Support BikePortland - Journalism that Matters

Gas tax ‘Yes’ campaign says it’s got $17,000 in pledges, will aim to raise more

Posted by on February 11th, 2016 at 1:21 pm

fix our streets

The campaign named a committee of backers

Five months after a poll showed a slight majority of likely Portland voters would support a temporary 10-cent gas tax to improve local streets, some donors are hoping cash will lock that lead in for the May election.

Backers of a local gas tax have so far pledged $17,000 for the effort, campaign strategist Stacey Dycus said Tuesday.

“We’re going to ask some local electeds to help chip in,” Dycus said. “We’re going to ask businesses to chip in. We’re looking for help from organizations. … Hopefully organizations and businesses and individuals are going to step up and help us tell the story.”

The Fix Our Streets campaign is expected to announce a committee of supporters Thursday. We’ll update this story with the full list of committee members once it has been made public.


Dycus, who has specialized in smaller-budget campaigns, said that though this one might raise enough for a targeted mailing or two, she didn’t think they’d be the best use of its money.

“I’m not convinced that mail is the best way to have impact on a small-budget campaign,” she said. “We’re going to be really counting on earned media, digital and social media.”

Dycus said the campaign has hired her frequent collaborator Jef Green of Polity Group as its fundraising consultant. She added that Mayor Charlie Hales, who isn’t running for re-election, has promised to help the campaign raise money, and that it’s welcoming people who’d like to volunteer to host house parties or recruit volunteers.

“It’s obvious that the petroleum industry is gearing up to fight this; they filed a ballot title challenge in court yesterday,” Dycus said. “Small contributions count, because this is a grassroots campaign. We have to have the support of folks who just want to help us get the word out.”

— Michael Andersen, (503) 333-7824 –

BikePortland can’t survive without paid subscribers. Please sign up today.

NOTE: We love your comments and work hard to ensure they are welcoming of all perspectives. Disagreements are encouraged, but only if done with tact and respect. BikePortland is an inclusive company with no tolerance for discrimination or harassment including expressions of racism, sexism, homophobia, or xenophobia. If you see a mean or inappropriate comment, please contact us and we'll take a look at it right away. Also, if you comment frequently, please consider holding your thoughts so that others can step forward. Thank you — Jonathan

Leave a Reply

5 Comment threads
18 Thread replies
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
18 Comment authors
Eric LeifsdadBeavertonRiderPeejayalankessleryashardonnay Recent comment authors
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Lester Burnham
Lester Burnham

This should also include bicycle licensing and registration. Everybody uses the streets, everybody should chip in. World-class biking infrastructure is wanted but it’s always somebody else who should pay. Time to change your thinking.


So shortsighted for the petroleum industry to oppose this. What will happen to gas sales when all the roads are crumbling? But I suppose being shortsighted comes with the territory in that industry.


Lets hope the anti-gas tax side wins this fight. PBOT is a bad steward of our tax dollars as it is. As I pointed out in detail months ago, the department misprioritizes spending. Heck, the City’s inspector general (whatever he’s called) released a report in 2014 saying precisely this.

PBOT deserves no more money until it stops it’s marketing activities, eliminates any and all diversity and inclusion staff positions and work, and eliminates any non-road construction, maintenance, and safety work.

The petrol industry was right to challenge the ballot title and ballot language. Opponents are right to point out that the list of projects is not set in stone and the ballot language does not ensure that additonal revenue raised will be spent of very specific road construction, maintenance, or safety projects.


There are all kinds of traffic control/safety improvements people would like to see in my neighborhood. The constant refrain from PBOT, one which I have no reason to doubt, is that there isn’t any money for it.

The gas tax increase is a cost-efficient way of getting more funding, charged to road users most responsible for the need for safety improvements. I think it deserves support.


Very nice personal attacks that are permitted here…

Peejay, I dont think ive complained about pro-bike comments here. I have, as i did yesterday, commented about the very clear anti-car opinions here that discourage me from contributing $ to this site or becoming more involved in bike causes here in PDX.

I find it interesting that you would interpret my comments criticizing the prioritization of PBOT dollars toward diversity and inclusion staff to be reflective of a more general opposition to diversity and inclusion. That’s quite a silly and illogical interpretation. It’s also incorrect.

Is it unimaginable that one can value and advocate for enhanced diversity and inclusion efforts while also criticizing wasteful and misprioritized PBOT spending? Really?

It’s dad that expressing a non-comforming opinion here results in personal attacks that are allowed to remain in place and not be moderated. It’s quite maddening and also results in maintaining the closed off bubble here at

I hope Jonathan lets this comment through…