Oregonians need to talk to some Texans and Floridians. People HATE the toll roads that are everywhere. It also creates this "the rich get to go fast, poor get stuck in traffic jams" dichotmy that is only going to fuel the "eat the rich" movement.
@@point29 also the rich A: can eat the toll easily to your point, also B: don't NEED to commute as much so tolls become a regressive tax on us filthy poors that need to go to the daily service jobs.
As a Floridian who absolutely loves cars, this situation seems the absolute textbook definition for a train route paralleling the tourist route. We just did it here in Florida, from Miami to Orlando, and almost the entirety of the route is producing massive profits for the company that did it, and that's just from ridership not real estate, which was the planned profit producer for the company, it's 30 minutes faster than if you did 10 miles an hour over the speed limit the entire way and encountered zero traffic the whole way. In this situation in Oregon you have a single road without many offshoots with neighborhoods and other areas that need to be serviced, with periodical towns that are popular for tourists on their way to their destination. These are great places to put train stations for small stops along the way.
When we passed cannabis legalization in Oregon it was written into the law that A: it's not allowed to be dumped into a slush fund and B: it was dictated that all taxes from it be used for education first and our infrastructure second. We produce hundreds of MILLIONS of dollars in taxes from cannabis alone. So rather then tolling us for more money our government needs to be held accountable for them dumping those taxes into a slush fund to fund their personal vacations only to hear them say "we can't account for where the money went!" This is ridiculous.
If this State would stop paying for the sex change surgeries and the other woke crap (DEI) and spend the money they get responsibly, they would have the money.
Any government agency that can't account for every red cent of the taxpayers' money should be audited with a fine-toothed comb and have all future spending require third-party approval and verification until the audit is complete. Thinking also of the Pentagon.
Classic Oregon Government BS, just Business as usual for our politicians. At least under Kitz, the money magically returned with a $3B surplus, and not the constant $3B-$5B deficit we always have under all other governors. The good old days!
@@Roxor128 I've never seen and thus didn't know Intel named any of their processors off of our local names. Kinda cool, though Intel is a terrible company.
@@TheCriminalViolin A bit of research shows Tualatin was the last Pentium III microarchitecture (starting at 1GHz clock speed) and Willamette was the initial one for the Pentium 4. So, yeah. Never owned one. The Pentium III I did have was one of the earlier ones, and I was using AMD hardware when the Pentium 4 was current. And yeah, Intel, not a great company, even if they did create the great x86 architecture. May it outlast the company that created it!
It's all about funneling tax dollars to private interests. Things should be either totally public or totally private I dont now about America but here in BC the ministry of highways used to be a small army of trailblazers, surveyors, machine operators, engineers, top drivers, and gearheads and they did absolutely everything right down to custom building trucks if one that met the need couldnt be bought the only private contractors were brought in to do specialty things like bridges which was more about time efficiency bridges need as much manpower as the whole rest of the route.
There is a ton of interstates with tolls, in PA I-76 , I-276, I-376, I-476 and I-95. I-80, I-90 and I-99 have no tolls. The word "freeway" is not in our vocabulary.
An interstate can be tolled as indicated by others here. The MassPike came into existence in 1957 and only in 1959 did it get the I-90 designation. Being a toll road still did not entitled it to federal highway dollars that other states get to maintain their interstates. Of course with the BigDig and I-90 being extended thru the Ted Williams Tunnel to East Boston and federal money being involved in that.....I find that confusing.
@@AmalgamationofMan no it is not. Most EZ Pass states collect tolls on Interstates, and I-90 is tolled in all states east of the Mississippi River except PA.
I have a feeling that if the interstate bridge is tolled, Vancouver is going to boom like crazy. Lots of residents in WA would rather work in Vancouver than in Portland since there is practically no commute, no toll, and no state income tax.
@@DaddyPilkers LOL Sorry but no. Vancouver would be a shell of what it is now and that is because of Portland. Portland is there the jobs are. The proof os all the southbound traffic in the morning and the north bound traffic in the afternoon. Secondly, goin to any portland area mall and you will see hundreds of washington license plates. The working folks generally stop in portland on the way home for a lot of every day shopping.
You can tell he used to live here because he nailed the pronunciation of everything and even had a version of the 99W Drive In Theater sign. Great video Rob!
11:12 Point of clarification: That historic bridge _is_ a state highway. It's currently OR-43, or the Oswego Highway #3. ODOT wants to turn the entire route of OR-43 over to local control, however.
@@RoadGuyRob It just barely does. I'll have to check the data/straightline charts on where it actually ends. (Also, because of how Oregon's wacky dual highway/route system operates, there may be a chance that OR-43 ends in a slightly different place than the underlying highway.) Edit: Yep, it looks like one of those wacky situations. By the most recent definition available (2008), OR-43 ends at OR-99E in Oregon City. However, according to the 2020 straightline data, state maintenance on the Oswego Highway #3 actually ends at the corner of 7th and Main, two blocks away. This potential disconnect is pretty recent, with those two blocks reverting to Oregon City sometime between 2012 and 2018. Fun fact: That old bridge used to carry US-99/US-99E from 1926 until about 1939, when it was rerouted through Milwaukie and east Portland in a new alignment.
@@jr98664yt I also don't think it was Rob who made that claim. It was his interviewee, if memory serves. It's a very minor error, really, but I wouldn't be a roadgeek if I wasn't needlessly pedantic about road history lol.
My daughter works for a department of transportation in another state. She tells me there are only a few ways a state can put a toll on a Federally paid for highway without breaking Federal law. (it's on the Federal DOT web site). And Robb points out Oregon's proposal doesn't work. I live in Oregon - these ideas are driven by ODOT and not by the people. Also, EVS pay a sharply higher annual registration fee (hundreds of $s extra), and Oregon is proposing a "per mile" fee for all vehicles. The congestion pricing model seems to conflict with the state's price gouging law. The latter says when a disaster happens, supply runs short, vendors can't charge more (so they just run out of product). Congestion pricing is the same - busy traffic and out of lanes, so let's charge more money. How is that not the same as the price gouging they prohibit? Weird. Finally, state parks were once free admission; then OR began charging admission or parking fees at many of them. Now the state wants to charge more to use the roads paid for by others already (e.g. Federal government). Oregon is now ranked 42nd in the nation for economic outlook as of 2024. Which may explain the problem in ways no one wants to talk about.
Oregon is obsessed with charging us for literally everything and anything. Whenever they add it in, it is never enough to them. Increase taxes? Yep. Add new taxes? Absolutely. Charge for access to our own state parks and public lands we already pay to have, make new ones and maintain? You bet. Add tolls in as many places as possible? Of course! Don't forget to constantly enforce ever increasing prices on each of the latter, too! And let's make sure to also consistently jack up cost on utilities and permits and tags while we're at it, too. Registration? Yes please! Can never have enough ways to rob us citizens of our hard earned money, don't you know?! It's a royally pain the butt to live here at this point. It is so damn irritating.
I would clarify that these seem to be driven by the Oregon Legislature in AB 2017. I really get the impression ODOT are the "middle-men" squeezed between what the legislature mandates and what the public will accept. The put on a brave face and take one for the team.
@@RoadGuyRob Incredibly well put. DOT's often get put in the middle and are tasked with finding solutions that are nearly impossible. "We need to get more money but don't use any of existing tax forms we already have." it's a tough spot that, like any government decision, will not make everyone happy
Rob, this is by far the most informative video i have ever seen on this local issue. Amazing job my friend!! Helps me understand the problems we face and how the solutions are few.
@@BackToTheGame.98 you keep stacking, packing, and racking up population in these high rise apts,...but your road infrastructures stay the same small regardless of what mode of transportation you take there's no room for anybody to commute anywhere. its 24, 7days, 365 all year round its a mess,...there's no plan to widen any road or highway to alleviate the congestion, so tolls are redundant,...show us the plans before you ask for $$$,.....
Glad it was helpful. Transportation financing becomes quite fascinating as a person peels back all the layers and complications. Lack of a sales tax option makes it really tricky!
During traffic jams, the freeway moves like 300 cars/hour (in each lane) instead of 2,400 cars/hour. The trouble is, all the ideas to fix that become unpopular: 1. Widening. It's expensive, especially when money is tight. And not popular among a large number of Oregonians. 2. Holding cars at the ramp meter. This makes traffic back up, sometimes for 6+ minutes to enter the freeway. The line spills onto city streets. 3. Variable-price tolling. Unpopular for all the problems I mention in the video. I can see how #3 seems appealing, since it generates revenue instead of costing money. But ultimately we live in a representative government so, over time, transportation policy has to reflect something that most people are okay living with.
The odometer tax seems like a bad idea, there’s a lot of people on the Portland interstates that aren’t registering their vehicles in Oregon. There are commuters who live in Washington state but drive to Portland for work, and long-haul travelers who are on their way from Washington to California.
That's the real challenge, right? Like if California did an odometer tax, it would probably work okay since none of the major population centers border another state. But in Portland, a huge amount of the traffic drives in and out of Washington state. Heck, I would drive into Vancouver just to print my scripts out (at the Fed Ex Office on Mill Plain). Those are miles that I should be paying Washington, not Oregon.
I live in hillsboro and I'd say 30% of the cars over here are Washington plated. That means they cross Portland and come west. It's why that tunnel is clogged for 8 hours a day. The odometer tax wouldn't apply to them so that doesn't really work, I don't think.
Oregon should just efficiently use the money it already has by building things itself instead of making Sweetheart deals with construction companies, we could actually afford to lower taxes if they weren't wasted.
@@RCenal Not if voters keep voting for corruption. If voters paid attention and voted in people that would work for the people and voted out those that don't there wouldn't be money in doing it wrong. People think getting involved in politics means seeing who their favorite social group says to vote for instead of actually getting looking in to what's going on.
As an EV Driver in Oregon, we do pay that Gas Tax in the form of a significantly higher Registration Fee. Like $350 on top of the normal Registration fee.
@@BrianscoronetWith a $0.58 per gallon gas tax (in video), that means $350 = 603 gallons of gas. At 25mpg, you can drive 15,000 miles. You would need a gas car of only 16mpg for the 10,000 miles to be true. That said, the original comment is also inaccurate. I don't find the $350 figure ON TOP of base registration in OR. It's actually $115/year according to ODOT. That's 198 gallons of gas or 4,956 miles of driving at 25mpg. Of course, with half a billion in deficit to maintain what they already have, neither is sustainable. OR, like many states, has a pilot program to charge all drivers per mile they drive. This will likely replace both gas tax and EV registration tax.
@@Brianscoronet: You're making multiple invalid assumptions. What is the mileage of the ICE or hybrid car? How many miles do they drive. (I only drive 3K miles a year, for example).
I live in Washington and work and go to school in Portland, If there was a tax to drive on the OR roads I do not think I could afford to drive because of how much driving I have to do to go to and from work and school home and back. I also can't change schools and my job since the program I'm in doesn't have another program near by and its also link to my job.
