When the 2025 legislative session began, the question around transportation was whether Oregonians would support a bold new approach to funding; one that would begin to wean us off an unsustainable reliance on the gas tax, one that would spread driving-related fees more equitably, one that would make a dent in much-needed maintenance, one that would help us move the needle on crucial goals like saving lives and saving our planet from the ravages of climate change.
By the end of the 2025 legislative session, those questions were left unanswered as a major transportation package fell on its face and never received a full vote in the House or Senate.
Now, as the largest layoffs in state history take hold in every corner of Oregon and the consequences of this massive political failure become tangible, new questions are being asked.
With an announcement from Governor Kotek about a special session imminent, at least one Republican lawmaker is girding himself for the hard choices he’ll have to make to bring the Oregon Department of Transportation back from the brink, re-open maintenance stations, and return workers back to their jobs.
Republican House Representative Mark Owens has represented District 60 since 2020. In May, long before a transportation package had been revealed, he told constituents where he stood on the issue: “I want to be clear about where I stand: I will not support increasing the gas tax or registration costs—while serious issues of waste and mismanagement persist in our agencies.”
Today, Rep. Owens appears to be having second thoughts. One of the 12 maintenance stations ODOT is closing down is in his district.
“In House District 60 alone, dozens are losing their jobs,” he said in his latest newsletter. “These are real jobs, held by real Oregonians.” “Unfortunately, the failure to pass any package means communities like ours are now seeing the consequences first,” Owens continued. “This is about more than plows and pavement, this is about safety, jobs, and what kind of state we want to live in.”
Rep. Owens was a guest on the Harney County Live radio show this morning where he said Governor Kotek will announce details of a special session this week. Owens suspects the package Kotek and Democratic party leaders will put on the table will be a six-cent gas tax increase and relatively modest increases to vehicle title and registration fees.
The bill would be a dramatically pared-down version of the original transportation package proposed in House Bill 2025, which sought a 15-cent gas tax increase and an eventual indexing to inflation. A second version of the bill proposed a 12-cent gas tax, and the last ditch effort by lawmakers in the waning hours of session (HB 3402) sought a meager three-cent increase.
While Rep. Owens said he wouldn’t support any gas tax increase back in May, he seems amenable today.
“[When it comes to a gas tax increase] what would you like me to do?” Owens asked show host Mindy Gould this morning.
“I’m gonna ask you this question, Mindy, live: Are you OK paying six cents a gallon more in gas tax if we could bring those employees back?”
“I would be,” Gould immediately replied.
Owens then said 80% of the people he’s asked that question also said yes. And later in the interview he seemed to lobby for the six-cent increase.
“If gas taxes go up 6 cents, you would be paying an extra $60 a year,” Owens said. “You know, what’s a tire cost if you blow it up in a pothole? Yeah. So that’s what we’re facing.”
Owens also said in the interview that talks are already underway with House Speaker Julie Fahey to identify gap funding to prevent workers from leaving their jobs by the July 31 deadline. That’s just one of several challenging moving parts that will hang over the next few weeks as the politics continues to evolve around this issue. Another big question is whether or not enough Republicans will return to the capitol to give the quorum needed to pass laws.
Given Owens’ comments today, the severity of the funding crisis appears to be changing the political calculus on both sides of the aisle.
Thanks for reading.
BikePortland has served this community with independent community journalism since 2005. We rely on subscriptions from readers like you to survive. Your financial support is vital in keeping this valuable resource alive and well.
Please subscribe today to strengthen and expand our work.
This should be a moment where Oregon leaders realize that the current ODOT paradigm must change, and this is an incredible opportunity. The unspoken truth about ODOT is that government officials see ODOT as a means to bring large amounts of federal money into the Oregon economy. In many ways, the money itself is valued more than the projects that are completed. ODOT could have a critical approach about what is best for transportation and the state, but they have, instead, chased after dollars for mega-highways. They put mega-highway fanboys at the higher levels of ODOT. The 2017 transportation bill was eventually passed because it overpromised something for everyone and became an unfunded mandate with enough plausible deniability baked in for legislators to hold their noses.
