Key moments in 2025 session: Minority offers its own transportation bill June 20

Presenter: We’re listening to key moments from the just-concluded legislative session. On June 20,  the Joint Committee on Transportation Reinvestment took up House Bill 2025. Oregon Democrats were working on the -23 amendment, and Oregon Republicans asked for consideration of their own version, the -8 amendment. Rep. Shelly Boshart Davis:

Rep. Shelly Boshart Davis: Thank you, I move to amend the current motion and substitute the -8 amendment to House Bill 2025.

[00:00:31] The -8 amendment is a response to a no-new-taxes approach to stabilizing ODOT. And I think that’s one of the words that we as House and Senate Republicans use, we know that stabilizing ODOT and also looking at a no-new-taxes approach because we know that Oregonians’ top concern is cost of living.

[00:00:54] We also know that there needs to be some stabilization within ODOT. So our -8 (amendment) reprioritizes funding that takes away from nonessential functions and focuses on core functions, especially in rural Oregon, such as plowing roads, filling potholes.

[00:01:10] And this proposal serves as a bridge as an interim plan that seeks to rebuild Oregonians trust in ODOT before asking them to pay more. This resolves the unconstitutional trucker overpayment.

[00:01:22] This also reforms the Oregon Department of Transportation. It adopts recommendations from the recent managerial review of ODOT that we actually use. That was one thing that Sen. Starr was able to do. We as a legislative body paid for that.

[00:01:37] And that recommendation came back to us, we heard about it in this committee and this -8 amendment takes those recommendations and uses those as reasons and ways that we can look to ODOT and actually do our job as a legislative body and demand some accountability.

[00:01:56] This also modernizes fuel taxes and regulations. It moves the point of diesel tax to the RAC. This also simplifies weight-mile tax tables, and it caps Oregon’s hidden gas tax, which is the Clean Fuels Program, at the current level and returns the program to its original intent. The CFP is estimated to cost Oregonians an additional $0.09 per gallon and $0.11 for diesel at the pump. If the current trends continue, Oregonians will pay an additional $0.60 per gallon for Oregon’s Clean Fuels Program by 2035. This amendment caps that, so that we don’t see that future gas increase, on behalf of Oregonians.

[00:02:37] And so, colleagues, I hope that you take a look at considerations to the -8. Like I said, it will modernize fuel taxes. It will cap the CFP. It will reprioritize funding to focus on core functions. It will resolve the unconstitutional trucker overpayment. And it will be stabilizing ODOT, where we can then look to see if ODOT continues to do its job, is accountable to the people of Oregon and to the legislative body, before we look at a new tax approach to ODOT.

[00:03:06] Presenter: Rep. Mark Gamba:

[00:03:08] Rep. Mark Gamba: (Amendment) -8, in my view, is irresponsible. We have underfunded our transportation system in this state for a couple of decades now. We are by far the lowest-funded-per-capita transportation system in the Western United States. We have bridges that are weight-restricted, many, many, many bridges that are weight-restricted, and we’ll continue to degrade, should we choose to not solve our revenue problem.

[00:03:42] This amendment also strips out any work towards safety. We have hundreds of people dying on our streets annually. And this amendment would not address that in the least and would actually take money away from the efforts to do that. So I am strongly opposed to this amendment.

[00:04:05] Presenter: Rep. Kevin Mannix:

[00:04:07] Rep. Kevin Mannix: When I take a look at the -8 amendment, and I compare it to the -23 (because we’re really looking at a substitution), the -23 is grossly obese, and the -8 is too thin. So what sort of choices do you make?

[00:04:22] Well, this is my mentality, I admit it, but if you’ve got something that’s slim and thin, you can add some weight to it over time. We have an opportunity to get on the right course.

[00:04:33] With the -23, we’re going to have to go through, in my view, a weight reduction program in terms of the privilege tax, the transfer tax, and the payroll tax. So when we’re reforming the system, we do have the reforms that we need structurally so we can see how effectively we’ve changed how ODOT operates and how we handle our finances with the -8.

[00:04:56] And then in the short session next year, we can come back and say, ‘Gee, let’s see what’s happening and what else do we need to do to add a little weight to it.’

So I’m going to vote in favor of the substitution and a phrase I used on the House floor I think yesterday or today: ‘The perfect is the enemy of the good,’ we don’t have anything perfect in front of us but I think the -8 is a bit better than the -23. Thank you.