As a former Delmarvan, I feel for those OR folks in those touristy towns. It's like the state is getting in your face saying "Yea this issue is wholly induced by out-of-area tourists, and in response, you all as residents and people working here will be paying a toll day-in day-out to compensate"
Residents should really get a pass for it. If they're doing e-toll systems, shouldn't be too hard to build-in. License plate registration should already have address attached, no?
@@bluerendar2194more likely you use the address on your driver’s license and billing address to apply for a discount, because depending on the type of toll tag, you can add multiple cars, like a rental car if you’re away, or if you have multiple cars, or your car is in the shop.
@@sblack53 Well, that can be a separate application - they can pretty much just automatically add everyone whose registered residential address is in the towns. I think it would do a lot to mollify people's frustrations by not having them jump hoops through it. Not like there's much room for mistake the other way - even if a few people are put on by accident (e.g. they moved away, car is sold, etc.), it should make minimal, if any, difference over the cost of trying to police it that hard.
Yeah, Oregon does this universally. They do the same with accessing our own State Parks. "Hey, so like, sure, you literally pay taxes that fund and maintain, even adding in new state parks and rec areas, but instead of only charging out of state folks to visit our park lands, we're going to instead charge everyone, including you all over again to then simply access and use the parks you pay taxes to fund. Thanks."
That is outright impossible. A state can not make a federal highway into a toll road with out the federal governments permission and the federal government has made it literally impossible to get that permission. The federal government many decades ago had permanently banned any federal funded highway to become a toll road that was not one already. For a road to be a toll road its mandatory to be either a privately owned highway or it has to be a state highway. The I5 is a federally funded highway. There is a way around that ban and that is having separate roads next to the federal highway where you can choose to either use the free highway or to use the toll road and that separate lanes are not built or maintained with federal funds.
Since when has breaking laws ever stopped private companies working with politicians? Rules only exist if they are both respected and enforced, but neither of those are true if profit is involved
Over a decade ago, two inside lanes of multi-lane I-95 (each way, N - S) were separated by concrete barriers for nearly 11 miles in the Miami, FL area to become a tollway. The tolled-lanes expansion project on I-95 has grown northward to Fort Lauderdale and is expected to reach Jupiter, FL in the coming years, nearly 100 miles.
@@kittenwizard4703 I don't think that some company or multable of dozens of very high level public officals who are going to do something that is so extremely easy to uncover and catch are going to risk 20 years in federal prison to put in some road. This is not the CCP in China who have little to no oversight or accountability or some some back water little town that you are talking about. You are talking about bribing the Secretary of Transportation who sits under the Presedent of the United States them self and a great many of the people under them you are talking about to get this approved. Yes it would actually take the Secretary of Transportation to approve such a new turnpike.
Well, Trump would probably look favorably on Oregon getting to turn the middle of I-5 into a toll road, not for any budgetary reasons, but as retribution for Californians, Oregonians, and Washingtonians not giving him any Electoral College votes. Also, some commerce flows back and forth between Mexico and Canada on I-5, so Trump would probably bulldoze all of it if he could.
From what you said about Federal law, I think tolling could fly IF THEY TOLLED JUST THE TWO COLUMBIA RIVER BRIDGES. They are planning on reconstructing those, so the tolling would meet the bridge reconstruction exemption. They would have to toll both bridges simultaneously, in order to avoid making the diversion problem manifest. Assuming there is nothing in the law about demand pricing, they could even make the tolls variable to help spread out demand and minimize congestion on the two bridges.
If we want to fix congestion there should be a toll applied to using the left lane like $5 for every whole minute spent there but the counter resets every time you move back over. Actually enforce people keeping right except to pass instead of adding 400 lanes.
@@georgesackinger2002 - Who says? You could make the toll $16 a car, like the NY-NJ bridges. That would put a real urgency into extending LRT to Washington State.
I have not heard a thing about replacing the Glen Jackson Bridge. I knew going in though it was likely soon going to come up and they'd start in on that one too. It was built in the 60s itself as expected, so it will definitely need a rebuild sooner than later, or at least a heavy retrofitting to modernize it.
Part of the problem with a tax on each gallon of gas paying for highways is that in 1975 the average car got 13 miles per gallon on the highway and now they get 26. Meanwhile,the costs of the labor, equipment and materials needed to construct or maintain highways have gone up every year, and the wear and tear inflicted on highways per car is the same for EVs as the 1970's gas guzzlers..
Another bothersome detail is that by not tolling the east west highways the wealthy in the west hills and washington county avoid the tax. At the same time the lower income areas of north and south portland get stuck paying as more of their traffic involves commutes to places like vancouver and other communities. Something the critic alluded to when he spoke of bedroom communitieies.
A great thing to help the road we DO have.......STOP letting people wear studded tires for as long as they do. Here in Portland we get very little snow and ice to warrant studded tires being worn from the beginning of Nov to the end of Mar. This is ridiculous and is destroying our roads unnecessarily!
A good set of Nokian Hakkapeliittas are all a person needs. You can't go wrong with tires manufactured in a country that sees snow 6 months a year. A good runner up is Michelin Blizzaks. No studs necessary. Honorable mention to Michelin Pilot Sport AS4 and Continental ExtremeContact DWS06+, both are all season tires, and both destroy the snow. They're just not as good in ice as the former two are. I never saw a need for studded tires, though all 3 states I've lived in have them outlawed so I lack experience with studded tires.
I live in Wisconsin. We banned studded tires decades ago. I think Oregon has some mountains. You should ban studded tires and allow chains only in the mountains and only during designated weather. We don't have mountains but we certainly have hills and curves and the whole state gets snow and ice. We salt or brine roads. We get by with all season tires. Some people have snow tires. Sounds like you have a problem. You can't have everything. Our cars rust to death. We have sales taxes, income taxes, and thousands in property taxes. We can barely leave Wisconsin without paying tolls to Illinois or going hundreds of miles out of our way.
I like all of this... except the "falling snow" part. Brrrrr! And the coffee part. (That's on me. Didn't grow up around the stuff. A warm tea or a hot cocoa sounds great, though!)
I'll give myself a raise, then! Thank you very much for the compliment, Pat! As a one-man-band (write, shoot, edit, admin), it's not easy work so a kind comment like yours feels very satisfying to read.
I'm slowly using up all the older footage I shot with the Class 0 vest. The old vest was so unsafe, I've almost been hit by cars twice. Hasn't been a problem with the new vest.
Another massive issue that underlies this and countless other budget deficits Oregon has, is the fact that this state is infamous for deep corruption and "missing funds" with all things budgets. Tina Kotek actually emphasizes her intentions to dig as far as possible to find that corruption and where the money keeps disappearing to, which may be part of why she said no to the proposals and shoved it down the road. It may buy her or others time to learn how budgeting works, and prioritization of projects where those funds will go, and thus where they will not go. At ODOT, there is a endless heap of corruption, missing funds, unfinished projects, cost overruns (well beyond the norm, actually), and lack of prioritization of projects, with imbalance in the funds each get. Then they immediately beg and demand more from us as taxpayers. This cycle repeats over and over and over again. And when the people collectively have repeatedly shown you they will NOT support expansion of freeways, new highways or freeways, tolls, and do NOT trust you or the project groups you facilitate and are a partner of (like the IBR, which is just the CRC with a new coat of paint and a new set of faces), it shows not only have they learned their lessons, but you won't be getting away with the BS you have never stopped trying to push through and force us into funding. TriMet similarly experienced this exact lesson learned rejection at the last "Transportation Bond Measure" proposal in 2019, itself originally was supposed to go up in 2017, but they panicked realizing how aware people had become that they are really just new MAX line funding packs, so it was a instant HELL NO from voters. It takes people here a ridiculous and infuriating amount of time to learn and finally admit when something like it is true, and reflect in in their votes. It is why the IBR (again, the same as the CRC just rebranded) and TriMet cannot get remotely enough trust or support in people to allow them to go through with their projects. They did that to themselves, and as always, continue to pretend they can't possibly understand how it is possible and why it is happening to them. When it comes to these Tolls on I-5 & I-205, another massive problem with this is the fact that literally no one has the ability to access Washington from here, or Oregon from there, without taking one of them. The next closest possible crossings into Washington or Oregon over the Columbia River is in Longview/Rainer, or at the Bonneville Dam. We need more options to travel between the states in the Portland/Vancouver region than the two we have. And obviously the majority of people will just crowd onto more local thoroughfares and streets to commute north and south through the Metro area. That's obvious, as TriMet is stupid unreliable, lacks the frequency and capacity needed to function as a proper alternative and option for getting around, and they also lack a lot of coverage, too. It is another reason it is a godawful idea to toll them. And even on them, the demand and congestion is ridiculous. OR 8, OR 10, 99W & E, OR 43, OR 210, the endless other mainline routes throughout the east side of the Portland area. East/West or North/South doesn't change it much, if at all. Another aspect of this the reality that the Portland area is split by the river, so East/West, meaning most people are going to actually be trying to commute between the two sides of the river. Often times that will still require us to take the North/South routes, including the freeways, even if for only a short little spur. In example, for me, if and when I decide to take my car down to Alex's Garage in Eugene for repairs (I live in the Hillsboro/Aloha region), or to visit my Dad, Grandma and Step family down in Keizer, I would say "f**k it" and only take 175th/Roy Rogers down to 99 in Sherwood to the state route that crosses the Willamette at Newberg, and take it all the way down into Keizer passing through St. Paul on the way. The east side would pretty much just stick to 99E to access Salem/Keizer, Eugene/Springfield, etc. The only north/south option outside of I-5 to cross the Willamette down in/by Wilsonville is the bridge I mentioned on the far southeast corner of Newberg. Now just imagine again, the reverse of that, trying to access Washington, or get somewhere in the Vancouver/Woodland region. We're f**ked. East side of the river has to divert to Bonneville, west side has to go all the way to Rainier, which is almost exactly halfway, if not halfway to Astoria for christ sake. It is beyond unreasonable. Edit was too correct 42 ro 43. I knew it didn't quite sound or feel right to me when I typed 42 initially.
And hw30 to the bridge at longview is already a disaster most days during the summer as it can barely handle the normal volume of cars crossing it now.
LOL Oregon already tolls and over charges the trucks over 0.28 cents per mile. Each semi truck drives through Oregon pays over 200 dollars. WTF this a rip off when it only cost about 2 cents per mile to drive to New Mexico and they have better roads
I remember when North Carolina wanted to tax I-95 because it needed to be expanded, but most traffic was just passing through. The Feds said no to that, so they devised a plan B to make just sections of it a toll, still not good. Then they proposed a four-lane express tolls through the center with 75mph speeds for it, throughout the state, that was when the state legislators balked. So we are still where we are with I-95.
It's not just IF you have a bus or max to get where you're going but you also need to consider the time it takes to do so, I had a job that was 15 minutes away by car or 90+ minutes by bus, that 4x commute is the ONLY reason why I even learned to drive in the first place.