The same rhetoric about just needing to get something, anything done, is floating around this transportation package again, but this time, it is a lot harder to make promises after 7 years of ODOT leadership failures and a hostile federal government. We are in this position because leadership roles are filled with people who stopped having new ideas enter their brains 20 years ago. Look at the OTC. Lee Beyer, who was appointed by Kotek, was a horrible choice, and the rest of the commission, is well aware of ODOT’s failures, but has taken no corrective action. Same with Metro. Strickler is basically there to make the I-5 bridge replacement the biggest monster cash cow possible without regard to climate, or the lives of people who live in Vancouver, Hayden Island or Portland.
This last session shows how weak-minded the legislature has become by being obsessed with government cliches. “Compromise,” “sausage making,” “perfect is the enemy of good,” “it’s too hard.” Like national dems, they are fretting over vibes while lacking direction, a real platform, or even the expertise they need to make decisions.
ODOT and the transportation leadership environment is a machine that has been built to produce the climate arson, road fatalities and budgetary collapse that is happening. There is no way that things will improve without serious restructuring.
Wowsers!! This is great! (Clapping emoji)
“The unspoken truth about ODOT is that government officials see ODOT as a means to bring large amounts of federal money into the Oregon economy. In many ways, the money itself is valued more than the projects that are completed. “
I agree 100%!!
The question I would pose is if you think the money is being brought in for the benefit of the population at large or for the politically connected who then donate to these same politicians creating a circle of corruption.
Omelettes =Broken Eggs? We can, maybe, if we had enough resources (rich time), travel further than sound bites can reach.
Comment of the week.
But is that the lesson they will learn? National Democrats don’t seem to be learning any lessons. They seem intellectually bankrupt (as do Republicans, not defending them).
It is difficult to get a democrat to not be intellectually bankrupt, when their billionaire/mega-corp campaign donations depend on them being intellectually bankrupt.
You make excellent and insightful points. Another aspect in the failure of both ODOT and legislative leadership to act on safety and climate is that those priorities don’t have deep pockets to sway decisions. On the other hand the freight industry, and the construction industry, who care little about the environment or the safe use of their products, are very persuasive in using the weight of their influence to shape policy (dollar sign emoji)
How do you propose we fund road maintenance?
I would suggest something like the PCEF but statewide, at a higher rate such as 5%, on any company with more than $100 million in Oregon sales, that sells car parts, cars, manufactures cars, sells or makes car tires, fuel, and transports cars – all receipts dedicated to transportation infrastructure maintenance.
Are you kidding. Business are leaving at the higest rate in the country
You can’t seriously be suggesting more and more fees and taxes, no way
I’ve been thinking about that. For strictly road maintenance only.. each county do a delivery tax of 1% . When I think about how many Amazon, UPS, FED EX drives down my street everyday its truck size running up and down terring up the road
If it’s by county more control over paving and stays in our backyard not dufus Multnomah greedy hands.
1% on what? Gross sales ala the Corporate Activity Tax?
CAT: 0.57% on gross sales. Exclusions to sales include SET/FET (for which the distributor is simply an agent) and 35% of COGS OR of Payroll.
That’s really simplified, but the gist is there.
Since that increase will directly increase teh cost of goods to the consumer, why don’t you just go all in and fund the roads with a sales tax?
The way anybody who pays CAT does it is we put a 0.4% load on all our goods (the .17% differential is for FET baked into our COGS and 35% of the remaining COGS). That means the retailer marks up on that increased price.
Now, I wouldn’t mind a 1% tax on delivered products for companies over $100 million, because after SET/FET and 35% of COGS exclusions we were 1/4 of that, so we’d gain a sudden, very large advantage over our much bigger competitors in OR (with blended margins of around 5%, 1% would be a huge boost to us).
Sorry, I should have said that the CAT produces about $1b annually in revenue. So $10bn over 10 years instead of the $14bn in the original bill and is paid by any business with over $1m in annual sales.
I’m not sure how 1% on delivery sales over $100m compares though for comparison Measure 118’s 3% tax on all business over $25m was projected to raise $1.3bn annually.
