People for Portland have filed a new homeless tax ballot form to rectify one of the three shortcomings cited by an attorney who rejected the first version

People for Portland have filed a new homeless tax ballot form to rectify one of the three shortcomin ...

People for Portland, a lobby organization wishing to clear homeless encampments in the metro area, submitted a new Tuesday to require that most of the money that Portland-area voters approved for homeless services be spent on emergency shelters.

The modification of the measure came just days after the legal team of the Metro Regional Government accused it of failing to comply with legal obligations.

One of Metro's lawyers was not identified, but the other two, according to a lawyer for People for Portland last week. The judge's decision to a federal court was not supported by the Oregon constitution.

People for Portland, who has advocated for changes in how local governments respond to public safety and trash as well as homelessness, hopes to modify how the estimated $250 million per year in voter-approved tax money for homelessness services is used.

Governments will have to invest 75 percent of their tax revenues to build more temporary emergency homeless shelters and to enforce any anti-camping legislation on their books, according to authorities. It is not humane to allow people to live unsheltered and without access to hygiene facilities.

If the proposal is approved by Metro or the Multnomah County Circuit Court, supporters would have to gather enough signatures ahead of a deadline of September 8 to submit it to voters in Multnomah, Clackamas, and Washington counties.

If the proposed measure were approved, one purpose would be to divert funding from rental subsidies, supportive services, and caseworkers that keep previously homeless people out.

The new proposal is almost identical to the initial proposal submitted on March 25 that was rejected last Friday. It added a clause that Metro's attorney said was required and designated as one of the factors determining the distinction.

The initial petition of a lobbying group failed to explicit all of the regulations it would enforce, according to Metro Attorney Vicky MacLaren. Moreover, people for Portland didn't propose new legislation, but rather administrative details of existing legislation and Oregon's constitution doesn't allow ballot measure on administrative issues.

People for Portland did not change those elements of their initiative petition. The group did not immediately submit a request for clarification.

Nicole Hayden issues an update on The Oregonian/OregonLive hereditary postings. She can be reached at nhayden@oregonian.com or on Twitter @Nicole_A_Hayden.

You may also like: