Hoping to wipe out the stains of the 2025 session, lawmakers who care about transportation have their work cut out for them this session. For a short session, it feels like there are a lot of significant bills up for consideration in Salem right now. With just about a month left for laws to be passed — or be passed over — the tight deadlines mean we’ll know soon which bills have a shot. But as of right now, everything is still in play.
Given that, I figured I’d share the list of 12 bills I’m tracking so far. I’ll start with the House first and then the Senate. If you know of any other interesting bills related to transportation or something else you think I should know about, please pass them along.
House Bill (HB) 4007 – E-Bike Bill
As I reported yesterday this bill does several important things around electric bike regulation and legislation. The big one is that it defines “powered micromobility device” and should add much-needed clarity around separating bicycles from all the other types of vehicles being used on streets these days. HB 4007 also lowers the legal age for e-bikes (Class 1 only) to 14. The reasons for doing so (to acknowledge reality of the market and open up educational opportunities when kids need it most) make sense, but I could see that making some lawmakers nervous.
- Bill overview
- Status: Work session (possible vote) scheduled for Monday, February 9th in House Transportation Committee.
HB 4008 – Transit Funding Task Force
This bill would create a new, 21-member task force to, “Determine the level of funding needed to maintain adequate transit service statewide that is reliable, safe and accessible and allows for population growth over time; and explore funding mechanisms to achieve the funding needs…” Transit funding is a hot topic in Salem right now as Democrats caved to Republicans last session by supporting a sunset on the existing payroll tax that funds transit statewide. Governor Tina Kotek has said as ODOT moves money around to keep the lights on and fund maintenance, transit funding is the only thing that can’t be touched.
- Bill overview
- Status: Public hearing scheduled for Monday, February 9th in House Committee on Transportation.
HB 4009 – EV Road User Charge for E-Commerce Deliveries
This bill would, “phase in a mandatory per-mile road usage charge for owners and lessees of electric and hybrid cars and delivery vans engaged in e-commerce. The Act would allow a flat annual fee in lieu of the per-mile road usage charge.”
- Bill overview
- Status: Public hearing and possible work session February 11th in House Committee on Transportation.
HB 4063 – Legalize Kei Trucks
Kei trucks are delightfully small Japanese workhorses that have become sought after by many Americans. But because of auto regulations, these trucks aren’t currently allowed. This bill has a ton of bipartisan cosponsors and it was vetted in the previous session, so I’d bet on it passing.
- Bill overview
- Status: In House Committee on Transportation.
HB 4081 – Photo Radar in Highway Work Zones
This bill would allow ODOT to create a photo radar program that specifically targets work zones. Given the folks most impacted by unsafe work zones are very popular with politicians, and its broad bipartisan support, this bill is on track to pass.
- Bill overview
- Status: Work session (possible vote) scheduled for Monday, February 9th in House Transportation Committee.
HB 4085 – Self Driving Vehicles
This is the bill I wrote about yesterday that would help autonomous vehicle companies like Waymo unleash fleets of robotaxis by pre-empting local governments.
- Bill overview
- Status: Public hearing scheduled for Monday, February 9th in House Committee on Transportation.
HB 4090 – Eliminates Vehicle Registration Fees
Three democrats (including Senate Committee on Transportation Chair Chris Gorsek) sponsor this bill. It appears to be a way for Dems to talk up affordability by exempting lower-income folks from payment of county vehicle registration fees.
- Bill overview
- Status: In House Committee on Transportation.
HB 4126 – Road Usage Charge Rate
10 Democrats (four from the House, six from the Senate) sponsor this bill which would require ODOT to come up with a rate for a per-mile road usage charge every other year starting this September. The rate would need to be set at a level that, “that would sustainably raise the revenue necessary to maintain the public highways in this state.”
- Bill overview
- Status: Public hearing and possible work session February 11th in House Committee on Transportation.
