ODOT warns of cutbacks to plowing amid falling gas tax revenue

[ZLoth]

From KGW8:

ODOT warns of cutbacks to plowing and other winter storm measures amid falling gas tax revenue

Snowstorms tend to stretch ODOT maintenance crews to their limits, and those limits will be a little lower this year due to declines in Oregon's gas tax revenue.

FULL ARTICLE HERE

[The Ghostbuster]

How well maintained are the roads in Oregon? With this cutback in funding, they will likely become even worse. I think they should ditch the gas tax for some kind of fee that is more sustainable for funding road projects.

[ZLoth]

I don't know as I only driven in Oregon during Summer-early Fall. But, it demonstrates how pushing for first more fuel-efficient vehicles and now electric vehicles, in the name of "going green" and being "more energy efficient", has the unintended side effect of reducing the revenue from gas tax. A mileage-based system may be a substitute, but what if you live in Portland, Oregon, but most of your traveling is in Vancouver, Washington or all over the state of Washington?

[hotdogPi]

what if you live in Portland, Oregon, but most of your traveling is in Vancouver, Washington or all over the state of Washington?

Washington needs the money, too, just like every state. And it actually makes more sense that they should get it rather than Oregon, as you're using and wearing down their roads.

[ZLoth]

what if you live in Portland, Oregon, but most of your traveling is in Vancouver, Washington or all over the state of Washington?

Washington needs the money, too, just like every state. And it actually makes more sense that they should get it rather than Oregon, as you're using and wearing down their roads.

How do you track that then? If you suggest GPS, I'll just step back and watch the explosion as people are absolutely anal about the government having access to what they call their "private affairs".

[Bruce]

Realistically: a combination of VMT and toll crossings on all the bridges. Miles driven until the timestamp provided by the toll bridge would go to the respective state.

That, or some kind of smart meter surcharge on electricity used for charging (which might be harder to track for residential use).

[hotdogPi]

Realistically: a combination of VMT and toll crossings on all the bridges. Miles driven until the timestamp provided by the toll bridge would go to the respective state.

How would this work for state boundaries where the border isn't a river?

[SectorZ]

With all the arguments about the very invasive issues on how to fund this stuff, how about the general fund like almost everything else? In advance, spare me the "people who shouldn't drive shouldn't pay for roads", because unless you're a hermit who grows your own food you benefit from the roads.

[ZLoth]

In advance, spare me the "people who shouldn't drive shouldn't pay for roads", because unless you're a hermit who grows your own food you benefit from the roads.

"People who shouldn't drive SHOULD pay for roads".

You take a bus, that is ON A ROAD.
If you bought it, a truck brought it ON A ROAD.

[Bruce]

With all the arguments about the very invasive issues on how to fund this stuff, how about the general fund like almost everything else? In advance, spare me the "people who shouldn't drive shouldn't pay for roads", because unless you're a hermit who grows your own food you benefit from the roads.

The general fund already has little room to add in transportation contributions, even when exhausting the entire rainy day fund.

ODOT might have to relinquish its state routes in more remote areas, as well as in-city where they can be turned over to PBOT.

[kalvado]

With all the arguments about the very invasive issues on how to fund this stuff, how about the general fund like almost everything else? In advance, spare me the "people who shouldn't drive shouldn't pay for roads", because unless you're a hermit who grows your own food you benefit from the roads.

It's going into political territory... But government spending as %% of GDP grew quite a bit over past hundred years. Right now, if I remember correctly, total government spending on all levels approaching 50%, including things like social security etc. And everyone has a pet issue which needs more money, be it affordable housing, roads, healthcare, military, public transportation, or whatever. Look up at headlines of any news site for more hot topics.
There are just not enough productivity in the system to cover all the wants...

[Plutonic Panda]

One of the richest states in the country can't afford to plow snow off of its roads, let alone expand freeways that are beyond way beyond capacity. This is nothing more than a matter of priority. I don't have the least bit of empathy or concern for this situation. You get what you vote for.

[Bruce]

One of the richest states in the country can't afford to plow snow off of its roads, let alone expand freeways that are beyond way beyond capacity. This is nothing more than a matter of priority. I don't have the least bit of empathy or concern for this situation. You get what you vote for.

"One of the richest"? Have you seen the majority of Oregon?

By median household income, Oregon is 18th. By collected tax revenue, Oregon is 23rd. It's not a rich state, and it has a low population + low density (which means much worse service burdens).

[Plutonic Panda]

One of the richest states in the country can't afford to plow snow off of its roads, let alone expand freeways that are beyond way beyond capacity. This is nothing more than a matter of priority. I don't have the least bit of empathy or concern for this situation. You get what you vote for.

"One of the richest"? Have you seen the majority of Oregon?

By median household income, Oregon is 18th. By collected tax revenue, Oregon is 23rd. It's not a rich state, and it has a low population + low density (which means much worse service burdens).

It's the 25th richest on average. Oregon is a very rich state.

[Plutonic Panda]

By these measures it's the 20th richest state: https://www.chamberofcommerce.org/how-rich-is-each-us-state/

[Rothman]

One of the richest states in the country can't afford to plow snow off of its roads, let alone expand freeways that are beyond way beyond capacity. This is nothing more than a matter of priority. I don't have the least bit of empathy or concern for this situation. You get what you vote for.

"One of the richest"? Have you seen the majority of Oregon?

By median household income, Oregon is 18th. By collected tax revenue, Oregon is 23rd. It's not a rich state, and it has a low population + low density (which means much worse service burdens).

It's the 25th richest on average. Oregon is a very rich state.

Wut.  The most average richest is very rich?

