Jim Mayer has a nice recap piece in Sunday’s O with a summary of transportation changes enacted this legislative session. Here are some of the key items:
- Authority to clear accidents from freeways more quickly (one of Commissioner Adams’ prioritities from the “Anatomy of a Crash” project)
- A number of key changes requested by the cycling community
- More cities allowed to use red light cameras
- Teenagers are not allowed to drive while using cell phones
Not bad, but the gas tax still hasn’t been raised since 1993…
10 responses to “Reviewing the Legislative Session”
Well, it’s unlikely that we’ll ever see an increase in the gas tax. As much as it’s needed, we’ll never be able to convince the public at-large to approve a gas tax increase, and the legislature can’t do it for us because they’re always afraid of losing their next reelection bid. That’s the nice thing about the federal Senate: they don’t have to worry about getting reelected every other year and they are more willing to gamble on the right thing to do, even if it’s unpopular with their constituents (a luxury that is not afforded to either house in our state).
One of my favorite bills that I saw enacted this session is HB2466 (allows photo radar in work zones as well as Milwaukie, Oregon City and Gladstone). Hopefully the OSP will use this to their advantage and put up functional photo radar equipment in work zones on the highway. I recently drove cross-country and there is little to no respect for construction workers nationwide; most people didn’t even slow down in spite of the warnings about steeper fines. I haven’t read the full text of the bill, but I hope that it allows for citing out-of-state vehicles as well. Our construction workers deserve this protection.
Also, BRAVO for enacting HB2936 (requiring vehicles to be removed from the roadway after a collision). I don’t know who these people are that think the police are going to show up to investigate the little scratch on their bumper or take pictures of their broken taillight when they get bumped at 2MPH in stop-and-go traffic, but they deserve the $180 fine. I don’t know where this sense of self-importance comes from, that the thousands of poor suckers on the freeway should have to wait for the police to investigate an accident that often will cost less than one’s deductible to repair. This bill was a long time coming, and I, for one, am THRILLED that it’s law. I also hope that they put up appropriate signage that indicates that you will be fined for failure to comply, and not the signs that mildly request that you move your damaged vehicle to the side of the road.
One of the problems with work zones in remote areas is that the crews often block off lanes for miles and miles and miles.
So when drivers have been driving the last 10 or 20 miles where there is ZERO work going on – they get accustom to speeding in “work zones”.
Additionally, people view it as a huge pain in the ass to drive 45mph for 25 miles just because orange barrels are up.
I think that if they limited the areas they block off to the arease that they were more immediately working on – that people wouldn’t be so prone to speed. Most people slow down when there is lots of actual work going on…
But just a theory of mine, as I grew up in remote areas of the southwest which were seemingly always and perpetually under construction.
Why would you want the gas tax raised? We can thank the Republicans for holding the line, preventing or delaying abominations like the West Side Bypass from being built.
I find it ironic that the Democrats want more money to build roads, while the Republicans (in Oregon) continue to fight global warming by limiting highway expansion.
I’m with Doug on the gas tax question. More roads where? Through whose neighborhood, farm or forest? And the public agrees.
ODOT needs to be re-organized to really manage transportation of all forms.
Where is high speed rail to Eugene? Why is garbage hauled by truck up the Gorge (Metro’s wisdom here)? Why are we looking at an I-5 mega-project over the Columbia when a local connector will do the trick?
Nothing scares me more than ODOT having more money.
Freight? ODOT is about to start work on a $50M project in N. Portland that will force all the freight off Columbia Blvd to merge where today it has an add-lane. Some “Freight Project.” 2 SOVs = 1 Semi. Let’s get to work, and help more of those folks alone in their rigs find another way.
With more $, ODOT would just do more of the same, which we know does not work. They need to learn how to do more with less.
I feel the same way about PDOT, Sam’s “dog & pony show” notwithstanding.
We have strangled the gas tax to the point where our arterials are soon going to be pothole-laden. Surely we can find some way to raise the tax sufficiently to maintain a very valuable public asset?
If necessary we can put into statute that it must be used for maintenance, not new capacity.
We have strangled the gas tax to the point where our arterials are soon going to be pothole-laden.