Stop wasting money on Round About for one thing
I visited Bend recently and LOVE’d all the Roundabouts they had and wish Portland would wake up and install them all over town!
End all these entitlements, stop feeding the strays, stop supporting this woke crap, end free healthcare for the lazy, hold criminal highly accountable… should I go on?
You probably understand more than most — including even some in leadership — about the depth of management challenges at ODOT. And I truly respect your expertise and insight into how a state agency’s budget should be managed. I’m not here to argue that.
I just want to add a few facts that I believe are important to keep in mind:
And finally, ODOT has been warning about structural budget problems since at least 2017. The agency began making cuts and scaling back projects even then. Unfortunately, no substantial changes were made at the state level to address the issue — and now that the crisis is unavoidable, we’re all being forced to face the consequences.
It didn’t have to come to this, but here we are. I just hope some meaningful lessons come out of it — and that the people most affected aren’t forgotten in the process.
I cannot like this enough- incredibly well-said!
fascinating to see recalcitrant tax refuseniks do math in their heads live
Jonathan, for this statewide topic thanks for focusing on the “east-side” and interviewing a local leader there. The out of pocket cost of a “‘busted’ tire analogy in a pothole” is an apt one [though it does not get into the time costs of waiting for help / towing in the remoter areas of the PNW].
I am not willing to pay $60 each year if it means the Rose Quarter and IBR projects can move ahead.
Seems like they are so determined to do those abominations, they’re willing to keep plowing ahead without funding (somehow?) even if nothing passes.
But agreed. There are so many better things they could spend that money on.
**public employee layoffs
In a year where Intel has laid off many multiples of the ODOT layoffs at a far larger economic hit to state and local governments, it seems like a decent qualification to make.
Good point. I think Intel is laying off over 2000?
Yes, with more to come it appeats.
I’m very thankful for your excellent continued coverage of this issue. Your granular level investigation is so important in understanding the dynamics.
Fund the bus!
It’s neither all that innovated nor bold – Utah passed a $75 fee by referendum a few years ago in lieu of a gas tax increase.
To be fair to the people of district 60, Rep Owens should demand that no Oregon funds be spent on widening the I-5 in Portland or at the I-5 bridge replacement.
Its a crazy conundrum that by continuing to vote straight blue, you’ve actually been greatly assisting in the Rose Quarter expansion and the Interchange Enhancement project.
A lot of people here seem to spend a lot of time protesting their own votes. It’s difficult to understand.
I certainly hope the DSA gets going and finally registers as an independent party to finally give a broader choice than the current mono-party (which consists of the bought and paid for members of the D’s and the R’s).
Republicans would support this stuff even more if they were in power. They just oppose it because they oppose everything, even things they would normally support, if they think it makes the other party look bad.
Bs you demorats waste more money in the Portland area than any were in the state
There already exists the Oregon Progressive Party. See https://progparty.org.
Thank you for that!
I hadn’t realized that they were a stand alone party. They have great positions on things. I really like the “no raw logs exported from Oregon forests” and pretty much the rest of the positions too.
I don’t know why they wouldn’t be doing better in Oregon.
That’s the last thing we need. DSA never proposes policies that are fiscally sound – they are ideologues.
The two party power dynamic has to be broken. I’d rather the group to do that was more conservative (and understood basic economics). However, it is more important that a party with support succeeds to show that it is possible.
Especially after seeing what Tina kotek has spent on homeless. How about asking the odot director to step down since he doesn’t know how to run a budget
No, no, NO! Don’t do it, Dems! You’ll be voting for the unacceptable status quo in which:
Pay no attention to the little man from Harney County.
I guess that since I live in Portland, I am not a real person and I do not hold a real job.
I grew up in a rural area and I hate when people in rural areas say stuff like that.
The phrase “real jobs by real Oregonians” doesn’t imply that either you or your job aren’t real.
No need to take someone’s plea for empathy for others as a dig towards you.
I think his point is that “empathy” only appeared when it was people in *his* district about to lose those jobs.
Therefore, only those jobs are *real*. If all the ODOT job losses had been confined to Portland Metro/Salem he’d never have said a word.