[Plutonic Panda]

One of the richest states in the country can't afford to plow snow off of its roads, let alone expand freeways that are beyond way beyond capacity. This is nothing more than a matter of priority. I don't have the least bit of empathy or concern for this situation. You get what you vote for.

"One of the richest"? Have you seen the majority of Oregon?

By median household income, Oregon is 18th. By collected tax revenue, Oregon is 23rd. It's not a rich state, and it has a low population + low density (which means much worse service burdens).

It's the 25th richest on average. Oregon is a very rich state.

Wut.  The most average richest is very rich?

Okay Oregon is a poor state that can't afford proper infrastructure projects. I mean I just I just provided links to show Oregon is no way shape or form a poor state but go on.

[ZLoth]

When you look at states west of the 80/20 line (Interstate 35 from Mexico to Kansas City, Interstate 29 from Kansas city to Canada) where roughly 80% of the US population lives in the eastern half, you see the following states ranked by population density (population divided by land area):

11. California
13. Hawaii
22. Washington
24. Texas (Portions east of the 80/20 line)
33. Arizona
35. Oklahoma (Portions east of the 80/20 line)
37. Colorado
39. Oregon
40. Utah
41. Kansas (Portions are east of 80/20 line)
42. Nevada
43. Nebraska
44. Idaho
45. New Mexico
46. South Dakota
47. North Dakota
48. Montana
49. Wyoming
50. Alaska

With the exception of California (highest population) and Hawaii (one of the lowest land area), you can see that many of the western states fall on the lower half of the density list. Even then, the two high population states (Texas and California) have the high population densities concentrated in major metro areas. California, for instance, has a high population concentration in the Los Angeles Metropolitan Statistical Area that exceeds the population all other states with the exception of New York, Texas, and Florida, plus San Francisco-Oakland-Berkeley MSA, San Diego-Chula Vista-Carlsbad MSA, and Sacramento-Roseville-Folsom MSAs combine to be almost 60% of California population. Meanwhile, in Texas, the major cities are along the I-35 Corridor (Dallas, Fort Worth, Austin, San Antonio) plus Houston to the East. West of the I-35 line, and there are only three minor Texas cities of note: El Paso, Amarillo, and Lubbock. Beyond those high-density areas, and you are looking at some areas that are sparely populated including Loving County, TX... population 57 (2021).

[Quillz]

One of the richest states in the country can't afford to plow snow off of its roads, let alone expand freeways that are beyond way beyond capacity. This is nothing more than a matter of priority. I don't have the least bit of empathy or concern for this situation. You get what you vote for.

"One of the richest"? Have you seen the majority of Oregon?

By median household income, Oregon is 18th. By collected tax revenue, Oregon is 23rd. It's not a rich state, and it has a low population + low density (which means much worse service burdens).

It's the 25th richest on average. Oregon is a very rich state.

How is it "one of the richest states" if it's smack dab in the middle?

[Quillz]

One of the richest states in the country can't afford to plow snow off of its roads, let alone expand freeways that are beyond way beyond capacity. This is nothing more than a matter of priority. I don't have the least bit of empathy or concern for this situation. You get what you vote for.

"One of the richest"? Have you seen the majority of Oregon?

By median household income, Oregon is 18th. By collected tax revenue, Oregon is 23rd. It's not a rich state, and it has a low population + low density (which means much worse service burdens).

It's the 25th richest on average. Oregon is a very rich state.

Wut.  The most average richest is very rich?

Okay Oregon is a poor state that can't afford proper infrastructure projects. I mean I just I just provided links to show Oregon is no way shape or form a poor state but go on.

He didn't dispute that or say Oregon was actually poor. He said you calling it "one of the richest states" and then providing statistics that show it to actually be right in the middle challenges the claim that it's "one of the richest states." Your choice of wording was very odd if you consider the middle/average to be the "one of the richest."

[Plutonic Panda]

Oregon is one of the richest states. It isn't cheap to live there and the taxes aren't low. That's my point. They shouldn't have much of an issue getting funds to build projects compared to a state like Mississippi.

[Quillz]

Well there are 24 richer states, so maybe they do have issues and perhaps you're oversimplifying things a bit.

[Bickendan]

Oregon is one of the richest states. It isn't cheap to live there and the taxes aren't low. That's my point. They shouldn't have much of an issue getting funds to build projects compared to a state like Mississippi.

Be careful with with terminology that have statistical import. Using 'richest' implies a position on a bell curve, which would be generally speaking in the top quarter in a generous meaning. If it's 24th out of 50, yes, you are very technically correct, but also extremely disingenuous, as that's literally at the peak of the bell curve and by definition, average.
By this metric, no, I would not argue that Oregon is one of the richest states, not even close.

[Plutonic Panda]

Oregon is one of the richest states. It isn't cheap to live there and the taxes aren't low. That's my point. They shouldn't have much of an issue getting funds to build projects compared to a state like Mississippi.

Be careful with with terminology that have statistical import. Using 'richest' implies a position on a bell curve, which would be generally speaking in the top quarter in a generous meaning. If it's 24th out of 50, yes, you are very technically correct, but also extremely disingenuous, as that's literally at the peak of the bell curve and by definition, average.
By this metric, no, I would not argue that Oregon is one of the richest states, not even close.

Good points. I'm just trying to say that Oregon could find the funds if they wanted to. If the political will was there. Maybe I worded it wrong.

[Life in Paradise]

Oregon is a large state, but truly most of the population is concentrated in the Portland/Salem/Eugene  corridor of I-5 with a splattering of population in the rest of the state.  Also, they have very few state or US roads outside of those concentrated areas.  Compare that to say, Pennsylvania.