HB 4129 – Clean Fuels Program
This is a Republican-backed effort to slow down ODOT’s clean fuels program, which mandates carbon reductions in fuels by certain amounts and certain dates. Current law requires a reduction of GHG emissions in fuel by 10 percent below 2010 levels by the year 2025. This bill would cap that reduction by at no more than 10 percent and remove the goal year. This bill also takes direct aim at Portland’s fight with Zenith oil by proposing to make it illegal to outlaw, or limit the size of, fuel storage tanks.
- Bill overview
- Status: In House Committee on Climate, Energy, and Environment.
HB 4175 – Gut and Stuff for Transportation Funding Legislation
This is a placeholder bill (don’t be fooled by the “speed bump height study” nonsense) where lawmakers will stuff any legislation they propose around a new transportation bill.
- Bill overview
- Status: In House Committee on Rules.
Senate Bills
SB 1542 – ODOT Governance “Measure What We Drive”
This is a bill created by transportation reform advocates and Senate Committee on Transportation leadership that seeks to improve accountability and transparency among the Oregon Transportation Commission (OTC) and ODOT. It directs the OTC to create a 10-year Capital Investment Plan (CIP) that scores and ranks projects before they are added to the ODOT Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). The regional Advisory Committees on Transportation (ACTs) would play a crucial roll in this process. This is intended to weed out staff that partake in “safety washing” their projects — that is, calling something a “safety project” when it actually isn’t. I’ll have more on this bill in a separate post.
- Bill overview
- Status: Public hearing and possible work session on February 9th at Senate Committee on Transportation.
SB 1543 – ODOT Debt Policy: “Guardrails for Good Governance”
A tandem bill with SB 1542, this would establish Oregon’s first debt management policy for transportation investments. ODOT debt has skyrocketed by 400% since 2007 as they lose traditional funding mechanisms and lean even harder into using their credit card to pay for megaprojects. Advocates and senators who understand the risks this poses (namely, that debt must be repaid first and obligates finances for 25 years that could be spent on other things) want to make sure ODOT’s debt practices are more sound by providing more checks and balances and by having clear policies in place.
- Bill overview
- Status: Public hearing and possible work session on February 9th at Senate Committee on Transportation.
SB 1544 – Gut and Stuff for Transportation Funding Legislation
This is the Senate version of HB 4175 and is a placeholder for any major funding legislation to come.
- Bill overview
- Status: In Senate Committee on Transportation
SB 1580 – Save Oregon Journalism
Championed by Portland Senator Khanh Pham, this bipartisan bill seeks to compensate Oregon journalism outlets whose work is used by Google and Facebook in search results and AI products. In order to avoid a lawsuit, these massive companies would have to have a signed agreement with the outlet. The bill would give an outlet (or a consortium of outlets) the right to sue for damages and it would create a grant-making body to help fund Oregon news outlets.
- Bill overview
- Status: Public hearing and work session set for February 11th at Senate Committee on Commerce and General Government.
SB 1599 – Referendum Vote
Democratic party leaders Senator Rob Wagner and House Rep. Julie Fahey are the sponsors of this bill that would move the elected date for the referendum on HB 3991 to May. Petitioners who successfully gathered signatures to block the new taxes and fees in HB 3991 planned on the vote being in November, where it would have more voters and a greater political impact on the general election. But Democrats want it to happen during the May primary. The party line is that an earlier vote would provide much-needed clarity around ODOT funding, but everyone understands this is a political maneuver from Democrats to thwart the chances of it passing (Senate President Wagner admitted this in a press conference last week).
- Bill overview
- Status: Public hearing set for February 9th in the Joint Special Committee on Referendum Petition.
That’s it for now. I will add others as I find them. If you know of ones I missed, let me know.
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.
Supporting HB 4063 for now…but I have to wonder in 5 to 10 years we will ‘rue the day’…once our shared use paths [unless designed differently or effectively enforced] will see way too many Kei trucks using them as bypass routes for highway congestion or tolling fees.
I love Japanese trucks, but only if they meet modern emissions standards, which most of the old imported ones do not. I also have safety concerns about trucks with drivers on the right side of the cab.