To answer your headline question:
No, I would not pay $60 a year to save ODOT jobs – not as long as ODOT continues the freeway-widening megaprojects AND continues strengthening the “cars and trucks shall dominate” paradigm that is leading us to climate catastrophe.
I want more cycling, walking, and transit and I want ODOT to facilitate these so-called “alternative” modes.
I agree with you, but how are you going to convince the ~%90 of Oregonians who drive everywhere by default that anything other than car infrastructure should receive funding? Especially when everything is expensive and getting more expensive, the only way to get that funding is to raise taxes.
I would encourage them to read BikePortland. 🙂
Just steer clear of the comments.
Not 90%.
Approximately 1/3rd of Americans of driving age don’t have a driver’s license. This goes up in urban areas, among lower SES people and among 16-24 year olds and those 85+
An estimated 9% of drivers are unlicensed – so the number of people who don’t drive is about 25%
That question is a glaring example of what has turned this city and state. But, but, but if each of us…blah blah blah. Dems do that for anything any everything until they’ve taxed businesses and high income earners out of state. Death by a 1000 cuts. No thanks. End the bloat in Oregon or they’ll tax your inner tube next. Oh wait…
How do you know the announcement is imminent? I haven’t seen anything anywhere about it.
It’s been reported by Willamette Week, I’ve heard it from sources, and now I’ve heard it said by Rep Owens and he said it as a matter of fact with a lot of certainty. Therefore I am comfortable saying it is imminent.
It would be great! But, I’m not sure it’s imminent.
I listened to the entire interview with the rep. He said that he thinks there will be one. He also said he’s not sure that quorum could be reached after talking with his republican colleagues.
Willy Week said that the governor is working on a plan for a potential special session before Labor Day. The article also said
A special session won’t be called until two things are in place. First that they know they will reach quorum and second that they have the votes for whatever package they’re pursuing. So far, it doesn’t sound like either are firmly in place.
I want you to be right that it’s imminent! But, that’s not what I’m reading so far.
I don’t think whether it happens this week or not is really that important. And if I get it wrong, that’s ok.
Totally hear you on that.
I think the Oregon voters should choose where the cuts should be made! Obviously, if we let the administrators chose where the cuts are to be made, the voters end up suffering the damaging cuts by letting the roads suffer. Not very surprising!
governing by ballot box is a disaster. let’s look at all the very specific tax measures that voters have passed that don’t support basic maintenance.
They vote for cutting things like bike and transit infrastructure.
They would cut anything that costs more than their house.
I would not vote for anything that didn’t at least include a tax for the heaviest personal vehicles on our streets wearing and tearing without paying anything. EV’s. There should be at least a 250 dollar per year tax on every EV. Which is roughly what the average non-EV driving Oregonian would pay every year at the current gas tax plus 6 cents.
You mean studded snow tires?
Ironically, I wouldn’t support anything that didn’t give EVs a big discount. I don’t have one, but the climate guys I know tell me we have to stop burning gasoline, and EVs are the fastest way I know of to do that at the scale we need.
I mean, it’s getting HOT out there.
EV’s are not the fastest way. The fastest way is to reduce VMT.
The way you do that is make if more expensive and harder to drive an SOV everywhere and use that money to make alternatives more attractive.
EV’s won’t hit 50% of the fleet in my lifetime (based on family history 2052-2055)
Given how we can’t even agree on a modest increase in gas tax to fund ODOT, why do you think “make if more expensive and harder to drive an SOV everywhere” is a viable and rapid strategy?
But we should do both. We’re making slow but steady progress on the EV front. How is the VMT reduction coming along?
Do you forecast VMT reduction will hit that mark?
Both reducing VMT and full electrification of the fleet are theoretical at this point.
Electrification takes building a *LOT* of charging and power generation infrastructure* and getting people to retire old ICE/Diesel vehicles.
*Remember, a huge number of people with cars do not have the luxury of parking them in a garage and charging them with their household current at off peak hours.
Reducing VMT not only doesn’t have the infrastructure costs associated with electrifcation, it would be a net income generator, reduce congestion and provide alternatives to lower SES folks for whom a car is a massive drain on already strained finances.
