NEWS UPDATE FROM STATE REPRESENTATIVE DAVID GOMBERG: The Bumpy Path to Road Improvements

The state transportation agency would receive $850 million of that new funding — half the amount Governor Tina Kotek requested from lawmakers in December — while cities would receive about $340 million and counties about $510 million. The state highway fund is sent back to counties (30%) and cities (20%) based on their number of vehicles registered and population.

This “framework” is the next step in an ongoing discussion that has included a 12-stop tour across the state and over 50 hours of workgroup meetings with a diverse group of stakeholders. Elements of the plan will still require an affirmative vote by the Committee and approval by a supermajority in both the House and the Senate (tax votes require a 3/5 approval in both chambers).

For my own part, I’m looking for a long-term plan that places the costs of our roads on the folks who use our roads. To me, that means:

• Electric vehicles and delivery fleets pay their fair share.
• The fuel tax is indexed to inflation.
• Cities and counties get the money they need for local roads.
• Visitors on our roads contribute rather than focusing costs on Oregon residents.
• Fees to support the road system are equitably tied to road use.

Electric vehicles, which have made up about 5% of the cars registered in Oregon in the past decade, aren’t subject to the gas tax. Instead, they are subject to higher title and registration fees than gas-powered cars. But the average driver of a gas-powered car still pays more in gas taxes than electric drivers pay in other fees.

Here’s a comparison of costs, based on the average number of miles a typical Oregon motorist drives:

The framework includes ten changes for new or increased fees. Unless otherwise specified, the revenue would go to the state highway fund:

• 20-cent increase to the gas tax over six years. The statewide fuels tax, which is currently 40 cents per gallon, would increase to 48 cents in January and gradually rise to 60 cents by 2032.
• Road user fee for delivery vehicles, like Amazon vans. Businesses with at least 10 medium-duty vehicles that deliver packages to homes would be required to pay this fee, which would likely land between 2 cents to 7 cents per mile. It’s unclear how much money this would bring in or when it would be implemented.
• Road user fee for some drivers. Details are evolving, but all-electric vehicle drivers would have to enroll in the pay-per-mile program by July 2026. Once enrolled, electric vehicle drivers would no longer pay higher registration fees than other drivers. Gas powered car drivers would not be affected until at least 2029.
• 1% tax on every vehicle purchase. Oregon is one of five states that don’t currently have a vehicle purchase tax. This is expected to raise $486 million per biennium. About half would go to unfinished major projects like the Newberg-Dundee Bypass, and the rest would go to the state highway fund.
• 3% tax on tire purchases. Half of the revenue would go to rail operations, and the remaining half would be split between building wildlife crossings over highways and salmon restoration programs to offset the environmental impact of tire pollution. This tax is expected to raise $50 million per biennium.
• $90 increase to title fees. Title fees currently range between $101 and $192 for most cars, and it’s unclear when these fees would increase or if certain vehicles would face steeper rates.
• $66 increase to car registration fees. Registration and renewal fees currently range between $126 and $316 for most vehicles. It’s unclear when these fees would increase or if certain vehicles would face steeper rates.
• 0.08% increase to state payroll tax. Oregon employers currently withhold a 0.10% tax from each employee’s gross pay, with all revenue used for state transit programs. (0.10% is one-tenth of 1%) This proposal would increase that to 0.18% and is projected to raise an additional $268 million per biennium for transit.
• 0.3% increase to vehicle privilege tax. Car dealers currently pay a 0.5% tax on all vehicle sales. This proposal would increase that to 0.8%, with all revenue used for rail, aviation, and marine projects, expected to raise $44.8 million per biennium.
• $9.50 increase to bike tax. Bike purchasers currently pay a $15 tax for bikes sold for $200 or higher, with revenue used for bicycle and pedestrian transportation projects. This proposal would increase the tax to $24.50, which would increase revenue by roughly $1 million per biennium.

There is plenty here to digest and I expect to hear a great deal from readers unhappy with one proposal or another, or all of them. I also expect to hear from people who think any small changes are better than one big one, or that declining roads and bridges are worse than higher costs.

As you look over the list, notice what is not there. Ther are no proposals for tolling – except for the already approved two-state plan for tolling the new I-5 bridge over the Columbia.

As I look at the framework, I have a few small questions. For example, if there is a 1% tax on new vehicles, I’d like the revenue on recreational vehicle sales to be designated to help pay for the removal of abandoned RVs on our roadside. Rather than tax new bicycle sales for bike lanes, I’d rather tax bicycle tires. Most riders don’t often buy new bikes, and tire sales focus on the riders who ride more often.

I also look at the proposal for large issues.

I have long argued that rural drivers drive further to get to work, shopping, or school. And the cars we drive are less fuel-efficient than those used by our city friends. Simply put, there are more pick-up trucks in Otis than in the Pearl District.

So, under the current gas tax, we end up paying more than urban drivers. According to ODOT’s own accounting, the average driver in rural Oregon pays $386 per year in state gas taxes. In Portland, the average driver pays $229.

Rural drivers tend to pay more in fuel taxes because they drive more miles in less fuel-efficient vehicles.

Similarly, our visitor traffic affects roads, but does not generate additional road money in tourist areas. Newport gets credit for 10,000 residents and not the 50,000 visitors we may see on a summer weekend.

This is not a new problem. But the changes being proposed present an opportunity for negotiation and improvements.

No one is surprised that this new transportation funding package is controversial. After all, no one likes to see their cost of living go up, or to see the price of everyday goods increase.