I recognize the self-driving vehicle bill could be pretty controversial so I am skeptical it will pass this short session but, if it doesn’t, something like it will be back next year.
I wrote a pretty comprehensive analysis of it, if people are interested.
https://www.mortlandia.com/p/autonomous-autos-and-vision-zero
SB 1599 should alarm anyone who cares about democratic norms. Oregon’s referendum process is one of the few direct-democracy tools voters have to check the Legislature, especially on major tax and fee increases. Moving a qualified referendum from a high-turnout general election to a low-turnout primary because leaders fear the outcome weakens that safeguard.
This isn’t about efficiency or “funding clarity.” Senate President Wagner has already admitted the timing change is political. Changing the rules after citizens have gathered signatures sends a clear message: public participation is welcome only when it produces the “right” result.
Progressives routinely — and rightly — condemn efforts to manipulate election rules, suppress turnout, or game the system for partisan advantage. Those principles don’t stop applying when Democrats are the ones doing it. If anything, they matter more. Democracy depends on consistent rules and maximum participation, not moving the goalposts when voters become inconvenient.
If this precedent stands, future legislatures will feel free to sideline referendums whenever the public pushes back. That’s not just bad transportation policy, it’s a real threat to Oregon’s tradition of direct democracy.
HB 4090 would apply only to counties with 700,000+ residents — which in practice means Multnomah County. It would allow the county to reduce or eliminate vehicle registration fees in select “low-income” zones, but the structure raises serious concerns.
The county gets wide discretion to decide whether to create zones and where to draw the boundaries, with relief based on geography rather than household income. That means some neighborhoods in Multnomah County could get a free pass while equally poor households just outside an arbitrary line get nothing.
Beyond the equity problem, the policy moves in the wrong direction on climate and safety. Vehicle fees are one of the few ways we price the real costs of driving — carbon pollution, road damage, and traffic violence. Cutting or eliminating them makes car ownership cheaper at exactly the moment many Oregonians say they wants fewer emissions, safer streets, and more mode shift.
It also weakens the principle that everyone should have some skin in the game. Registration fees help fund maintenance and safety projects that benefit people walking, biking, and taking transit. Reducing those fees in carve-out zones shifts costs onto everyone else and undermines stable transportation funding.
If lawmakers want to help low-income residents, there are better tools than subsidizing private vehicle ownership based on ZIP code. For Multnomah County in particular, HB 4090 looks less like equity and more like a retreat from stated climate and safety goals.
Let’s be real—HB 4090 is a disaster waiting to happen. The only thing it’s setting up is a mess, with arbitrary lines, more burdens on Multnomah County (which already can’t juggle its current responsibilities), and a policy that misses the mark on everything from climate to fairness. Here’s hoping it gets the treatment it deserves and goes up in smoke before anyone starts taking it seriously.
I agree with both of these commenters (Joe and Angus). Certainly the gov’t has a role to play in crafting policy that allows low-income people to get around, but subsidizing – and thereby encouraging – car use isn’t it. Since this is BikePortland, we should all agree that creating great bike infrastructure is a terrific way to help low-income people get around, since cycling is 100X cheaper than driving. And it’s way more fun.
Best thing for engaged citizens to do is drop the chief sponsor Ricki Ruiz an email expressing why you are opposed (respectfully of course).
Rep.RickiRuiz@oregonlegislature.gov
The state’s climate goals are complete performative bullshit so no real retreat there.
Thanks for highlighting SB 1580 – Save Oregon Journalism. Google and other news consolidators absolutely need to start paying for the news content they aggregate and pass on to users. They are some of the most profitable companies in history so they can absolutely afford to pay for the content they use.
And to play devil’s advocate, what will the shareholders demand? (full disclosure I have a few shares of google in my retirement portfolio)
They’ll demand the same or more profits.
How will that happen? Maybe they’ll charge more for ads.
What will the companies do that have to pay more for ads to sell us stuff? They’ll raise their prices.
Who gets to pay? We all do.