We pay taxes so the roads can be maintained so adding a toll would be double taxation which is supposed to be illegal. I'm really frustrated because taxpayers paid half a billion to widen 405 between Bellvue and Renton and they still want to toll us. I have a long commute because I can't afford housing near work and I often have to pay a fee to park at work, its getting to the point where I can't afford to go to work. Meanwhile the government continues to spend more than it takes in = bigger and bigger debt payments = less money for needed programs and it doesn't matter who I vote for they always overspend. Why is it that the average person always has to live within their means but the government never has to live within its means?
I'm still struck by the lack of a comprehensive traffic plan around projects like this. Like, why not first build out proper alternatives to driving and then start mode shifting? It's not like any of this is a mysterious dark art, cities have done this for decades. By doing it half-assed you're going to get (legit) complaints of people who don't have good alternatives to driving and see this as a strict tax increase. Which, by the way, is also fine because driving is quite expensive and highly subsidized, but then... make sure everybody pays!
Proper alternatives usually translates to massively overpriced infrastructure projects that states can't afford, not to mention stealing enough land from marginalized communities for the footprint for the rail/bus hubs and lines. And real world, good alternatives only work in dense urban areas. In suburbia, the car is the only practical option.
Part of the problem is these toll plans were devised around eliminating a budget deficit so the toll money that should be going towards transit improvements instead goes towards the highway spending we’ve already normalized. It’s just highlights the giant hole our highway system has gotten ourselves into. It’s too expensive so we need people to use it less so it costs us less but we can’t (or choose not to) invest more in transit until our highway spending goes down. And that’s before we get into the issue that often highways aren’t just taking transit money, they’re also actively making the transit experience worse (e.g. a train station that is separated by a highway). If we wait until transit is great before we stop subsidizing highways, we’ll never get there. Now I think in this case they could’ve at least proposed an expanded transit plan along side the tolling proposal but again the question is how do you pay for that if the tolls are just going to highway construction.
The problem is that the state already doesn't have enough money to pay for the roads now. They'll have to raise taxes or fees somehow to pay for it, and it's better to raise those taxes on drivers only than on everyone and also tax people who take transit and don't cause the high prices on the roads
@@dividebyzero1000 In almost every case (and literally this video), the state can’t afford the highway projects already. So it’s a blatant double standard to only say we can’t afford transit projects while billion dollar highway bridges (not even entire roads) are waived through. You also seem to be confused about which form of transportation stole land from marginalized communities. It wasn’t rail/buses (do you even know how small a bus footprint is??), it was highways. So if you recognize that taking land for marginalized communities is bad, and you just did, you obviously should oppose urban highways right? Or was that a dog whistle that you don’t actually care about…
@@Willgo373 Not sure why you think I am anti-transit or pro-car and throwing around terms like dog-whistles. The city I grew up near is expanding their light rail, and it is wildly expensive- but affordable given how dense the population is. I am actually HUGELY in favor of public transit. I just also see how poorly it works in less dense areas. You can't fix suburban sprawl with public transit. Buses can use regular roads, but then unless you take land by imminent domain and create cutouts (which my current town did not do), the buses screw up traffic far more than they help- plus they tend to be under utilized. So you end up with a bus with 10 people in it delaying 600 people. Rail, when they can share existing track with cargo is better, but you still need to take a bunch of land for stations and parking lots. I am for shifting codes to force densification, walkable cities, etc, just not going to blindly say that we shouldn't maintain bridges on vital corridors like I-5. And finally, just because highways construction was the biggest culprit in destroying marginalized communities 50 years ago does not give the government or big business the greenlight to do it now for other purposes. Ask any rich white yuppie if they want a commuter rail or wind farm in their backyard. No? Guess we better build it in the blue collar neighborhood and call it revitalization. These projects always target the people without the clout to fight back.
States cannot impose tolls on interstate freeways without Federal approval, and Federal approval has NOT been granted - in fact, it has been declined twice - for both I-5 and I-205 in Oregon. It seems the State wants to ram tolls through anyway, which would be unconstitutional at both the State and Federal level. 1) it restricts free travel, and 2) it surmounts to the imposition of a tax without a vote of the people.
Hate to break it to you, but the ENTIRE STATE of Oregon is ALREADY a toll road. Has seriously nobody ever noticed that I-5 is almost entirely 70 or 75 mph EVERYWHERE else and 55 from border to border in Oregon? Boy it sure is weird how much more dangerous that road is in Oregon that they need those low speed limits and dozens and dozens of unmarked cop cars eh?
It's because they've misappropriated funds that were for maintenance/upkeep, expansion, & repair... That was budgeted (federal monies also apparently).... We get a kicker check/tax refund for excess monies (for received tax monies above what is budgeted)... Tolls as an option means they're not doing their jobs correctly....
I was just thinking this. How are we getting a kicker if money is appropriated properly? What am I missing? Might need to research exactly where/how the kicker is calculated.
@@Queenread82 if Oregon's approved budget is 1,000 & they receive 1,500... Then the 500 gets paid back to the taxpayers (that's the basics of the kicker program on a very small scale).... All the interstates ( I-5, I-205, ect.) have federal (given) & state (budgeted) monies for upkeep & expansion... They have been spending it on asphalted bike/walking paths & various other things throughout the state, instead of banking it to use when needed.... The money for the expansion was building up, but they called it excess (for that year, but not for the 5-10yrs buildup needed for the bigger projects) & spend it... then turn around & say we need more taxes/tolls to pay for it.... When they've had it all along... (If they could/would keep their little fingers out of it)
It would be nice to simply say "Oh look, money isn't being spent right." But honestly, building roads is something American states are pretty good at bidding out appropriately. Back in the 1920s, there was a TON of graft. But in the 1930s, the feds help states whip their programs into shape and they've gotten really good at it over the past 90 years. The trouble is, inflation has chewed away at most of the federal help we had back in 1993. States do a pretty good job maintaining roads on their own, but always have needed federal help for expansion. Nowadays, it appears like this has flipped. Feds help maintain the interstate routes and counties/states have to generate revenue for expansion. Hence why there are more sales tax measures, tolling, etc.
@@RoadGuyRob that sounds good, but in a gaslighty way for Oregon... I'll breakdown what I stated.... You have a car that we share, it cost 60 a month for insurance And we figure 25 a month for maintenance & upkeep (oil,tires,ect.) Fuel costs = the tank will be filled after each use by the user... We get a joint car account from the bank (You have the only card) & we pay our half's of 1020.00 1st year.... Tot= Ins. 720, maint 300... Tires are good, but two oil changes -100, that leaves 200 extra ? No those tires are going to need replacing someday, & it will be more than 200). So 200 in account.... 2nd year...(covid) tot = 1020, -50 (oil change) we didn't use it that much so 250, +200=450 in account.... 3rd year... tot=1020, -100 (oil changes) so 200 +450= 650 in account.... & You see a deal on a shiny big screen TV & borrow 300, (Your logic, tires & car are ok) now 350 in account... 4th year.... 1020, -100 (oil changes) so 200+350=550 ( I don't know about TV) so I'm thinking 850 tot. & It's a good thing because now we need tires & a tune up... Tires 600, tune up & parts 250 tot=850.... Then You tell me we're 300 short & I need to come up with the difference... (Tolls/added taxes), You=state & federal, me=tax payer THEY misappropriated the funds on shiny things.... They used the federal money to maintain while using the allocated state money elsewhere... Hoping we wouldn't see their ineptitude, & covering the theft by gaslighting us with a need for tolls and taxes.... so they can do it again, & again... (Make a budget, Stick to it, & vote separately on any individual shiny things, so they can be saved for & paid for) it's not surplus money to be spent on whatever feels good in the moment, it's money needed for the projected costs that will come, & like You mentioned, it hopefully added a bit for inflation.... Sorry that got a bit long... & I did enjoy Your video, Thank You
Couple of comments from Austin, Texas: I35 going through Austin is one of the most congested roads TX130 was built east of town as a toll road. Even it shows red on Google maps sometimes. The idea was that a lot of traffic would divert to 130 thus improving I35. Hasn't really worked out that way. The tolls on large trucks are pretty expensive. So, who pays the toll? Fleet trucks (owned by a single entity) quite often tell their drivers "if you have a choice between a toll road and a free road, take the free road" (because company doesn't want to pay the tolls). For Owner/Operators, who own their rig, those tolls come right out of their pocket. Maximize take-home pay? Use the free road. I 35 is being rebuilt to add at least one toll lane in each direction. It might be done a few years from now. We have one road on the west side of town that does have a congestion based pricing and traffic usually is moving pretty quick. Until... the speed limit on that toll lane is 70. Invariably, someone who is at a slower speed means everything stacks up behind them. And then... what separates the toll lane from the free lanes are just those rubber posts that bend out of the way. Occasionally, a car in the free lane next to the toll lane decides "I'll just cut over here" without watching for traffic already in the toll lane. Quick, multi car wreck and ALL the lanes come to a standstill. And if you're really unlucky, the incident is visible to traffic going the other direction. This leads to the gawkers who feel it necessary to slow down, thereby jamming up the other lanes.
I-90 was supposed to be free in NY by now. But the tolls apparently help maintain it. Wouldn’t be able to tell driving on the bridges that they maintain it but that’s whatever haha
It’s already told it’s called gas tax. That’s what it was, therefore and meant for…. Why is it worth seen all these ideas and concepts that were done in California and other states all of a sudden now in Oregon. We have a high enough gas as it is and if you’re concerned about gas cars just understand that electric cars way more than gas cars and they ruined the road faster we’ve spent enough money on the bridge with no results..
They already do. This video is very misleading. Maybe Rob just doesn't know or he's anti-ev. Oregon charge a $115 annual EV registration fee. Oregon offers a road usage charge program as an alternative to the registration fee. $200 annual EV registration fee (2025) that increases to $250 annual registration fee (2026).
I'd be happy have my gas taxes subsidize electrics - but I think a tax at public charging stations would be a reasonable add. the biggest thing is we do need to raise the gas tax. - and Portland already has a local gas tax in addition to the state and federal gas tax, IIRC. (yes, verified at 10 cents per gallon)
Commerce Clause should kick the SHIT out of this idea. Interstates were funded by the federal government for commerce and military security. Back in 2020, federal courts slapped down Indian Reservations for attempting to strangle travel along federal roads under the pretext of COVID.
Just an addition to why New Jersey is so mad about the congestion pricing. To drive into New York, people driving in from New Jersey ALREADY pay a toll to cross the river into Manhattan in the tunnel. This is NOT the case when driving into Manhattan from Brooklyn. All NJ is asking for is to toll ALL the river crossings so there is not a disparity between which river crossing is used. So either toll the East River bridges to bring all them into alignment, or exempt the New Jersey drivers from the congestion pricing since they are already paying to enter the area. THAT is why NJ is mad about it.
Why should New Yorkers pay an additional toll on a bridge that is wholly within their city, managed by NYCDOT, and wholly paid for by their higher than NJ taxes? The Port Authority receives zero dollars in funding from taxpayers in either New York nor New Jersey, tolls are the only way the Holland and Lincoln Tunnels are funded, as Port Authority holdings, along with the GWB and all three of their crossings from NJ to Staten Island.