[00:05:22] Presenter: Sen. Khanh Pham:

[00:05:23] Sen. Khanh Pham: I’m in ‘Opposed’ to the -8 because we know that if we don’t raise revenue, this will mean we’re eliminating hundreds of ODOT workers who currently fix our roads, pave the roads, so they’re fixing the potholes, plowing the snow when communities are completely cut off in snowstorms.

[00:05:43] It would mean the elimination of entire transit bus lines that so many Oregonians told us that they depend on to get to their work, to get their kids to school, to get to healthcare. And no more investments in the Safe Routes to Schools, the great streets programs that people have been lit, Oregonians have literally begged us to invest in.

[00:05:59] And so I understand the desire to want to punish an agency when we feel like they are not performing up to what we want. But I think it is unfair to cut one-fifth of the workforce of an agency, completely gutting entire programs, and then to ask staff: ‘Why aren’t they performing to what we want?’

[00:06:17] I recognize that many of us are concerned about you know the cost of living in Oregon. It is not easy to vote for higher taxes. But I am skeptical the Oregonians pocketbooks are really better off if we continue to let our roads crumble. When we think about how expensive it is to be late for work because the bus didn’t show up or you are stuck in traffic, or what happens to Oregon communities losing these hundreds of good-paying jobs of people who are fixing up our roads, our state highways.

[00:06:43] And I want to just reiterate, as we saw in committee, we have the comparison of the seven western states and the vehicle-related taxes that Utah, Nevada, Washington, California pay. And Oregon is the absolute bottom of that. Utah pays twice as much in transportation-related taxes. Nevada nearly three times as much and Washington three times as much. And California is four times as much, just like $1,104 compared to our $294.

[00:07:11] So I just want to just say this is about good governance and we have a responsibility to govern. People are expecting it. The main thing they expect from us is that we take care of the roads. And so for that reason I cannot vote for the -8 amendment. (Thank you very much.)

[00:07:29] Presenter: Sen. Chris Gorsek:

[00:07:27] Sen. Chris Gorsek: In terms of the -8, if you look at Section 10: Redirects revenues from the bicycle excise tax to the state highway fund. (Section) 11 and 11b redirects $37.5 million per quarter from the STIF to the trucking overpayment credit account; eliminates the pass—

This is (Section) 12, 13, and 16, 18, eliminates the passenger rail transportation account, moves all monies to the State Highway Fund, redirects monies from Connect Oregon Fund that would have accrued to the Multimodal Active Transportation Fund, removes Connect Oregon and bicycle excise tax from funding sources for Multimodal Active Transportation.

This is, -8 takes us away from what we’ve been trying to craft in this bill, just something that isn’t just about highways, that’s something that is about other modes of transportation and for that reason I’m completely opposed to the -8.

[00:08:36] Presenter: Rep. Shelly Boshart Davis:

[00:08:39] Rep. Shelly Boshart Davis: I appreciate the conversation. In response to that, the focus was restoration of jobs. And so this saves money and it moves, it preserves operation and maintenance jobs. Jobs—the number one goal was restoration of jobs in ODOT. So the premise is completely false and moving it to key functions and so what my good co-chair just listed off is true and that’s because we believe that the core function needs to be refocused.

[00:09:06] And so, this isn’t about punishing ODOT. This gives them an opportunity to be successful and that’s why we use the stabilization and interim plan so there’s a restoration of jobs. And what I think is grossly irresponsible is not allowing the public to weigh in to a $15 billion package. That’s grossly irresponsible.

They have not been able to weigh in after we got the revenue impact. So this amendment is a no-new-taxes approach to stabilization, an interim plan where we give the opportunity for ODOT to be successful, not cut jobs, and then reevaluate where we are. Thank you.

[00:09:46] Presenter: Sen. Bruce Starr:

[00:09:47] Sen. Bruce Starr: I appreciate my co-vice chair presenting the -8 amendment as an alternative to the majority’s -23s. Clearly you have differences in priorities, differences in how the minority and the majority look at taxes, tax increases, what the core function of government ought to be.

[00:10:18] I align myself somewhat with the comments from Rep. Mannix. You know, the -8s are not a product of collaboration, but neither are the -23s. So while I recognize the results of the vote that’s going to occur here shortly, the bottom line is that we’re here today, unfortunately, with a lack of Republicans and Democrats working together.

