No on Measure 36-237 - McMinnville Oregon

10/02/2026

**UPDATE ON THE McMINNVILLE RECREATION CENTER / BOND**

Many of you followed this page during Measure 36-237. That $98.5 million bond measure officially failed in November 2025 by just 13 votes — 4,759 NO to 4,746 YES.

The city has continued working on plans for a new recreation center and a possible future bond proposal. This is **not currently Measure 36-237**; that measure is over. The city has been reconsidering the project's scope, cost, financing, operating expenses and other details.

I'm reopening this page's discussion because I want McMinnville residents to have access to the numbers before another proposal potentially goes before voters.

As additional official information becomes available, I'll be looking closely at the proposed bond amount, estimated interest and total repayment, property-tax impact, construction costs and contingencies, annual operating costs and expected revenue, and what happens to our existing facilities.

Whether you supported or opposed Measure 36-237, I think residents deserve clear information about what any new proposal would cost and exactly what taxpayers would receive.

I'll post the city's updated numbers and source documents here as they become available.

12/14/2025

I just wanted to say to everyone:

Thank you for your hard work, dedication, sacrifice, and perseverance.

Because of you, Measure 36-237 did NOT pass. You helped protect disabled veterans and senior citizens in our community from being priced out of their homes if this measure had gone through.

I know this took real effort.. But nothing worth fighting for comes easy. We won by 13 votes:

YES: 4,746
NO: 4,759

This is what happens when we come together for the greater good of our community.

Thank you again to the wonderful community of McMinnville, Oregon.

10/30/2025

Vote NO on Measure 36-237

Vote No On Mcminnville’s $98.5 Million Blank Check. No on Measure 36-237. By Taxpayers Association of Oregon OregonWatchdog.com The City of McMinnville wants nearly $100 million for a new pool and recreation center—which are luxuries, not essential city services. In this economy, we cannot a

10/24/2025

Ahhh yes… the campaign’s choice to use children wearing “Vote Yes” shirts in promotional material. It’s deeply concerning to see minors used as political visual shields for a 21-year tax bond they cannot possibly understand.

Kids do not grasp:
• municipal bonds
• long-term interest burdens
• levy stacking
• operational deficits
• tax escalators

If a bond proposal stands firmly on its merits, children shouldn’t be needed to sell it. Marketing optics should never replace informed analysis.

Here are the facts that don’t fit on campaign shirts:

▪️ $0.95 per $1,000 of assessed value — and Oregon’s assessed values can rise automatically up to 3% per year.
▪️ Construction inflation is currently 4–6% annually. A $98.5M project can easily swell past $115M before completion.
▪️ With interest over 21 years, taxpayers are realistically looking at a total cost closer to $145M–$150M.
▪️ ORS 287A prohibits bond funds from paying staffing and operations. Once the doors open, the community must pay again through future levies, higher program fees, or cuts to other services.

Transparency means acknowledging the ongoing financial obligations — not just the construction cost headline.

We deserve infrastructure planning based on:

✅ sustainable budgeting
✅ grant opportunities
✅ phased construction options
✅ realistic operating cost projections

Not bundled necessities and feel-good marketing.

For transparency, sustainability, and fairness to those most financially vulnerable:

I’m voting NO on Measure 36-237.

10/24/2025

It’s become very clear through multiple public Facebook posts and town hall promotions, Robert Porter of Mcminville Oregon is actively supporting Measure 36-237. That’s his right, and civic engagement is a good thing.

But when someone chooses to publicly advocate for a 21-year tax bond, voters deserve just as much freedom to publicly question it — especially when it significantly impacts seniors on fixed Social Security, disabled veterans, and low-income households who will shoulder a disproportionate burden.

Let’s remember the facts that don’t fit on campaign shirts:

▪️ $0.95 per $1,000 of assessed value — and assessed values can rise up to 3% per year automatically.
▪️ Construction inflation is 4–6% annually. A $98.5M project can swell past $115M before completion.
▪️ With interest over 21 years, taxpayers are realistically looking at $145M–$150M.
▪️ ORS 287A prohibits bond funds from paying staffing and operations. That means after the ribbon is cut, taxpayers will be asked to pay again through future levies or higher program fees.

Advocates like Robert Porter are encouraging attendance at town halls — and that’s great. Transparency matters. But transparency means acknowledging the ongoing financial obligations, not just the construction cost headline.

And yes — the campaign’s choice to use children wearing “Vote Yes” shirts in promotional material is deeply concerning. Kids do not understand: • municipal bonds
• interest burden
• levy stacking
• operational deficits
• tax escalators

This turns minors into political visual shields. If a bond proposal stands firmly on its merits, children shouldn’t be needed to sell it.

We deserve infrastructure planning based on:
✅ sustainable budgeting
✅ grant opportunities
✅ phased construction options
✅ realistic operating cost projections

Not feel-good marketing and bundled necessities.

Civic engagement is not “profiling.” It’s democracy.