@@sblack53 Wholly paid for by higher taxes? Uh, no. All of the repairs on those bridges were partially or fully funded by FEDERAL money. Check Skanska's website for details on the most recent Williamsburg bridge repairs.... The line for East river bridge maintenance funding in the NYC budget is a rounding error. (see page 3 of the DOT budget) And the goal here is CONGESTION reduction. The tolls already reduce the number of cars from New Jersey. Applying tolls on the NYC bridges would reduce the number of cars going into the area and probably succeed at reducing congestion. The credit of $3.00 isn't enough, what it will do will just shift more people from the QMT and HCT to the 4 toll-less bridges.
If NJ residents are so upset, just find a job in NJ and stay out of NY. It’s hard enough for NYers to find jobs that NJ residents are taking. So they shouldn’t complain about Congestion Pricing if they’re contributing to it by working in NY and taking their money back to NJ. You have to Pay to Play baby.
@@justin423it was difficult and costly enough to get the existing toll system to this point. Congestion will be reduced regardless and that's not even the only goal. Tolling the other bridges can and should come later, but NJ should have no say over infrastructure outside of its borders.
@@HeavyRayne My point was that the congestion charge is likely not going to decrease vehicles from New Jersey since they already pay a sizable toll to enter, and tolling the East River bridges could have been an easy first step to reduce congestion. (The E-toll readers could be installed in a weekend, see the bridge between Manhattan and the Bronx with just e-toll readers) If NY had done that, the people in NJ would not be as mad about it.
Oregonian here, who lives near the George Abernathy Bridge and uses it almost every day: The State is swimming in cash. In 2021-2023 the State ran a $5.6 billion surplus. It feels like the problem is an unwillingness to spend it on anything useful and instead it's used to fund big flashy refund cheques to residents. They call it the "Oregon Kicker", and last year they refunded thousands of dollars to each taxpayer. That's not in itself a bad thing, and in fact, it's very popular, but when you have things like road construction projects begging for money or the Bureau of Labour and Industries backed up several years investigating wage theft claims, it seems like a portion of this money is really better spent improving public services rather than just being used for a publicity stunt by politicians to show how "thrifty" the State is. And really, the opposition of tolling is just classic NIMBYism. Everyone wants to use the road but nobody wants to pay for the road. We all want to drive on the road for free and have someone else pay for it.
Absolutely this. Whenever something about state funding in Oregon comes up, I think about the kicker. We're not missing the sources of funding. We're missing the willingness to DO something with it.
The kicker about that kicker (which I had not heard of before, but which instantly bothers me) is that it shows two crucial things: 1) The state is collecting more tax than it "needs" from citizens (keeping in mind that it is wrong in itself and kills economic growth by disincentivizing people and commerce to be in your polity) 2) The state is paying money that it otherwise wouldn't pay in order to process and return that excess tax. Therefore, the money is taken from citizens and businesses immediately, when it would be most useful (and due to inflation/interest, most powerful) for them, held by the government as an interest-free loans, effectively taxed (since someone has to crunch the numbers and send it back), and people celebrate this?
@NightKnight347 the state collects income tax at their normal rates. When income goes up, they do collect more money. When the tax revenue exceeds their projection, they give back the excess. Sounds good to me.
@@jpatrickmoore5158 I don't agree. Giving back the excess is almost the worst way to deal with the money. With $5 billion, the State could have created a huge sovereign wealth fund to invest in Oregon companies that would pay dividends for generations to come. It could have used that money to fund ODOT and scrap this rolling scheme altogether. It could build tens of thousands of new housing units across the state solving the housing shortage immediately and generating perpetual income for the government through rent payments. It could lower taxes to keep more of that money in the pockets of citizens to begin with. There are just so many better uses for the money than just writing cheques to everyone.
I enjoyed the video. Oregon invited and encouraged such an influx of people but didn’t prepare. Plus, the roads have to be built around lava flows with houses already built on them. I-5 at the Moda Center goes down to 1 usable lane for several hundred yards. That doesn’t work for all the traffic going between Seattle and LA.
An advantage is that the MAX system is genuinely really good. And the City of Portland has been aggressive at letting market demand better use land near rail lines (rather than freezing land use as old houses). Any land use demand that can happen near a MAX line can help delay a freeway expansion and save the state some money.
I reached out to ODOT a few years ago when this first came up. I am a truck driver and I go through Portland a lot. I suggested multiple ways to reduce traffic without forcing people out of their vehicles. The email I got back basically said "we are going with tolls end of discussion, we don't care that most truck drivers don't pick their loads or routes, we don't care that drivers, not their employers will have to pay the tolls, if you don't like it change jobs". The problem with our road system is that its designed, built and maintained by people who spend most of their time in an office running numbers and some of their time operating the equipment used to make the roads. Don't get me wrong the numbers you show are not entirely useless but they don't account for human behavior. A good example of accounting for human behavior is road construction in Nebraska. When they do work on I-80 they just set up cones and leave the freeway running at 70mph. People are given ample notice to get over into the correct lane. As a result no one slows down and because everyone is doing 70mph through the cone zone, no one is stopping to look, everyone is paying attention to where they are going and the vehicles in front of them. As a result accidents in construction zones in Nebraska are rare because everyone is going to fast to get distracted by the road crews. Portland on the other hand is an example of not accounting for human behavior. Too many interchanges, too many exits, too many people using the interstate as downtown bypass to get to work or go home. The biggest problem is trucks like mine, rarely are we actually going into Portland, most of us are either going to 84 or going into Washington. The law forces us to stay in the left lane and because of this coupled with cross town traffic, we have to slam on our brakes every time a car gets on the freeway. It takes a car seconds to accelerate, it takes us minutes. If they made the left lanes a free bypass for traffic not stopping in Portland and made it against the law to enter the bypass or exit it once inside city limits, most of us would take that bypass and traffic would be unplugged.
I agree with all of the part about human behavior and idiots in charge of highway planning. (And most states don't mandate drivers ed to get a license if 18+, compounding the issue.) But they are right that if you don't like the truck-driver covering the cost of the toll you should switch jobs, or more reasonably put toll costs in your contract. Your lack of basic business skill really isn't anyone else's problem.
@@TheDuckofDoom. I mean, to suddenly place a toll on an established trucking route, and telling the Transportation Industry to kick rocks is a bit harsh. Yeah, they can take a longer route and avoid I5. I'd love less trucks on it, but will be ready for the price increase of goods.
@@Puddingskin01 That isn't the point at all. The comment was about the emotional plea for the little guy, as if his internal company compensation is a valid argument against the toll its self. Yes, tolls have problems especially the way the dolts in OR want to apply them 24-7 (Giving drivers zero incentive to reschedule).
In London (ish), we do already have a congestion charge on the Dartford Crossing, and from next year on the (new) Silvertown tunnel and the (existing) blackwall tunnel. These are different to infrastructure tolls, which pay for the construction only, in that they can generate a profit for the government.
@@emouselOregonWanting to drive is up to you. Thanks for forcing your choice on others. What a mindless statement. Having less car-dependence is great and means *more* choice, not less. It doesn't mean not being able to drive, only that *not* driving becomes a realistic (and perhaps even attractive??) option more often. Public and private transport are both important; let's not pretend there should only be one blessed way to get around.
@jakew1362 That's great. But as he stated, unless you live in the inner part of the metro, it just doesn't work. I live fairly close to 2 max stations. But it would more than double my commute time to use them (80 minutes instead of 30). It also doesn't allow for the stops I make along the way: grocery store, bank, post office, picking up my kid from school. There are simply not enough hours in the day. As well as still having to have a car to get elsewhere, so not saving money by not paying for car insurance, registration, and maintenance.
The problem with I 5 is the Marquam bridge bottleneck and even worse is the lloyd district bottleneck. The lanes split in half at the junction with I 405, yet almost everyone is staying on I 5, and i think the desiign there just doesnt really reflect the traffic flow.
It's ridiculous that it goes from 3 lanes to 2 lanes, but at the 2 lane road a 4 lane road merges into 2 lanes into 1 lane to merge into the highway. And that happens in multiple places, not just the 405 bridge but up by jantzen beach, airport way, etc. The real solution is those oregon business' that have the bulk of their employees in Vancouver need to open offices across the river. It's a win for everyone as the workers would no longer pay income tax, wouldn't have to commute across the bridge, etc.
@KahluaBomb I will add, that a lot of people are going from I 5 to I 84 there as well and have to cross those lanes to get to that exit just at the end of the bridge. And most definitely, business needs to be more spread out around the different population areas.
We're going to need Semi trucks on the roads, at least until they make big drones that can safely fly those big shipping containers from ports directly to the back loading docks of supermarkets and big box stores. I've been around cargo helicopters. It was noisier and breezier than semi-trucks would have been.
Oregon has no sales tax, however the cumulative taxes the State collects are some of the highest in the nation. The bureaucracy never stops attempting to raise them even higher, hence the failed attempt to apply a sales tax onto business. (consumers would pay)
Rob, great video. I use those roads daily. Oregon needs to figure something out. I don’t have the answer but thank you for bringing to light some different perspectives.
I’d love to see a video about Lake Oswego’s refusal to expand public transit out of their city and pushback against the plans to build a bridge to Milwaukee despite it likely resulting in greatly reduced travel times.
You should see the maps of proposed freeway routes from the 1950's. I217 was originally to extend from I5 following what is now Kruse(sp?) Way thru the gold course area and across the Willamette at Lake Oswego. The bypass was later made as I205 farther south. And then later, I205 was planned to extend west at Tualatin to connect with a west side bypass that would carry Washington bound traffic across a new Columbia River bridge someplace like Longview. These decisions are made by people that don't care about our opinions. Witness the recent attempt to put the two tolling areas on I5 and I217 instead of one south of the Boone bridge on I5 so that it hit truck traffic heading to Seattle instead of the local population. Don't get me started on Oregon voters who approved of triple trailers so taxes on truck traffic between Washington and California is taxed less while causing more damage to bridges.
I don’t think that is Constitutional. What could keep them from making all roads toll roads? I think the government should pay us for allowing them to be the government.
Why don't they do an audit of the Oregon DOT and see where the money goes, clearly they can't handle what they get already, and I am from Oregon by the way.
same, and I think the same thing. Just look at all the people going through DEQ every day and how much they charge per car. Where does all that money go?
If its anything like Washington where the politicians decide what funding and where it goes to, then the politicians are the ones who need to have the pressure put on them. The fact I-5 through Portland looks like it hasn't been modernized at all says it all. At least Oregon for the most part has decent road surfaces just poor planning and anti-car politics.
Well at least with portland they throw money at bike lanes instead. Instead of expanding Powell to 4 lanes they kept 2 lanes and made massive sidewalks and bike lanes
101 down the coast is one of the most expensive roads in the world to maintain,,and it's still a death trap. It washes out every year ,,,check out the Hooskanaden slide area,,,and between Gold Beach and Port Orford,,alot of money gets spent there..101 gets shut down every year in that area.