Chris, I don’t think the gas tax is entirely the problem. We have found money for all sorts of new road construction while not paying to maintain what we have.
If necessary we can put into statute that it must be used for maintenance, not new capacity.
I doubt it frankly. I don’t think the votes are there for limiting the gas tax to paying for maintenance. Its not just the highway engineers at ODOT that love shiny new projects, the politicians do as well. You don’t put asphalt overlays in your campaign literature.
I doubt it frankly. I don’t think the votes are there for limiting the gas tax to paying for maintenance. Its not just the highway engineers at ODOT that love shiny new projects, the politicians do as well. You don’t put asphalt overlays in your campaign literature.
So the conclusion then is that there are only two outcomes: build inappropriate new roads or allow the existing system our economy depends on to decay?
We have to be smart enough as a society to figure out a middle course. I refuse to give up hope.
To some degree, the legislature in actuality passed laws that in some form are practicing discrimination.
Examples include:
Clear accidents and stalled cars from freeways more quickly, but at who’s expense? Is this a public service or just another cost and possible storage cost passed on to the drivers that must also fix their cars?. And how about sweeping up bicycle accidents more quickly on arterial and city streets? How about the authority to remove bicycles illegally chained to poles or street signs and blocking sidewalks?
A fall down standard for motorists passing cyclists on roadways, but what about an “equal” fall down standard applied to safety pass standards when bicyclists pass cars on the right along with no more squeezing between cars on downtown streets?
More red light cameras cultivates more discrimination since the cameras do not record bicyclists not obeying the signals.
Teenagers not allowed to drive while using cell phones. It should be age indiscriminate and apply to all drivers.
So the conclusion then is that there are only two outcomes: build inappropriate new roads or allow the existing system our economy depends on to decay?
Or both, which is what we have now.
We have to be smart enough as a society to figure out a middle course.
I don’t know why, we haven’t done it with our health care system.
I refuse to give up hope.
OK. Putting aside my cynicism for a moment, further restricting the use of the gas tax in the constitution might be possible. It runs counter to what most alternative transportation advocates have generally supported, which is releasing the current restrictions.
But there needs to be some real evaluation of fundamental assumptions:
1) Does our economy really depend on the quality of our transportation system? What are those qualities that are important to the economy? Which facilities are really priorities?
2) Are we really talking about letting the transportation system deteriorate or about how much we will end up spending to restore it in the long run because we fail to maintain it in the short run?
3) Assuming the “economy” really does depend on the transportation system, who is getting the economic benefit? Shouldn’t people pay based on their economic benefit?
It seems to me the problem is not that we aren’t smart enough or that there aren’t solutions. Its that there is no consensus about what realistic expectations are for the transportation system.
Many people cling to the notion that there will be a “free” uncongested road between any two destinations with “free” parking on either end. That has been largely true for the past century. Many of us believe that time has ended. But until there is a critical mass of voters who have come to that same conclusion, we are going to continue to operate with that old paradigm.
Ultimately, at least in a democracy, people generally get the government they deserve. I think the notion that you can get around that generally makes things worse. Its the public, not the mechanisms of funding, that needs to be addressed.
It’s ironic that there is talk of all these new roads.
Where are they? What new roads have been built by ODOT? What new roads is ODOT planning to build?
Unlike Metro/TriMet, ODOT doesn’t have a massive plan to grid Portland with massive freeways. Anyone can look at ODOT’s webpage and find that for themselves. The only new project I can find is the Newberg-Dundee Bypass (a project I personally oppose; it’s completely unnecessary, a waste of money and is politically motivated, not driven by safety or demand.)
On the other hand, Metro seems to have no problem lining up TriMet’s dollars and stacking them for light rail projects, stealing those dollars from quality bus service that is a truly regional asset and putting them in select neighborhoods to enrich some developers. If we are going to demand that ODOT be held accountable for its dollars (i.e. “no new roads”), then TriMet and Metro should be held to the exact same standard.
By the way, how’s those 17 year old non-air conditioned busses doing today? In fact I saw one being pushed by a TriMet maintenance truck today up Broadway through the PSU campus while waiting for my ten minute late bus in the pleasant 97 degree heat.