For the sake of transparency, sustainability, and fairness to those most financially vulnerable:

I’m voting NO on Measure 36-237.

10/24/2025

McMinnville residents, Zack Geary – Ward 2 City Councilor and co-founder of Branch Geary Inc., a local design-build firm – is backing Measure 36-237. He’s pushing this $98.5 million bond as a "come together" chance for a new rec center, park upgrades, library, and senior center fixes, having voted with the council to put it on the ballot. But what’s the true cost to us?

This bond could climb to $150 million over 21 years, adding $0.95 per $1,000 of home value – about $217 more yearly on a median home, with automatic hikes as values rise 3% annually. There’s no operating plan, and rising construction costs could burden taxpayers further. Seniors on fixed incomes and disabled veterans might struggle to pay taxes or face rent increases that jeopardize their homes.

It’s relevant to note Geary’s support, given his firm’s construction focus, while others weigh the financial strain. Why support this council-backed bond without considering grants or phased projects? Let’s prioritize our vulnerable neighbors – real community progress shouldn’t risk hardship.

Vote NO on Measure 36-237: Support and Justice for all residents, not only new sites.

10/24/2025

In McMinnville, Margo Bowman is making waves, advocating for Measure 36-237 with a vision of a sleek new rec center, park enhancements, and beyond. It’s pitched as community joy, but let’s look at the real cost.

This $98.5 million bond could grow to $150 million over 21 years, adding $0.95 per $1,000 of home value – about $217 more yearly on a median home, with values rising 3% annually. No operating plan, just climbing construction costs that might burden taxpayers. Seniors on fixed incomes and disabled veterans could face tough calls: cut essentials or risk eviction as rents jump.

Why lock us into this pricey roll of the dice when grants or phased projects could lighten the load? It’s notable who’s hyping the build while others brace for the strain. Protect our vulnerable – a true community cares for all.

Vote NO on 36-237: Fun for a few shouldn’t mean hardship for the rest.

10/24/2025

McMinnville neighbors, let's chat about Marni Cochran.

She's fired up online, urging a YES on Measure 36-237 for that shiny new rec center, library tweaks, and park glow-ups. Her family's all in, dreaming big since 2019 with kids in Zumba, basketball, and gymnastics galore. Sounds like family fun, right? But hold up – who's really paying for the party?

This $98.5 million bond? It balloons to $150 million over 21 years, tacking on $0.95 per $1,000 of home value – about $217 extra annually on a median house, plus automatic hikes as values rise 3% yearly.

No ops plan in sight, just soaring construction costs that could leave taxpayers holding the bag. Seniors scraping by on fixed incomes and disabled vets honoring their service might skip bills or meds, facing rent spikes or worse: the street.

Bundled dreams shouldn't mean bundled burdens. Why not grants or phased fixes first? It's eye-opening who’s selling the splash while we brace for the bill.

Stand up for our elders and heroes – real community cares about all of us. Vote NO on 36-237: Playtime for a few can't price out the vulnerable.

10/24/2025

Spotlight time in McMinnville: Debbie Harmon Ferry is out there advocating for Measure 36-237.

She is part of those who want YOU to befooting the endless bill.

Picture this: A $98.5 million bond morphing into $150 million repaid over 21 years, slapping an extra $0.95 per $1,000 of home value. That's $217 more yearly on a median house, spiking higher as values climb 3% a year.

Fixed-income seniors and disabled vets? They could be staring down tough calls – skip meds to cover taxes, or watch rents jump and risk the sidewalk.

Why let bundled mega-projects lock us in without an ops plan or cost controls? Grants and smart phasing beat tax grabs every time. It's no secret who's cheering from the sidelines while we sweat the levy.

Safeguard our elders and vets – demand plans that don't displace dreams. Vote NO on 36-237: Fun for some shouldn't mean hardship for all.

10/24/2025

In McMinnville, transparency starts with knowing who's pushing the buttons on your wallet. Take Meredith John Maxfield – she's publicly championing Measure 36-237, proudly donning her support like a badge of honor. But while advocates like her envision splashy new pools and upgrades to the library for her "enjoyment," the reality hits harder for the rest of us.

This $98.5 million bond isn't free fun – it's a 21-year tax hike adding about $0.95 per $1,000 of assessed value, potentially ballooning to $150 million in total repayments with interest. For a median home of around 250K, that's an extra $217 a year, and with assessed values rising 3% annually, the squeeze only tightens.

Seniors on fixed incomes and disabled veterans, already stretching every dollar, could face impossible choices: cut essentials or risk losing their homes to unaffordable taxes or rent increases passed on by landlords.Why shoulder this load for bundled, oversized projects when smarter options exist – like grants, phased builds, and private partnerships without new taxes?

It's fair to spotlight those urging you to carry the weight while they reap the rewards. Protect our vulnerable neighbors and demand real fiscal accountability.

Vote NO on 36-237 – because enjoyment shouldn't come at the expense of eviction.