Oregon needs to tread lightly with the tolls. It is against U.S. Law to charge a toll or any admittance fee to access a roadway constructed with federal money.
A hole in the boat is still a problem. Does not matter if it’s a new or old boat. Water comes in, if you don’t pump it out, you sink. In my case, if Oregon tolls I-205 and I-5, I simply don’t go there and choose spend my money elsewhere. I will use the Washington highways to go east and west. And then go around Portland. It’s annoying and takes more miles, time and maybe even more money. But they get what they want. They congestion price me off the Portland freeways.
Or do what us New Yorkers are doing with the current tolls already and with the congestion pricing they want to do, license plate flippers they flip the plate up and away from the cameras.
As a person that is forced to take toll roads everyday, don't let them start or they will keep expanding tolls on every new / reconstructed road. Then that rate increases every year. The promise that they gave to Dallas was that the Dallas North Tollway was going to be free after they paid for it. That was back in the 60's. Spoiler alert, they are still charging tolls today, they lied! 🤷♂🤦♂
The problem in Portland is, there hasn't been a major freeway or bridge built in the last 40 years. THAT is why there is congestion. You can't have tens of thousands of people move here every year and expect the same old tired infrastructure can handle it. Only two freeways running north/south? Fine, 40 years ago. I-5 only four lanes instead of eight running through parts of town? Fine, 40 years ago. Only two bridges across the Columbia instead of four? Fine, 40 years ago. Tolling will not fix this problem. Only more roads and bridges will, or fewer people.
The consensus I get (on background) from consultants who work for ODOT: Three thru lanes on every freeway. No more (except auxiliary lanes for merging). No fewer. That's why they are working to build out widening the 205 bridges and section near Stafford. And the Rose Quarter section of I-5, which is also just 2 lanes. But they also know that there is a significant portion of residents who strongly oppose wider California-style freeways. Without public support to build something that wide, there's no way it'll get funded.
The federal government may have something to say about that. Here in Pennsylvania, the governor wanted to toll Interstate I80 he was shut down because of the funds that paid for the highway. The federal government stopped the tolling of I80. Without paying the fed back for that road. The federal highway act I believe is what prevented Pennsylvania from tolling that road... Now new roads funded other ways can be tolled. Also special new lanes can be tolled on existing interstate highways but not the original highway act funded sections.
I've said for years in my community. I'm open to public transit, but the system needs to be fixed. Public transit in my community does not run 24/7, so I would only have transit coming home, no way to get to work, they need to bring the commute time from an hour and a half down to 45 minutes or less, and they need to remove the firearm restrictions. If they do those three things, I will gladly take public transit to and from work and leave my car in the garage the majority of the time. I was called entitled for making that suggestion. Okay, I'll take my car for the 20 minute commute, then.
firearm restriction? where are you commuting to that you need a gun? although i do entirely agree with your first two points, more area served & higher frequency/times is always nice, most busses in london run
@1e1001 Where am I commuting to? Somewhere in town, what difference does it make? They have restrictions that prevent me from using public transit. With those in place, I'll choose to take my car
I live in Portland. you should look into how Oregon and Portland have raised taxes including gas tax to 'fix' the roads- however the money is not used to 'fix' the roads. It is used for everything but the roads, including bike paths- which is not fixing roads
I got a chuckle out of your video. I could tell to the foot where you were recording this. It's in my neighborhood. To the subject of the video. I used to work in Beaverton, on the west side of Portland and lived on the east side. I only occasionally used I205 because the surface streets were faster. The city leaders really-really-really want me and drivers like me to use the Tri-Met transit system. Even if the tolls were $7 (and I couldn't use the surface streets) I would still pay the tolls because even during rush hour, my commute time was 60% less stuck in traffic than using public transit. I have timed it many times, even rush hour traffic is faster than the light rail.
Another problem with this plan is that there are only two bridges from the Portland area into Washington, and they're both part of interstate highways 5 and 205. The next closest bridge is Bridge of the Gods in Hood River, and then the Lewis and Clark bridge in Kelso, WA. It's simply not fair to toll taxpayers who are supposed to benefit from the Federal Interstate Highway system -- it's called a FREEway, not a tollway. Perhaps they should tax electricity usage on electric vehicle chargers, to make up for the lost gasoline tax revenue, since those vehicles are still using the roads that the gasoline tax pays for.
Ha! You should try living in Sydney, Australia. The average Sydneysider spends $84 AUD (~$52 USD) per week on road tolls, while many spend over $300 AUD (~$187 USD) per week.
If the taxpayers paid for the roads in the first place then placing tolls on those taxpayer funded roads would be illegal, or akin to double taxation. Interstate highways are federally funded by the taxpayer therefore no tolls.
EV's are much heavier than gas powered auto's, that means more wear on the roads. But EV's have no "Gas Tax" which pays for roads. I heard Alberta slapped an additional annual tax on EV's to cover this cost.
So glad we moved out of Oregon after the 120 continuous nights of riots in Portland. Tolling roads is the least of their worries; they spend so much money on worthless stuff. Per capita state expenditures grew exponentially in our 40 years there, mostly in the last 10. Where does the money go? The climate scammers, political donors, unions, etc. with no improvement in services and no new highways opened in the last 20 years. Good riddance. It's not a road problem, it's a sanity problem.
When motorists pay for their annual licence plate stickers, a portion could go to road maintenance. EVs could pay a higher fee, to compensate for the taxes not realized from the gas tax. Just a thought…
This is basically what California is transitioning to now. The gas tax is being shifted to a registration tax. People are balking at making it mileage-based (a whole can of worms there), but basically the gas tax has become ineffective due to high-MPG vehicles and EVs.
It has an elevator! Just like Quebec city! Quebec city also has a f ton of stairways, too, and some in a very weird spot. I remember getting lost trying to find on and having to go into a yard to find one... it was a paved parking by looked more like a private yard, surrounded by either the cliff side or houses, densely packed
They act like tolls will solve all their problems, but I say find something else. Once they start they will only expand. Never paid a toll in my life until I went to Florida. Absolute insanity how much it costs to go from Orlando to the beach. Disgusting, imo. Roads should always be free. I had no idea "toll road" meant you pay every 5 fing minutes
Rob, please dial back the music volume. It’s hard to hear your voice over it - at least during the first minute. Love the videos, and this one is local for me! Thanks! Edit: Nice job pronouncing Tualatin correctly!
A vehicle fee based on weight would be a very Equitable way generating Road repair Revenue. As heavier Vehicles do significantly more wear and tear on roads. It also incentivize smaller vehicles that would make navigating urban areas more pleasant and much safer for pedestrians.
That’s a much fairer way to tax EVs imo, since they’ll naturally be a little heavier. Hopefully it’d also make people reconsider driving around massive vehicles, unless they need their utility frequently.
@@zedramer Yeah I'd love that. As an EV driver I get taxed 350 more, even though the weight of my vehicle is the same as combustion. I dont understand how a F350 that weighs 2x as more as my EV is getting taxed hundreds less than my 3K lb EV.
You'd probably want to factor in the number of axles as well. 20 tonnes over 8 axles is going to do less damage to the road than 20 tonnes spread over only 4 axles.
@silvy7394 that's because that F350 could be doing actual work like hauling a load of sheet rock, or gravel or whatever to a house, whereas your heavy EV is just hauling you around running errands. You could be living closer to work and riding an electric bicycle instead.
And this is the situation you get stuck in when you have pursued a car-based suburban-commuter transportation system for decades. Land-use and transportation need to change at the same time, but for the places where it takes more time to change land-use (suburbs resistant to change) there is no sense in spending more money to accommodate that system.
Can tell you are not from Oregon. We have some of the most restrictive growth laws in the nation. Each municipality has an urban growth boundary and a city cannot annex an area without it being a part of the urban boundary and they have to be out of room to grow within the boundary for 20 years forward.
@@Huntsmen64then they need to change the rules inside the growth boundary to allow for denser housing. And cities like Portland still sprawl out a ton even with the UGB.
@@sammymarrco47 I guess you have never gotten out of the DC area and out west. The UGB law was passed in the 70s and championed by the republican governor at the time. That governor was such an environmentalist he was also the reason Oregon had one of the first bottle bills in the nation, made the entire beach front in Oregon from having anymore closing access to the public and was instrumental in having the Naito Freeway removed from downtown Portland and made into a park...Tom McCall park. Look things up before you just write. You might learn a thing or two.
How can the name spruce goose not stick in your mind? My dad told me about it when I was 13 (over 40 now) and I can still remember the name because it's so silly.
I watched this video to understand how they "value price" a freeway. Fully support congestion pricing in NYC because they have alternatives, but does Oregon?
From the commercial side of things... this is where OR goes to die, logistically speaking. They already harvest a $2,000/truck bond and a mileage-based weight tax from us common carrier types, not to mention their mileage-based cuts of all our IFTA and IRP... adding tolls on top of that is just begging to turn them into the next CA/NYC, wherein the industry carves out "no forced Oregon dispatch" as a caveat in order to attract/retain drivers. And unlike CA, OR doesn't have nearly enough intrastate commerce to afford alienating interstate drivers like that
I'm assuming this comment is some red vs. blue political nonsense. Guess which two states have the most miles of toll roads? Florida and Oklahoma! Both deeply red states! More than New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania.
@brandonb.5304 I'm simply saying people need to educate themselves about any candidate before going and voting from city council all the way to the president ,too many people don't. And you may need to stop assuming, it doesn't help you
Unfortunately, the problem has no good solution no matter whether your political philosophy is to face the problem or just keep kicking it down the road. Also, where does road congestion realistically rank on your priority list?
It doesn’t offset. EV’s are mostly driven but wealthier people and they are not paying their share of the road maintenance. Not only that but due to their increased weight and characteristics they cause greater road wear.
And just to add, even non EVs pay the highest registration cost in the nation. Oregon registration fees are the highest in the nation-for the purpose of maintaining roads
@@icesk8man *Wrong.* Gas tax in Oregon is 40c a gal. So to reach 350 dollars EV's get taxed on thats about 850 gal of gas. 850 gal at 25MPG is 21,250 miles before you become even with the EV taxes. Average MPG is 24 in a vehicle. Average mileage a year is 14K
Oregonians need to talk to some Texans and Floridians. People HATE the toll roads that are everywhere. It also creates this "the rich get to go fast, poor get stuck in traffic jams" dichotmy that is only going to fuel the "eat the rich" movement.
Equity movement does not apply to private transportation (apparently).