[00:10:55] Presenter: Later, tempers began rising with a discussion of the Highway Cost Allocation Study, or HCAS. Sen. Gorsek:

[00:11:02] Sen. Chris Gorsek: The problem is that you are giving power to the executive branch, which is what we’ve been trying to avoid by saying that DAS (Department of Administrative Services) and therein the executive branch will be the ones that then try to fix problems with HCAS. The thing to remember is we may be slow, but it’s still our responsibility, and I’m very uncomfortable giving any more power to the executive branch.

[00:11:34] Presenter: Sen. Starr:

[00:11:35] Sen. Bruce Starr: With all due respect, we are delegating the ability for unlimited new revenues coming to the executive branch agency. That’s what we do. It’s this give and take. We have proof—anyway, I’ll shut up.

[00:11:51] Sen. Chris Gorsek: We might be giving them more money, but we’re not telling them to make the decisions for us.

[00:11:58] Presenter: Rep. Boshart Davis:

[00:12:01] Rep. Shelly Boshart Davis: Co-Chair Gorsek, you mentioned abdicating our responsibility. I do want to point out immediately (because of that): Indexing the CPI to inflation is abdicating our responsibility. I know that people are talking about—

Sen. Chris Gorsek: No, it’s not. We’re indexing it, we’re not giving it to another agency.

Rep. Shelly Boshart Davis: Indexing any sort of gas tax, indexing abdicates our responsibility because it lacks accountability for an agency (Not the same thing) to come back to the legislature and say that we need to have an increase in taxes and then we as a legislative body can say: Do you deserve this? Have you done your job?

[00:12:41] We get to ask questions and we as a legislative body get to approve.  We have the power of the purse. And so having the CPI—am I done? (No.) Okay, that abdicates our responsibility. There’s also no mechanism to decrease gas taxes in times of deflation, so I want to point that out as well so as far as abdicating our responsibility, CPI does that.

In response to talking about HCAS with the –23, there is a near 50% increase in their rates. I think that’s a problem.

[00:13:18] Presenter: Her final summary would also be interrupted. Rep. Shelly Boshart Davis:

[00:13:23] Rep. Shelly Boshart Davis: I want to state that we are looking at the largest tax increase in Oregon’s history.

[00:13:33] To compare that, House Bill 2017 was a $5.3 billion tax increase over 10 years. The CAT (Corporate Activity Tax) tax, which was the previous largest tax increase in Oregon’s history, has raised an average of about $1.2 billion per year, which is $12 billion over 10 years. And the -23 (amendments) that we’re looking at today that we will be sine die-ing next week sometime, again, that the public has not had time to weigh in since we’ve received the revenue impact.

[00:14:02] So when we had eight hours of public hearing on the -13 or the base bill, the public didn’t know that it cost $15 billion over the next 10 years. They may have said something different if they knew that it would be the largest tax hike in Oregon’s history.

And so, since we’ve known that realization, the public has not had the opportunity to weigh in.

[00:14:25] What we do know from the public, though, is their online testimony. And it currently sits in opposition 2-1. And I think that matters because oftentimes members of this committee quote numbers from going around the state: How many people are in a work group? How many people showed up? But this is what’s in front of us now, and we know the opposition is 2-1.

So if we’re going to listen to Oregonians, we need to listen to Oregonians. We’re left with a $15 billion tax increase, with a few days left in session, with a really bad process. When we talk about being grossly irresponsible, that’s what this is. I will be a ‘No’ on this vote.

[00:15:07] Sen. Chris Gorsek: Excuse me. You are impugning all of us that have worked on that bill. So stop with that.

[00:15:13] Rep. Shelly Boshart Davis: I used Rep. Gamba’s words. He said ‘grossly irresponsible.’

[00:15:17] Sen. Chris Gorsek: You made your point, Representative. You made your point.

[00:15:20] Rep. Shelly Boshart Davis: I’m using words that somebody on this committee actually used.

[00:15:24] Rep. Susan McLain: You guys, that’s it. (Enough). We’ll carry this into another room. So thank you very much, both of you, for your comments. That’s enough.

[00:15:34] Presenter: From the recently-concluded legislative session, that’s the June 20 Joint Committee on Transportation Reinvestment, as tensions run high over the transportation bill, HB 2025.

[00:15:45] In committee, Democrats blocked a Republican version that would have preserved ODOT jobs. On the House floor, Republicans blocked the Democrats’ version, preventing a $15 billion tax increase.

This story produced by John Q for Whole Community News,  giving voice to those who may otherwise be unheard, and providing  a forum for controversy and debate right here on KEPW 97.3, Eugene’s PeaceWorks community radio.