As for predictions, neither electrification nor reduction in VMT will occur in time to do a lot of good.
Human beings, and Americans in particular are to selfish, short sighted and not overly bright to do what’s best for future generations.
It would take a WWII level of pulling together for a single goal to get it done, and about half the people in the country voted for a party that’s actively dismantling the small gains we’ve made and most of the rest aren’t really behind the changes that need to be made.
This is a good point. It can be addressed in a number of ways, none of which seem to be on the agenda. Some Chinese cars are now using batteries that can be charged in 5 minutes, but it seems likely that tariffs will keep both the batteries and the (inexpensive) cars out of the country for a while. And installing public curbside chargers in areas with lots of renters seems to be something city council has no interest in. Street-only parking is another way that renters get screwed.
Electric cars at least have the great benefit of pulling in the same direction as selfishness — people who drive them largely say they will never go back. VMT reduction seems to be much more of a niche product.
To save PBOT? yes
To save ODOT? no
what is the difference?
I am not willing to pay anything to save ODOT. The state of Idaho has roughly half the DOT workers than what Oregon has .Further IDOT has nearly the same Highway miles as Oregon.
ODOT is way heavy on manpower.This means that management is not utilizing the crews efficiently .
Make some cuts at the top and get down to employees that know how to get work done safely and efficiently.
The state of Oregon has more than double the population of Idaho, and a long stretch of very busy I-5 and 84.
Unused highways don’t cost as much to maintain. It’s more complicated than that, but that has to be a factor.
162,088 Lane Miles for Oregon and 107,568 Lane Miles for Idaho. Yea that’s nearly the same. Of course another factor is number of vehicles. Oregon has 4.5 million registered vehicles while Idaho has 1.31 Million vehicles registered. Of course in Idaho that includes Side-by-Sides and ATVs which cant be plated in Oregon.
Instead of a fixed cost, why not a percent of taxable income. How about 1/2%?
Would one need to stay current with their tithe to maintain their driver’s license? I think I’ve seen that system before.
But only on people making over 125k, right?
Oregon spends 28-32 million on DEI training, need I say more!
That’s like 0.1% of ODOTs budget for maintenance, so I would encourage you to say more. I would also prefer that people working at a state agency have some understanding of how to work with the variety of diverse folks who call Oregon home, but that’s just me.
How about they cut the unnecessary such as the 28 million for social justice and keep the essential service it’s not that they need more money they just need to be wise with how they spend it. Last I checked there isn’t a privilege white lane that is in perfect shape that only whites can use while the others drive in the lane next to them that is full of potholes no more new taxes
Because the Equity Office is funded through federal funds and mandated by federal law.
Also, that office is getting some layoffs and reductions similar to other offices across the bureau.
ODOT continued paying overtime. ODOT continued paying 5% for out of class positions. ODOT continued hiring. ODOT continued to write bad checks – and now mom and dad won’t fund their gross negligence, fill up their bank account so they can do it again. The budget has been run into the ground for several years with little to no accountability. It’s as if no one took a deep dive into analyzing expenditures and took the pen away. This situation is actually not rocket-science – its budgeting. There’s no excuse and who’s going to suffer? Oregonians will suffer because safety and people should have been the top priority all along. Kris Strickler and Tina Kotek talk to us like we are stupid and don’t understand how to avoid scenarios like this. We do – most of us budget our accounts on a monthly basis. Of course, this is simple language explaining things on simple terms – any state agency is politicized as soon as they start depending on federal dollars and taxpayers. People did not have to lose their jobs – firing people did not have to happen. Solutions should have been created last year to avoid this. ODOT employees were notified of potential job loss last year. Did ODOT offer furlough days to save money? Did ODOT cease overtime hours/pay? Did ODOT return employees who were making 5% more for working an out of class position? Did ODOT freeze hiring? Did ODOT seek out job share opportunities with other state agencies? NO. ODOT didn’t do anything to protect their workers. ODOT didn’t do anything to solve the problem. ODOT failed.
We need HUGE cuts in government entitlement programs and spending. Kotex and all the Liberals don’t get it Some of that huge amount of wasted money could fund our real needs . We cannot continue increasing taxes and fees.