I really don't want tolls here
They rob us more than enough
@@point29 also the rich A: can eat the toll easily to your point, also B: don't NEED to commute as much so tolls become a regressive tax on us filthy poors that need to go to the daily service jobs.
many people use them in both states. And they definitely don't hate them. lmao
As a Floridian who absolutely loves cars, this situation seems the absolute textbook definition for a train route paralleling the tourist route. We just did it here in Florida, from Miami to Orlando, and almost the entirety of the route is producing massive profits for the company that did it, and that's just from ridership not real estate, which was the planned profit producer for the company, it's 30 minutes faster than if you did 10 miles an hour over the speed limit the entire way and encountered zero traffic the whole way.
In this situation in Oregon you have a single road without many offshoots with neighborhoods and other areas that need to be serviced, with periodical towns that are popular for tourists on their way to their destination. These are great places to put train stations for small stops along the way.
When we passed cannabis legalization in Oregon it was written into the law that A: it's not allowed to be dumped into a slush fund and B: it was dictated that all taxes from it be used for education first and our infrastructure second.
We produce hundreds of MILLIONS of dollars in taxes from cannabis alone. So rather then tolling us for more money our government needs to be held accountable for them dumping those taxes into a slush fund to fund their personal vacations only to hear them say "we can't account for where the money went!"
This is ridiculous.
If this State would stop paying for the sex change surgeries and the other woke crap (DEI) and spend the money they get responsibly, they would have the money.
Any government agency that can't account for every red cent of the taxpayers' money should be audited with a fine-toothed comb and have all future spending require third-party approval and verification until the audit is complete. Thinking also of the Pentagon.
Classic Oregon Government BS, just Business as usual for our politicians. At least under Kitz, the money magically returned with a $3B surplus, and not the constant $3B-$5B deficit we always have under all other governors. The good old days!
Yeah, we saw that one coming. Oregon is great at making money vanish.
How's that working out for you? Society destroyed and rampant crime
I love how you made fun of those awful youtube sponsorships, this video is definitely getting a thumbs up.
this was also the moment I stopped and liked the video
Glad you enjoyed it. I have 618 contributors (via Patreon) to thank and goofy sponsorships seem like a fun way to do so!
+5 points for pronouncing Tualatin and Willamette correctly.
Rob used to live here. Honorary native.
he lives there.. I would hope he pronounced them correctly...
The only place I recognise those names from is Intel's processors, though I don't think I ever owned one using either microarchitecture.
@@Roxor128 I've never seen and thus didn't know Intel named any of their processors off of our local names. Kinda cool, though Intel is a terrible company.
@@TheCriminalViolin A bit of research shows Tualatin was the last Pentium III microarchitecture (starting at 1GHz clock speed) and Willamette was the initial one for the Pentium 4.
So, yeah. Never owned one. The Pentium III I did have was one of the earlier ones, and I was using AMD hardware when the Pentium 4 was current.
And yeah, Intel, not a great company, even if they did create the great x86 architecture. May it outlast the company that created it!
Ah, the public-private partnership. Where you socialize losses, and privatize profits. It's as American as apple pie.
I hate this country...
the likes on this comment should be much higher.
@@InsidiousSwedewell, bye! Find a better country to live
It's all about funneling tax dollars to private interests. Things should be either totally public or totally private
I dont now about America but here in BC the ministry of highways used to be a small army of trailblazers, surveyors, machine operators, engineers, top drivers, and gearheads and they did absolutely everything right down to custom building trucks if one that met the need couldnt be bought the only private contractors were brought in to do specialty things like bridges which was more about time efficiency bridges need as much manpower as the whole rest of the route.
It’s called being a democrat 😂
It should be illegal for major roads with federal funding to have tolls. If a state wants tolls they should 100% pay for the roads.
It is illegal to toll an interstate highway
There is a ton of interstates with tolls, in PA I-76 , I-276, I-376, I-476 and I-95. I-80, I-90 and I-99 have no tolls. The word "freeway" is not in our vocabulary.
@@AmalgamationofMan Tell that to the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority. Nobody calls it I-90 in MA. It's "the Mass Pike."
An interstate can be tolled as indicated by others here. The MassPike came into existence in 1957 and only in 1959 did it get the I-90 designation. Being a toll road still did not entitled it to federal highway dollars that other states get to maintain their interstates. Of course with the BigDig and I-90 being extended thru the Ted Williams Tunnel to East Boston and federal money being involved in that.....I find that confusing.
@@AmalgamationofMan no it is not. Most EZ Pass states collect tolls on Interstates, and I-90 is tolled in all states east of the Mississippi River except PA.
I have a feeling that if the interstate bridge is tolled, Vancouver is going to boom like crazy. Lots of residents in WA would rather work in Vancouver than in Portland since there is practically no commute, no toll, and no state income tax.
However, they all come to Oregon to buy items, as Oregon does not have a sales tax.
@just-looking430 That's what Oregonians always think, but we only come over for really big purchases as it's not worth it for most general purchases.
Wages are better in Washington.
@@moetarded7757 100%
@@DaddyPilkers LOL Sorry but no. Vancouver would be a shell of what it is now and that is because of Portland. Portland is there the jobs are. The proof os all the southbound traffic in the morning and the north bound traffic in the afternoon. Secondly, goin to any portland area mall and you will see hundreds of washington license plates. The working folks generally stop in portland on the way home for a lot of every day shopping.
You can tell he used to live here because he nailed the pronunciation of everything and even had a version of the 99W Drive In Theater sign. Great video Rob!
I love Portland. If I loved clouds, I'd probably still live there.
@@RoadGuyRobIt's pouring in Butte Falls right now.
11:12 Point of clarification: That historic bridge _is_ a state highway. It's currently OR-43, or the Oswego Highway #3. ODOT wants to turn the entire route of OR-43 over to local control, however.
As Rob concluded, “a critic could be wrong 99 times,” and this was one of them.
Good to know! I didn't realize OR-43 crossed into Oregon City.
@@RoadGuyRob It just barely does. I'll have to check the data/straightline charts on where it actually ends. (Also, because of how Oregon's wacky dual highway/route system operates, there may be a chance that OR-43 ends in a slightly different place than the underlying highway.)
Edit: Yep, it looks like one of those wacky situations. By the most recent definition available (2008), OR-43 ends at OR-99E in Oregon City. However, according to the 2020 straightline data, state maintenance on the Oswego Highway #3 actually ends at the corner of 7th and Main, two blocks away. This potential disconnect is pretty recent, with those two blocks reverting to Oregon City sometime between 2012 and 2018.
Fun fact: That old bridge used to carry US-99/US-99E from 1926 until about 1939, when it was rerouted through Milwaukie and east Portland in a new alignment.
@@jr98664yt I also don't think it was Rob who made that claim. It was his interviewee, if memory serves. It's a very minor error, really, but I wouldn't be a roadgeek if I wasn't needlessly pedantic about road history lol.
My daughter works for a department of transportation in another state. She tells me there are only a few ways a state can put a toll on a Federally paid for highway without breaking Federal law. (it's on the Federal DOT web site). And Robb points out Oregon's proposal doesn't work.
I live in Oregon - these ideas are driven by ODOT and not by the people. Also, EVS pay a sharply higher annual registration fee (hundreds of $s extra), and Oregon is proposing a "per mile" fee for all vehicles.
The congestion pricing model seems to conflict with the state's price gouging law. The latter says when a disaster happens, supply runs short, vendors can't charge more (so they just run out of product). Congestion pricing is the same - busy traffic and out of lanes, so let's charge more money. How is that not the same as the price gouging they prohibit? Weird.
Finally, state parks were once free admission; then OR began charging admission or parking fees at many of them. Now the state wants to charge more to use the roads paid for by others already (e.g. Federal government). Oregon is now ranked 42nd in the nation for economic outlook as of 2024. Which may explain the problem in ways no one wants to talk about.
Oregon is obsessed with charging us for literally everything and anything. Whenever they add it in, it is never enough to them. Increase taxes? Yep. Add new taxes? Absolutely. Charge for access to our own state parks and public lands we already pay to have, make new ones and maintain? You bet. Add tolls in as many places as possible? Of course! Don't forget to constantly enforce ever increasing prices on each of the latter, too! And let's make sure to also consistently jack up cost on utilities and permits and tags while we're at it, too. Registration? Yes please! Can never have enough ways to rob us citizens of our hard earned money, don't you know?! It's a royally pain the butt to live here at this point. It is so damn irritating.
Taxation is theft and government is slavery.
And on top of all that are Oregon taxes going up or down?
I would clarify that these seem to be driven by the Oregon Legislature in AB 2017. I really get the impression ODOT are the "middle-men" squeezed between what the legislature mandates and what the public will accept. The put on a brave face and take one for the team.
@@RoadGuyRob Incredibly well put. DOT's often get put in the middle and are tasked with finding solutions that are nearly impossible. "We need to get more money but don't use any of existing tax forms we already have." it's a tough spot that, like any government decision, will not make everyone happy
Rob, this is by far the most informative video i have ever seen on this local issue. Amazing job my friend!! Helps me understand the problems we face and how the solutions are few.
It almost makes it seem like he's a local. Very in depth.
@@BackToTheGame.98 you keep stacking, packing, and racking up population in these high rise apts,...but your road infrastructures stay the same small regardless of what mode of transportation you take there's no room for anybody to commute anywhere. its 24, 7days, 365 all year round its a mess,...there's no plan to widen any road or highway to alleviate the congestion, so tolls are redundant,...show us the plans before you ask for $$$,.....
Glad it was helpful. Transportation financing becomes quite fascinating as a person peels back all the layers and complications. Lack of a sales tax option makes it really tricky!
How do they possibly justify charging more for what we already paid for? "We need money" isn't a valid reason
But that's the only reason they are going with
A congested highway is a useless highway.
You already paid for construction, but not maintenance or earthquake-proofing.
During traffic jams, the freeway moves like 300 cars/hour (in each lane) instead of 2,400 cars/hour. The trouble is, all the ideas to fix that become unpopular:
1. Widening. It's expensive, especially when money is tight. And not popular among a large number of Oregonians.
2. Holding cars at the ramp meter. This makes traffic back up, sometimes for 6+ minutes to enter the freeway. The line spills onto city streets.
3. Variable-price tolling. Unpopular for all the problems I mention in the video.
I can see how #3 seems appealing, since it generates revenue instead of costing money. But ultimately we live in a representative government so, over time, transportation policy has to reflect something that most people are okay living with.
12:22 My good man, umbrellas are illegal in Oregon. I'm calling the police.
lmao! As an Oregonian I agree, shorts and a hoody is all you need.
LOL. I think it was a parasol to protect his skin from that occasional flaming orb that appears in the Oregonian sky. 😂 🏖
Woah! Did that thing get smuggled in from Calf. or something?
I have been publicly chastised by a perfect stranger for putting my hood up
He knew what was up and started putting it away
Tolls on interstates should be illegal.
The odometer tax seems like a bad idea, there’s a lot of people on the Portland interstates that aren’t registering their vehicles in Oregon. There are commuters who live in Washington state but drive to Portland for work, and long-haul travelers who are on their way from Washington to California.
