natural areas are integral to the city’s identity, but the city’s parks system faces major financial challenges, including a massive maintenance backlog and generally unsustainable funding mechanisms.  

In a special election this fall, voters will be asked to approve a new, five-year levy to stop the bleeding at Portland Parks & Recreation (PP&R). If the measure passes, it will enact a property tax of $1.40 per $1,000 of assessed property value, running the average Portland property owner about $310 annually. 

PP&R expects the levy to bring in $456 million over the next five years, the majority of which will go toward basic parks and recreation operations. If Portlanders reject the levy, PP&R will be forced to make major budget cuts, pushing parks further into a state of disrepair. Services like restroom cleaning and trash pick-up, community center programs, and nature preservation, would all be affected.  

In 2020, roughly two-thirds of Portlanders voted in favor of a parks levy, which expires at the end of this year. The 2020 measure enacted a tax of 80 cents per $1,000 of assessed property value, meaning the average Portland homeowner paid about $177 per year, or $15 a month. That revenue was insufficient to fill PP&R’s budget gaps, and city leaders determined it would be necessary to raise the tax rate in a new levy. 

Unlike tax programs like Preschool for All and the Portland Clean Energy Community Benefits Fund, which have faced pushback in recent years from Portland business leaders and some elected officials, the new parks levy has been relatively uncontroversial. 

The parks levy campaign Portlanders for Parks boasts endorsements from the tax-critical Portland Metro Chamber and a diverse range of other organizations, including the Portland Police Association, the Coalition of Communities of Color, and the Portland Association of Teachers. Members of Portland’s chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) have also put their weight behind the parks levy measure, framing it as part of their agenda to make Portland a place supportive of families from all income levels. 

While a recent audit of PP&R highlighted issues with the bureau’s fiscal management, leading to some skepticism about approving a new parks levy, the consensus around the measure still appears largely favorable. After all, Portlanders love their parks and value the city’s access to outdoor recreation and nature. Portland residents are also generally happier with the parks bureau’s services than many other aspects of city government. 

Still, some proponents of the measure say the city needs to work on a more sustainable long-term approach to funding Portland’s most cherished public resources. 

“I'm hoping that we talk about how to stop this cycle of underinvestment and deferred maintenance that just continues to lead to all of these even worse problems down the road,” Portland City Councilor Candace Avalos said at a meeting in July, when the Council voted to put the new parks levy measure on the ballot. “I'm ready to have the conversation to start figuring out how we do some other taxation measures that ask those that have the most to pay their share. I will be voting ‘yes’, but want to continue to raise our concerns about how we really invest in the infrastructure that we need.” 

What will (and won’t) the parks levy fund? 

The new parks levy, if approved, would represent a 75 percent tax rate increase compared to the current levy approved in 2020. But years of disinvestment in Portland’s parks system means the additional revenue will be used just to keep the city’s parks and community centers afloat and maintain current service levels. If the city renewed the levy at the 2020 rate, the parks bureau would face roughly $35 million in cuts. If the measure fails altogether, PP&R will face a $90 million budget deficit, requiring mass layoffs and service cuts. 

A report released this week by the City Auditor’s Office highlights the $550-$800 million major parks maintenance backlog that has piled up. PP&R estimates 86 percent of its assets are in poor or very bad condition, and the audit says the bureau made things worse by building new assets without figuring out how to take care of its existing maintenance needs. 

“Parks has added more ongoing maintenance expenses to an already unmanageable maintenance backlog,” the auditor’s report says. 

In light of the auditor’s concerns, the new parks levy has faced criticism for dedicating only a small portion of its revenue to capital maintenance projects. The levy would set aside roughly $2 million a year to capital maintenance, barely making a dent in the massive backlog of needs. 

“The levy reflects that same attitude of kicking the can down the road by dedicating only three cents of every $1.40 to capital maintenance – totaling a paltry $2 million a year,” the Oregonian editorial board wrote earlier this week, explaining its decision not to endorse the levy. “The only way the city could justify a supersized levy is if it were confronting the parks maintenance backlog head-on.” 

If the levy is not approved, however, PP&R’s maintenance backlog will only grow. The levy does dedicate funding for daily, routine maintenance, including bathroom cleanup and minor repairs, as well as natural area and trail preservation. Such daily upkeep can prevent a sitefrom requiring more substantial maintenance in the future. 

“This levy is about protecting what we have, and it provides space for the city government to develop a long-term plan to address the backlog of maintenance, which is a real issue,” Tony Morse, Portlanders for Parks campaign manager, told the Mercury. “But if the parks levy fails, that won’t solve the capital maintenance backlog. That will close parks.” 

In order to seriously tackle PP&R’s maintenance backlog using the new parks levy, the city would need to set a higher tax rate, which may make the measure a harder sell to the public. The auditor’s report suggests the parks bureau will need to address its maintenance backlog through a dedicated, long-range funding plan, and by ensuring it can afford to maintain new assets before starting work on them. PP&R leaders said they largely agreed with the recommendations, and plan to work with Portland City Council to develop a long-range financial plan by the end of fiscal year 2027-28. 

The new levy may not seem terribly exciting, as the funds will largely go toward existing programs and services. Still, some supporters are trying to create hype for the measure, encouraging voters to fill out their ballots during an off-year. Portlanders for Parks and Portland DSA will each lead canvassing events over the weekends leading up to the November 4 election, trying to get Portlanders to think about what the city’s parks mean to them. 

Portland DSA member Jesse Joseph, who’s leading the organization’s parks levy campaign, told the Mercury that Portlanders currently face a choice: to “continue funding the programs that people care about and make sure our parks are safe, or to lose a ton of it.” 

“I think it’s obvious which one is the better choice,” Joseph said. “We definitely need to come up with a different longer-term funding structure to help fund our parks and community spaces…but at this point, we need to make sure that the parks continue to get the funding they need so we don’t see these massive cuts.”