Oregon Democrats unveil $1.9 billion transportation funding plan
A woman walks a bike along Oregon Highway 99 in an undated photo. The Oregon Transportation Commission voted this week to spend $50 million to make state highways like this one more accessible to people walking or riding bikes. (Oregon Department of Transportation)
This is a developing story and will be updated.
Oregonians would pay more at the pump, higher fees when they buy a car or bike and see more money deducted from their paychecks to pay for transit under a wide-ranging plan released Thursday by Democratic lawmakers for filling a transportation deficit.
The framework that Sen. Chris Gorsek, D-Troutdale, and Rep. Susan McLain, D-Forest Grove, released is the result of nearly two years of meetings and a statewide tour to hear about transportation needs. It comes as state and local transportation departments struggle to pay for basic maintenance like potholes and snowplows, let alone finish some major projects like the Rose Quarter highway improvement and Abernethy Bridge replacement in the Portland area.
McLain and Gorsek's plan, shared early with the Capital Chronicle under the condition that the publication not seek comments from anyone else before 3 p.m. Thursday, aims to raise at least $1.9 billion in additional revenue per two-year budget cycle for the State Highway Fund, Oregon's main source of transportation funding, by the time a 20-cent gas tax increase is fully phased in, in 2032.
Much of that increased funding would come through increases to the gas tax, vehicle title and registration fees and the weight-mile tax paid by truckers. Oregonians would also see more money deducted from their paychecks under an existing payroll tax to pay for transit, and all electric vehicles would gradually be enrolled in a now-voluntary road usage charge program meant to replicate what their drivers would pay for gas-powered cars.
'It's a big picture thing where we're resetting everything,' Gorsek said. 'But we're not going to say to the public, 'OK, we're going to fix the gas tax today, and it's going to go through the roof, or we're going to do EVs, and it's going to be through the roof right away.' The idea is to work these things into something that can keep us from getting where we are now in the future.'
'Where we are now' is a funding crisis years in the making, as gas tax revenues decline, inflation hikes construction costs and the state and local governments split transportation funding. The Oregon Department of Transportation predicted an immediate deficit of more than $350 million, with warnings that it may need to lay off nearly 1,000 employees. Without legislative action, the agency has warned, it will take longer to plow roads, open and close highways during fire season and fix potholes.
The transportation co-chairs' proposed fix comes as Oregonians deal with higher prices on all kinds of goods and anticipate increased costs due to President Donald Trump's tariffs, the highest tax on foreign goods in generations.
'We're very conscientious about the cost of living and some of the experiences we've had economically, but it also costs money to do nothing,' McLain told the Capital Chronicle. 'And right now, we have maintenance, and we have preservation, and safety that all are the very pillars of what we've heard in our tour around the state.'
The plan, which will be refined by the Legislature before it adjourns in June, includes raising Oregon's current 40-cent gas tax to 60 cents per gallon by Jan. 1, 2032. The biggest jump, to 48 cents, would happen Jan. 1, 2026, with 4-cent increases every two years until 2032.
It would also add $66 to vehicle registration fees, which now run between $126 and $156 every two years. Titles, which cost about $101 to $116, would increase by $90.
Electric vehicle drivers now pay more — $192 for title and $316 for registration — but their registration costs would go down as they enrolled in a road user charge program or paid a flat annual fee. The current road user charge program, OReGO, is a voluntary two-cent-per-mile fee, but lawmakers want to expand it to all electric vehicles.
Existing EVs would be enrolled in the program by July 2026, newly purchased vehicles by July 2027, plug-in hybrids by 2028 and all new vehicles rated at 30 mpg or greater by July 2029.
Additionally, McLain and Gorsek want to charge a one-time fee of 1% of the vehicle price when a car is sold. Oregon is one of only five states that doesn't currently have such a fee.
Tolls, a tool lawmakers laid the groundwork for in their 2017 transportation package, are nowhere in the framework. Gov. Tina Kotek ordered a moratorium until 2026 on tolls, which the transportation department planned to use on Interstates 5 and 205 in and around Portland in part to pay for replacing the I-5 bridge connecting Oregon and Washington, and they're politically unpopular in Oregon, which has no toll roads.
'The governor didn't say no to tolls in the future, but that is not what is in the package currently,' Gorsek said.
The current 0.1% payroll tax all Oregonians pay for transit would nearly double to 0.18%, adding an additional $268.6 million per two-year budget cycle. A 3% tax on tire sales would provide $50 million every two years to fund rail, wildlife crossings and salmon restoration. Bikes that cost $200 or more, which now carry a $15 tax, would see that rate increase to $24.50 per bike to provide $1 million per budget cycle for local paths and trails.
'There's no competition between transit, maintenance and finishing our promises,' McLain said. 'We have different streams of money available for stable, sufficient funding for all three.'
McLain and Gorsek said they're confident in Oregon's ability to continue to receive federal transportation grants, despite directives from U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy that federal funding should go toward states with high marriage and birth rates, no vaccine or mask mandates and that are committed to working with the federal government to enforce Trump's immigration policy — all areas that don't apply to Oregon.