That's the real challenge, right? Like if California did an odometer tax, it would probably work okay since none of the major population centers border another state. But in Portland, a huge amount of the traffic drives in and out of Washington state. Heck, I would drive into Vancouver just to print my scripts out (at the Fed Ex Office on Mill Plain). Those are miles that I should be paying Washington, not Oregon.
I live in hillsboro and I'd say 30% of the cars over here are Washington plated. That means they cross Portland and come west. It's why that tunnel is clogged for 8 hours a day. The odometer tax wouldn't apply to them so that doesn't really work, I don't think.
Oregon should just efficiently use the money it already has by building things itself instead of making Sweetheart deals with construction companies, we could actually afford to lower taxes if they weren't wasted.
Quit helping homeless, druggies, and illegals come to mind
Good luck with that
There is no money in making things work right
@@RCenal Not if voters keep voting for corruption. If voters paid attention and voted in people that would work for the people and voted out those that don't there wouldn't be money in doing it wrong. People think getting involved in politics means seeing who their favorite social group says to vote for instead of actually getting looking in to what's going on.
Says citizens of every state. We may be forced out of our county because of the taxes. We are just half mile from a different county.
As an EV Driver in Oregon, we do pay that Gas Tax in the form of a significantly higher Registration Fee. Like $350 on top of the normal Registration fee.
Unfortunately that 350 dollar fee is only equivalent to about 10K miles of driving from gas tax. So ur getting a bargain.
@@Brianscoronet Yep!
A bargain if you drive more than 10k miles a year.
@@BrianscoronetWith a $0.58 per gallon gas tax (in video), that means $350 = 603 gallons of gas. At 25mpg, you can drive 15,000 miles. You would need a gas car of only 16mpg for the 10,000 miles to be true.
That said, the original comment is also inaccurate. I don't find the $350 figure ON TOP of base registration in OR. It's actually $115/year according to ODOT. That's 198 gallons of gas or 4,956 miles of driving at 25mpg.
Of course, with half a billion in deficit to maintain what they already have, neither is sustainable. OR, like many states, has a pilot program to charge all drivers per mile they drive. This will likely replace both gas tax and EV registration tax.
@@Brianscoronet: You're making multiple invalid assumptions.
What is the mileage of the ICE or hybrid car? How many miles do they drive. (I only drive 3K miles a year, for example).
Keep the Oregon-related content coming Rob!
Two more Oregon videos popping up during early 2025.
2:00 'It's the tolliest place on earth' made me LOL for real.
Oklahoma has entered the chat
NYC has entered the chat. $17 to cross the George Washington bridge
Sydney. Some people have quit jobs due to rolls being too expensive and not worth commuting to/from work.
I mean, what else do you expect from the most liberal place on earth in the United States lol.
Trolliest too
I live in Washington and work and go to school in Portland, If there was a tax to drive on the OR roads I do not think I could afford to drive because of how much driving I have to do to go to and from work and school home and back. I also can't change schools and my job since the program I'm in doesn't have another program near by and its also link to my job.
As a former Delmarvan, I feel for those OR folks in those touristy towns. It's like the state is getting in your face saying "Yea this issue is wholly induced by out-of-area tourists, and in response, you all as residents and people working here will be paying a toll day-in day-out to compensate"
OTOH, NO state income taxes. ALL decisions have trade-offs, and THERE IS NO FREE LUNCH.
Residents should really get a pass for it. If they're doing e-toll systems, shouldn't be too hard to build-in. License plate registration should already have address attached, no?
@@bluerendar2194more likely you use the address on your driver’s license and billing address to apply for a discount, because depending on the type of toll tag, you can add multiple cars, like a rental car if you’re away, or if you have multiple cars, or your car is in the shop.
@@sblack53 Well, that can be a separate application - they can pretty much just automatically add everyone whose registered residential address is in the towns. I think it would do a lot to mollify people's frustrations by not having them jump hoops through it. Not like there's much room for mistake the other way - even if a few people are put on by accident (e.g. they moved away, car is sold, etc.), it should make minimal, if any, difference over the cost of trying to police it that hard.
Yeah, Oregon does this universally. They do the same with accessing our own State Parks. "Hey, so like, sure, you literally pay taxes that fund and maintain, even adding in new state parks and rec areas, but instead of only charging out of state folks to visit our park lands, we're going to instead charge everyone, including you all over again to then simply access and use the parks you pay taxes to fund. Thanks."
That is outright impossible. A state can not make a federal highway into a toll road with out the federal governments permission and the federal government has made it literally impossible to get that permission. The federal government many decades ago had permanently banned any federal funded highway to become a toll road that was not one already. For a road to be a toll road its mandatory to be either a privately owned highway or it has to be a state highway. The I5 is a federally funded highway. There is a way around that ban and that is having separate roads next to the federal highway where you can choose to either use the free highway or to use the toll road and that separate lanes are not built or maintained with federal funds.
Since when has breaking laws ever stopped private companies working with politicians? Rules only exist if they are both respected and enforced, but neither of those are true if profit is involved
Over a decade ago, two inside lanes of multi-lane I-95 (each way, N - S) were separated by concrete barriers for nearly 11 miles in the Miami, FL area to become a tollway.
The tolled-lanes expansion project on I-95 has grown northward to Fort Lauderdale and is expected to reach Jupiter, FL in the coming years, nearly 100 miles.
Yeah because following the rules always happens. 😂
@@kittenwizard4703 I don't think that some company or multable of dozens of very high level public officals who are going to do something that is so extremely easy to uncover and catch are going to risk 20 years in federal prison to put in some road. This is not the CCP in China who have little to no oversight or accountability or some some back water little town that you are talking about. You are talking about bribing the Secretary of Transportation who sits under the Presedent of the United States them self and a great many of the people under them you are talking about to get this approved. Yes it would actually take the Secretary of Transportation to approve such a new turnpike.
Well, Trump would probably look favorably on Oregon getting to turn the middle of I-5 into a toll road, not for any budgetary reasons, but as retribution for Californians, Oregonians, and Washingtonians not giving him any Electoral College votes. Also, some commerce flows back and forth between Mexico and Canada on I-5, so Trump would probably bulldoze all of it if he could.
From what you said about Federal law, I think tolling could fly IF THEY TOLLED JUST THE TWO COLUMBIA RIVER BRIDGES. They are planning on reconstructing those, so the tolling would meet the bridge reconstruction exemption. They would have to toll both bridges simultaneously, in order to avoid making the diversion problem manifest. Assuming there is nothing in the law about demand pricing, they could even make the tolls variable to help spread out demand and minimize congestion on the two bridges.
Tolls on the two bridges alone would not solve the problem.
If we want to fix congestion there should be a toll applied to using the left lane like $5 for every whole minute spent there but the counter resets every time you move back over. Actually enforce people keeping right except to pass instead of adding 400 lanes.
I live in the area and anything that would slow down traffic even more over the Abernathy bridge might just turn us into that one Doctor Who episode
@@georgesackinger2002 - Who says? You could make the toll $16 a car, like the NY-NJ bridges. That would put a real urgency into extending LRT to Washington State.
I have not heard a thing about replacing the Glen Jackson Bridge. I knew going in though it was likely soon going to come up and they'd start in on that one too. It was built in the 60s itself as expected, so it will definitely need a rebuild sooner than later, or at least a heavy retrofitting to modernize it.
The problem with toll roads is we already pay a gas tax.
Part of the problem with a tax on each gallon of gas paying for highways is that in 1975 the average car got 13 miles per gallon on the highway and now they get 26. Meanwhile,the costs of the labor, equipment and materials needed to construct or maintain highways have gone up every year, and the wear and tear inflicted on highways per car is the same for EVs as the 1970's gas guzzlers..
Another bothersome detail is that by not tolling the east west highways the wealthy in the west hills and washington county avoid the tax. At the same time the lower income areas of north and south portland get stuck paying as more of their traffic involves commutes to places like vancouver and other communities. Something the critic alluded to when he spoke of bedroom communitieies.
A great thing to help the road we DO have.......STOP letting people wear studded tires for as long as they do. Here in Portland we get very little snow and ice to warrant studded tires being worn from the beginning of Nov to the end of Mar. This is ridiculous and is destroying our roads unnecessarily!
Where are you seeing people driving studded tires??!! People just use a good snow tire without studs.
@set921 all over portland. I used to run AAA so I saw a lot of it and you can always hear them coming
A good set of Nokian Hakkapeliittas are all a person needs. You can't go wrong with tires manufactured in a country that sees snow 6 months a year. A good runner up is Michelin Blizzaks. No studs necessary. Honorable mention to Michelin Pilot Sport AS4 and Continental ExtremeContact DWS06+, both are all season tires, and both destroy the snow. They're just not as good in ice as the former two are.
I never saw a need for studded tires, though all 3 states I've lived in have them outlawed so I lack experience with studded tires.
@@set921 You don't see it, you hear it. And I hear it more than is needed.
I live in Wisconsin. We banned studded tires decades ago. I think Oregon has some mountains. You should ban studded tires and allow chains only in the mountains and only during designated weather. We don't have mountains but we certainly have hills and curves and the whole state gets snow and ice. We salt or brine roads. We get by with all season tires. Some people have snow tires. Sounds like you have a problem. You can't have everything. Our cars rust to death. We have sales taxes, income taxes, and thousands in property taxes. We can barely leave Wisconsin without paying tolls to Illinois or going hundreds of miles out of our way.
My Saturday morning with coffee and a light snow falling is made more fun and relaxing by this. I love Transportation!
In the NYC area?
Relaxing, the music is too intense to be relaxing.
Both mind you, the snow and a coffee does sound great.
I like all of this... except the "falling snow" part. Brrrrr!
And the coffee part. (That's on me. Didn't grow up around the stuff. A warm tea or a hot cocoa sounds great, though!)
Just like in Texas, the toll road was never used and it's a Chinese company that owns it. Texas got ripped off on it.
Whoever does the music for these videos deserves a raise! Fantastic
And whoever controls the volume of the "background" music should be FIRED. TWICE.
I'll give myself a raise, then! Thank you very much for the compliment, Pat! As a one-man-band (write, shoot, edit, admin), it's not easy work so a kind comment like yours feels very satisfying to read.
They can screw off with their tolls. I have to go to Portland for work
This is the best explanation of congestion pricing I’ve ever seen. Love your graph and on scene demo :)
Thanks, Greg! It wasn't easy to animate, so I'm really happy to hear you like it.
Your analysis is greatly appreciated by me. Thanks for putting in so much effort!!!
Hey! You're finally wearing your Class 3 safety vest! Good for you, Rob!
has the class 4 come out yet
I'm slowly using up all the older footage I shot with the Class 0 vest. The old vest was so unsafe, I've almost been hit by cars twice. Hasn't been a problem with the new vest.