In the minds of the legislators who created it, this package requires the people who use the roads to pay for their upkeep, and it spreads the pain as thinly as possible. For example, by taxing tires, increasing registration fees and adding an EV use fee, it forces electric vehicle users to shoulder more of the burden than they are today. As EVs continue to use and damage the roads, this seems much more equitable to me.

Back in January, I wrote that Democrats have a supermajority in both the House and the Senate. They could, if they wish, pass any bill, budget, or tax without a single Republican vote. And if they did that, it would be wrong.

Republicans, on the other hand, could leave it to the Democrats to sort out these difficult and politically fraught decisions, criticizing us each step of the way, and then poke at us next election season for the hard votes we needed to take. That would be wrong too.

The right way for Oregon is to find the will and courage to work together, negotiate, compromise, and lead – together. That cooperation will produce the best results for all of Oregon.

All of this needs to be accompanied by a strong dose of ODOT accountability. That’s why I’m pleased the Legislature’s top Democrats put a Republican member in charge of finding ways to force more accountability out of our transportation department. I also support regular audits to scrutinize budgets, processes, and management structures.

Oregon’s transportation system is essential for a strong economy, our emergency preparedness and responses, and our connectivity. It deeply impacts the daily lives of all Oregonians. Inaction is not an option.

Tough choices will have to be made. Either we slash ODOT’s budget and choose which roads will be closed and which people will not receive service, or we will have to come up with more money. I am hoping that with this package proposal as a starting point, Oregon can find a pathway – or a highway – forward.

Long-time readers are well aware of my concerns about Oregon’s National Primate Research Center.

I have often opined that while reasonable people can disagree whether animal research is ethical, whether there are good new non-animal alternatives, or whether the results even apply to humans, the long record of documented animal welfare violations makes it clear we don’t do it well here in Oregon.

In 2023, I authored and passed House Bill 2904 to require Oregon Health & Science University, which runs the center, to annually publish online information, including the number of primates in the facility and how many were bought or sold, born, and used for research or breeding. I proposed the legislation after reviewing more than 1,600 pages of public records about the center. In one instance, two adult monkeys in 2020 were scalded to death in cage-washing equipment after a technician failed to remove them from their cage.

Information I formally requested took more than a year to deliver, more than a thousand dollars, and was largely redacted.

As part of its campaign, the group is buying time for radio and television ads in the Portland market. In its 30-second TV spot, the group describes infants being torn from their mothers for “fear experiments” and monkeys being subjected to electroejaculation tests. Incompetence and neglect led to 21 animal-welfare violations at the research center and 35 at OHSU as a whole since 2014, including using the wrong anesthetic, leaving instruments in monkeys after surgery, and letting forgotten animals die of thirst.

“If OHSU can’t care for a monkey, how can they care for you?” the ad asks. Read more here.

Governor Kotek has also called for a transition. “While the governor has very limited authority under Oregon law to weigh in on the proposed merger, she does believe that OHSU should figure out how to close its primate research center, just like Harvard University did 10 years ago,” spokeswoman Elisabeth Shepard said in an email. “The Governor has directly advocated for OHSU leadership to complete their current research obligations and move towards shutting the center down in a humane and responsible manner.”

Sunday, the Oregonian published two contrasting guest opinions on this difficult subject. Neal Barnard, president of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, wrote in favor of retiring the facility. Peter Barr-Gillespie, chief research officer at OHSU, argued that the work must continue. If this subject interests you, I encourage you to read both pieces.

My office has received nearly 100 letters about primate research in the past month, and I’m informed that nearly 10,000 letters have been sent to the review board evaluating the possible merger. Many of those letters have originated from this site.

To be clear, I believe using primates for medical research is cruel and outdated. New, modern, more accurate methods exist. I support a planned phase out of Oregon’s National Primate Research Center that will save money, save the jobs of people now working there by shifting them to other tasks, and save monkeys.

For more information on the OHA review of the OHSU-Legacy merger, go here. If you wish to comment, use one of these links:

• Email hcmo.info@oha.oregon.gov
• Leave a voicemail at 503-945-6161
• Fill out the public comment form

In the Transportation and Economic Development Committee, which I co-chair, budgeting is taking time and a lot of emotional energy, as we have to decide whether emergency shelter beds are more important than counseling veterans with PTSD or addressing the backlog of claims for stolen wages at BOLI. It is a daunting responsibility.

And policy bills are on the move, including my proposals for new industries using more of our fish biproduct, changes in how we evaluate utility rate increases, recreational immunity, helping wildfire impacted school districts, age discrimination in employment, emergency water and fuel supplies in coastal hospitals, property tax relief when buying a home or business emergency power generator, eelgrass restoration, and spay and neuter support through a Pet Animal Trust in Oregon.

One of my bills improving your privacy in your own car will be on the House floor this week. Internet-enabled cars outfitted with ever-growing numbers of sensors and cameras can offer performance and safety benefits, but they also can collect and transmit to car companies vast amounts of data. One study found that every automaker reviewed collected personal data from drivers. Read more here.

Let me know if you have questions about specifics on any of these bills.

Saturday, I was in Newport for a patriotic rally at City Hall. As many as 1000 people participated, voicing what I describe as a shared concern about our jobs, our retirement savings, the erosion of our personal freedoms, and our collective futures. There were similar gatherings in Yachats, Corvallis, and Lincoln City. Democracy requires engagement, and these people were engaged.

Early today, I was back in Salem for another very busy week. And next weekend I’ll be driving to La Grande for the next Ways and Means public hearing.

As I said, democracy requires engagement. And I’m striving to be well-engaged on your behalf.

phone: 503-986-1410

address: 900 Court St NE, H-480, Salem, OR, 97301

website: http://www.oregonlegislature.gov/gomberg