Income Survey Important For Future Funding For Siletz

The city of Siletz is racing against time to correct what local leaders say is a deeply flawed income survey, one that could cost the community millions of dollars in affordable funding for a new wastewater treatment plant. City of Siletz officials say they first learned of the problem after years of planning with multiple government agencies to finance a long-needed replacement for the town’s aging wastewater treatment facility. During what is known as a “one-stop” meeting, Siletz leaders sat down with agencies such as the Department of Environmental Quality, the Environmental Protection Agency, and other state entities to map out grants, low-interest loans, and loan-forgiveness programs that could make the project financially feasible.

As part of that process, the city renegotiated and modernized its water and sewer agreement with the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians. The tribe agreed to pay its proportional share of the new plant, roughly 45 percent to the city’s 55 percent. With a new agreement in place and a $3 million federal grant secured with the help of Representative David Gomberg, it appeared the project was finally on solid footing. That changed abruptly when the city was told its median household income had spiked so dramatically that Siletz no longer qualified for many of the favorable funding options it had been promised. According to the data, the city’s median household income had jumped from somewhere in the $30,000–$40,000 range to about $83,000.

Local officials immediately questioned the accuracy of that figure, saying it does not match what anyone sees on the ground in Siletz. They describe the town as a working-class community with older homes, modest vehicles, and many residents employed in service jobs, mill work, or commercial fishing—not the sort of place where an $83,000 median household income is realistic. Siletz Mayor Willie Woreman pressed state and federal officials on how the number had been calculated, he were told it was based on Census Bureau and HUD housing data. The timing raised additional questions locally, because the income jump appeared shortly after the city had completed its one-stop planning process, and it did not fall in a normal census year.

Despite repeated inquiries, city staff say they never received a clear explanation of why or how the number changed so dramatically. Officials gathered their documentation and tried to make the case that the new figure was wrong, but were told the data would not be revised and that they would have to wait five years for a new cycle. That answer did not sit well with Woreman, who feared that moving ahead under the higher income classification would mean relying on higher-interest loans with no forgiveness, forcing steep increases in water and sewer rates and leaving today’s children and grandchildren paying off debt long after the plant’s useful life.

Unwilling to accept that outcome, the city pushed back. With support from Representative Gomberg and others, Siletz officials lobbied for a path to challenge the number. Eventually they were told that if they wanted to contest the data, they would have to pay for their own survey, partnering with another qualified agency and proving, through statistically valid sampling, that the official income estimate is inaccurate. As a result the city secured grant funding and entered into a partnership with Portland State University to conduct what is essentially a localized, smaller-scale version of the census focused on household income. However, the burden of proof falls heavily on Siletz.

While the original federal process may have relied on a relatively small number of households to generate the $83,000 estimate, the city has been told it must obtain income information from at least 217 households to demonstrate that the median is lower. To reach the required sample size, the city and Portland State University have designed a multi-stage outreach campaign. In the first phase, Siletz mailed out approximately 276 postcards to randomly selected households. Each postcard includes a QR code that residents can scan with their phones, allowing them to complete the income survey online from home. The goal is to receive at least 217 valid responses, with a built-in allowance for a 20 percent non-response or failure rate.

If the initial mail-in and online response falls short, Portland State University staff will travel to Siletz to conduct door-to-door surveying. City leaders are working to get the word out now so that residents understand these visitors are legitimate and that the effort is not a scam. The survey itself is described as short and straightforward, asking primarily about household income, and officials emphasize that all responses are confidential. Should those steps still fail to generate enough responses, the city plans additional follow-up rounds, including phone outreach to households using city records and, if needed, another computer-generated random selection of residents to contact.

To encourage participation, the city is offering a modest incentive: a $10 credit on residents’ water and sewer bills for completing the survey. Officials acknowledge that $10 is not a large amount, but say it is both a gesture of appreciation for people’s time and a sign of how important the survey is to the community’s financial future. Mayor Woreman stressed that the push for accurate income data is not about government intruding into residents’ lives, but about protecting them. He added that the new wastewater treatment plant must be built regardless—the current infrastructure is outdated and the project cannot be deferred indefinitely.

However, if Siletz is forced to rely on high-interest loans with no forgiveness because of inflated income figures, the result will likely be significantly higher water and sewer rates, and long-term debt that could last far beyond the new plant’s 30-year design life. If the community can prove that its true median income is lower, Siletz may once again qualify for more favorable financing options, including loans with partial forgiveness. One scenario described involves a 50 percent loan forgiveness structure: if the city borrowed $4 million, repaid on time over a set period, the government could forgive half, leaving only $2 million to be fully repaid. Local officials say that kind of assistance could make the difference between manageable rates and unsustainable bills.

Throughout the process, Siletz leaders have emphasized that this is fundamentally about fairness and about making sure outside agencies see the community as it really is—a small, low-income coastal town where people work hard, support one another, and are “all doing fine together,” but are far from wealthy. The current outreach effort aims not only to gather data but also to build understanding. By talking publicly about the survey, explaining the stakes, and clarifying that Portland State University staff may go door to door, city officials hope residents will recognize the legitimacy of the project and the importance of their participation. Survey information can be found on the city of Siletz' website.