'I think what helps us is that this isn't just about Portland,' Gorsek said. 'This is about the West Coast, and the bottlenecks that we have in Portland for the whole I-5 system. There are comments about Oregon and Washington in terms of the Trump administration not being very happy with us, but this is really about the region and serious economic impacts if we don't fix this.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Axios
15 minutes ago
- Axios
Impeachment wars
Rep. Jasmine Crockett's mere mention of a possible impeachment inquiry into President Trump has touched off negative reactions from some colleagues. "I think she's going to turn off a lot more people than gain," a House Democrat told us. Why it matters: House Democratic leaders are staying neutral. But many Democrats are allergic to the word after they impeached Trump twice only for him to return to power with full control of the government. Crockett (D-Texas), asked in a local news interview if she would pursue impeachment if Democrats retook the House in 2026 and she became Oversight Committee chair, said she would "absolutely at least do an inquiry." The other three candidates for the ranking member job on Oversight, Reps. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.) and Kweisi Mfume (D-Md.), told us they wouldn't go that far. 👿 "Turning this ranker race into a proxy for impeachment is unhelpful and unfair to her colleagues," said a House Democrat who predicted Republicans will "try to motivate their base by saying that a Democratic majority will inevitably lead to impeachment." Crockett told us the term "impeachment inquiry" would stress to the public the "next level of gravity" of the subject matter — such as Trump's pardons for big money allies and the Qatari jet scandal. "A lot of times we as Democrats can overthink stuff," Crockett said. "A lot of people ... felt like [Oversight Committee chair] James Comer was an embarrassment. But at the end of the day, who won the House?" The bottom line: House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries deferred to House Judiciary Committee ranking member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), whose panel, he said, "has jurisdiction over impeachment."


New York Times
18 minutes ago
- New York Times
Adams Team Works Behind Scenes to Try to Sway Rabbis Against Cuomo
Mayor Eric Adams may be running an unusually low-key race for re-election in New York City, opting out of the Democratic primary and mounting an independent general election run without even a campaign manager to steer it. But behind the scenes, he is making an aggressive play to try to shape the field to his liking and hold onto a key voting bloc. A top aide to Mr. Adams has been calling Orthodox Jewish leaders in recent weeks to urge them not to back Andrew M. Cuomo in the June 24 Democratic primary, or to temper their support for him if they do, according to six people familiar with the effort. Mr. Adams's allies have indicated they believe he would have a better chance of winning the general election if Zohran Mamdani, the democratic socialist assemblyman now polling in second place, defeats Mr. Cuomo and becomes the Democratic nominee. At the same time, Mr. Adams has used his mayoral powers to make policy pronouncements that seem designed to resonate with some Orthodox Jews. He signed an executive order recognizing the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's definition of antisemitism and created the Mayor's Office to Combat Antisemitism to address the spike in antisemitic hate crimes in the city. 'He is going around to people to ask for support for the general election,' said Rabbi Moishe Indig, a leader of one faction of the Satmar Hasidic group in Williamsburg, Brooklyn. 'He would love that everyone just ignore the primary and wait until the fall.' Want all of The Times? Subscribe.


Fox News
18 minutes ago
- Fox News
NY lawmaker lambastes failed commemoration of Oct 7 attack, as Dem leadership accused of 'antisemitism'
The New York assemblyman behind an effort to formally commemorate the Oct. 7, 2023, terror attack in Israel lambasted leadership for tanking what was supposed to be a "poignant" bill remembering the tragedy. Assemblyman Lester Chang, R-Brooklyn – one of the few GOP members from New York City in the 103-47 Democratic-majority chamber – said he had been working on a resolution for New York state to officially remember the terror attack since hostage negotiations began a year ago. "I'm a Navy veteran of 24 years and I did a tour in Afghanistan. So I understand what war is all about," said Chang. "I've seen atrocities out there." Once American figures like then-candidate Donald Trump began helping hostage negotiations, Chang said he directed his staff to craft a message – which he said took more than a month of back-and-forth to make sure it was "balanced" and did not have a partisan streak. "We submitted it in January, as a resolution, and it was rejected… because [leadership] said it was 'controversial,'" Chang said. "We were astounded but not surprised. So we converted it to a bill," he said, adding that, in the end, a bill would be better because a resolution only commemorates an event for that year, while a bill would codify the remembrance for eternity. With a handful of Democratic co-sponsors, Chang and colleagues believed they had the right balance to attempt to put it up for a vote, but as the New York Post reported, it was reportedly ultimately blocked by House Speaker Carl Heastie, D-Bronx, and other top Democrats. Chang said the bill, destined for the smaller governmental operations committee, was redirected to the larger Ways and Means committee, and that four members were "switched out." The top Republican on that panel, Assemblyman Ed Ra, told the New York Post that remembering Oct. 7 and/or combating antisemitism should never be "political." Republican Assemblyman Ari Brown, who, like Ra, represents Long Island, accused Albany Democrats of "veiled antisemitism," telling the Post the legislature is "rotten" with it. The assembly also tanked a resolution from Brown that complimented Chang's bill. Compounding that was, as Chang described, no GOP bills have been successfully put through the process at all this session. "Having me as a Republican [sponsor] – that would [procedurally] choke them – not because of me, the person, but as a member of that party." Chang said he would just as soon "give this bill to a Democrat" to sponsor if it meant commemorating the Oct. 7 attack. He added that, as a person of Chinese ancestry who represents largely Asian and Italian Bensonhurst, he has no religious horse in the race. "That should make it more poignant as a non-Jewish person pushing this bill in a mostly Christian and Buddhist district," he said. At least seven Democrats did come out in support of the Oct. 7 remembrance legislation, all of whom hail from New York City. Senate Minority Leader Rob Ortt, R-Niagara Falls, echoed Chang's concerns in comments to Fox News Digital. "Many New Yorkers had loved ones injured or worse in the terror attacks in Israel on Oct. 7," Ortt said. "The least we can do is commemorate this tragic day." "Instead of taking commonsense action, Albany Democrats would rather play politics, and have time and again refused to defend our Jewish brothers and sisters." Fox News Digital reached out to Heastie for comment and response to the allegations but did not hear back.