@@RoadGuyRob oh! well drivers never pay attention or see anything anyways
Another massive issue that underlies this and countless other budget deficits Oregon has, is the fact that this state is infamous for deep corruption and "missing funds" with all things budgets. Tina Kotek actually emphasizes her intentions to dig as far as possible to find that corruption and where the money keeps disappearing to, which may be part of why she said no to the proposals and shoved it down the road. It may buy her or others time to learn how budgeting works, and prioritization of projects where those funds will go, and thus where they will not go. At ODOT, there is a endless heap of corruption, missing funds, unfinished projects, cost overruns (well beyond the norm, actually), and lack of prioritization of projects, with imbalance in the funds each get. Then they immediately beg and demand more from us as taxpayers. This cycle repeats over and over and over again.
And when the people collectively have repeatedly shown you they will NOT support expansion of freeways, new highways or freeways, tolls, and do NOT trust you or the project groups you facilitate and are a partner of (like the IBR, which is just the CRC with a new coat of paint and a new set of faces), it shows not only have they learned their lessons, but you won't be getting away with the BS you have never stopped trying to push through and force us into funding. TriMet similarly experienced this exact lesson learned rejection at the last "Transportation Bond Measure" proposal in 2019, itself originally was supposed to go up in 2017, but they panicked realizing how aware people had become that they are really just new MAX line funding packs, so it was a instant HELL NO from voters. It takes people here a ridiculous and infuriating amount of time to learn and finally admit when something like it is true, and reflect in in their votes. It is why the IBR (again, the same as the CRC just rebranded) and TriMet cannot get remotely enough trust or support in people to allow them to go through with their projects. They did that to themselves, and as always, continue to pretend they can't possibly understand how it is possible and why it is happening to them.
When it comes to these Tolls on I-5 & I-205, another massive problem with this is the fact that literally no one has the ability to access Washington from here, or Oregon from there, without taking one of them. The next closest possible crossings into Washington or Oregon over the Columbia River is in Longview/Rainer, or at the Bonneville Dam. We need more options to travel between the states in the Portland/Vancouver region than the two we have.
And obviously the majority of people will just crowd onto more local thoroughfares and streets to commute north and south through the Metro area. That's obvious, as TriMet is stupid unreliable, lacks the frequency and capacity needed to function as a proper alternative and option for getting around, and they also lack a lot of coverage, too. It is another reason it is a godawful idea to toll them. And even on them, the demand and congestion is ridiculous. OR 8, OR 10, 99W & E, OR 43, OR 210, the endless other mainline routes throughout the east side of the Portland area. East/West or North/South doesn't change it much, if at all.
Another aspect of this the reality that the Portland area is split by the river, so East/West, meaning most people are going to actually be trying to commute between the two sides of the river. Often times that will still require us to take the North/South routes, including the freeways, even if for only a short little spur.
In example, for me, if and when I decide to take my car down to Alex's Garage in Eugene for repairs (I live in the Hillsboro/Aloha region), or to visit my Dad, Grandma and Step family down in Keizer, I would say "f**k it" and only take 175th/Roy Rogers down to 99 in Sherwood to the state route that crosses the Willamette at Newberg, and take it all the way down into Keizer passing through St. Paul on the way. The east side would pretty much just stick to 99E to access Salem/Keizer, Eugene/Springfield, etc. The only north/south option outside of I-5 to cross the Willamette down in/by Wilsonville is the bridge I mentioned on the far southeast corner of Newberg.
Now just imagine again, the reverse of that, trying to access Washington, or get somewhere in the Vancouver/Woodland region. We're f**ked. East side of the river has to divert to Bonneville, west side has to go all the way to Rainier, which is almost exactly halfway, if not halfway to Astoria for christ sake. It is beyond unreasonable.
Edit was too correct 42 ro 43. I knew it didn't quite sound or feel right to me when I typed 42 initially.
This is what happens when everyone's too lazy to have real leaders
Kotek is part of the corruption... doubtful she will expose or correct anything. IMO
And hw30 to the bridge at longview is already a disaster most days during the summer as it can barely handle the normal volume of cars crossing it now.
@@Jankybro I miss Kitz, man
LOL Oregon already tolls and over charges the trucks over 0.28 cents per mile. Each semi truck drives through Oregon pays over 200 dollars.
WTF this a rip off when it only cost about 2 cents per mile to drive to New Mexico and they have better roads
I remember when North Carolina wanted to tax I-95 because it needed to be expanded, but most traffic was just passing through. The Feds said no to that, so they devised a plan B to make just sections of it a toll, still not good. Then they proposed a four-lane express tolls through the center with 75mph speeds for it, throughout the state, that was when the state legislators balked. So we are still where we are with I-95.
It's not just IF you have a bus or max to get where you're going but you also need to consider the time it takes to do so, I had a job that was 15 minutes away by car or 90+ minutes by bus, that 4x commute is the ONLY reason why I even learned to drive in the first place.
We pay taxes so the roads can be maintained so adding a toll would be double taxation which is supposed to be illegal. I'm really frustrated because taxpayers paid half a billion to widen 405 between Bellvue and Renton and they still want to toll us. I have a long commute because I can't afford housing near work and I often have to pay a fee to park at work, its getting to the point where I can't afford to go to work. Meanwhile the government continues to spend more than it takes in = bigger and bigger debt payments = less money for needed programs and it doesn't matter who I vote for they always overspend. Why is it that the average person always has to live within their means but the government never has to live within its means?
A question as old as the Holy Roman Empire 😅
As people should not pay for what they don't use, drivers should pay for the Highways the state maintains with billions of dollars
and people say Im crazy for bicycle commuting free parking don't get stuck in traffic don't have to pat a gas tax not owning a car is saving me money
Well technically our state income tax is unconstitutional by itself
@@newmobile1455
Cool
You're not special
I'm still struck by the lack of a comprehensive traffic plan around projects like this. Like, why not first build out proper alternatives to driving and then start mode shifting? It's not like any of this is a mysterious dark art, cities have done this for decades. By doing it half-assed you're going to get (legit) complaints of people who don't have good alternatives to driving and see this as a strict tax increase.
Which, by the way, is also fine because driving is quite expensive and highly subsidized, but then... make sure everybody pays!
Proper alternatives usually translates to massively overpriced infrastructure projects that states can't afford, not to mention stealing enough land from marginalized communities for the footprint for the rail/bus hubs and lines. And real world, good alternatives only work in dense urban areas. In suburbia, the car is the only practical option.
Part of the problem is these toll plans were devised around eliminating a budget deficit so the toll money that should be going towards transit improvements instead goes towards the highway spending we’ve already normalized. It’s just highlights the giant hole our highway system has gotten ourselves into. It’s too expensive so we need people to use it less so it costs us less but we can’t (or choose not to) invest more in transit until our highway spending goes down. And that’s before we get into the issue that often highways aren’t just taking transit money, they’re also actively making the transit experience worse (e.g. a train station that is separated by a highway).
If we wait until transit is great before we stop subsidizing highways, we’ll never get there. Now I think in this case they could’ve at least proposed an expanded transit plan along side the tolling proposal but again the question is how do you pay for that if the tolls are just going to highway construction.
The problem is that the state already doesn't have enough money to pay for the roads now. They'll have to raise taxes or fees somehow to pay for it, and it's better to raise those taxes on drivers only than on everyone and also tax people who take transit and don't cause the high prices on the roads
@@dividebyzero1000 In almost every case (and literally this video), the state can’t afford the highway projects already. So it’s a blatant double standard to only say we can’t afford transit projects while billion dollar highway bridges (not even entire roads) are waived through.
You also seem to be confused about which form of transportation stole land from marginalized communities. It wasn’t rail/buses (do you even know how small a bus footprint is??), it was highways. So if you recognize that taking land for marginalized communities is bad, and you just did, you obviously should oppose urban highways right? Or was that a dog whistle that you don’t actually care about…
@@Willgo373 Not sure why you think I am anti-transit or pro-car and throwing around terms like dog-whistles.
The city I grew up near is expanding their light rail, and it is wildly expensive- but affordable given how dense the population is. I am actually HUGELY in favor of public transit. I just also see how poorly it works in less dense areas. You can't fix suburban sprawl with public transit.
Buses can use regular roads, but then unless you take land by imminent domain and create cutouts (which my current town did not do), the buses screw up traffic far more than they help- plus they tend to be under utilized. So you end up with a bus with 10 people in it delaying 600 people.
Rail, when they can share existing track with cargo is better, but you still need to take a bunch of land for stations and parking lots.
I am for shifting codes to force densification, walkable cities, etc, just not going to blindly say that we shouldn't maintain bridges on vital corridors like I-5.
And finally, just because highways construction was the biggest culprit in destroying marginalized communities 50 years ago does not give the government or big business the greenlight to do it now for other purposes. Ask any rich white yuppie if they want a commuter rail or wind farm in their backyard. No? Guess we better build it in the blue collar neighborhood and call it revitalization. These projects always target the people without the clout to fight back.
States cannot impose tolls on interstate freeways without Federal approval, and Federal approval has NOT been granted - in fact, it has been declined twice - for both I-5 and I-205 in Oregon. It seems the State wants to ram tolls through anyway, which would be unconstitutional at both the State and Federal level. 1) it restricts free travel, and 2) it surmounts to the imposition of a tax without a vote of the people.
Hate to break it to you, but the ENTIRE STATE of Oregon is ALREADY a toll road. Has seriously nobody ever noticed that I-5 is almost entirely 70 or 75 mph EVERYWHERE else and 55 from border to border in Oregon?
Boy it sure is weird how much more dangerous that road is in Oregon that they need those low speed limits and dozens and dozens of unmarked cop cars eh?
I guess California and Washington don't exist...
@@MarloSoBalJr @TheJunkFarm from bakersfield to vancouver, wa its posted 65, definitely saw 75 in wa.
The constant changing of the speeding the I-5 in WA seems more like a trick to me.
Sorry, Oregon is not 55mph throughout the state.
@Buckseed that's what he said.
It's because they've misappropriated funds that were for maintenance/upkeep, expansion, & repair... That was budgeted (federal monies also apparently).... We get a kicker check/tax refund for excess monies (for received tax monies above what is budgeted)... Tolls as an option means they're not doing their jobs correctly....
I was just thinking this. How are we getting a kicker if money is appropriated properly? What am I missing? Might need to research exactly where/how the kicker is calculated.
@@Queenread82 if Oregon's approved budget is 1,000 & they receive 1,500... Then the 500 gets paid back to the taxpayers (that's the basics of the kicker program on a very small scale)....
All the interstates ( I-5, I-205, ect.) have federal (given) & state (budgeted) monies for upkeep & expansion... They have been spending it on asphalted bike/walking paths & various other things throughout the state, instead of banking it to use when needed.... The money for the expansion was building up, but they called it excess (for that year, but not for the 5-10yrs buildup needed for the bigger projects) & spend it... then turn around & say we need more taxes/tolls to pay for it.... When they've had it all along... (If they could/would keep their little fingers out of it)
It would be nice to simply say "Oh look, money isn't being spent right." But honestly, building roads is something American states are pretty good at bidding out appropriately. Back in the 1920s, there was a TON of graft. But in the 1930s, the feds help states whip their programs into shape and they've gotten really good at it over the past 90 years.
The trouble is, inflation has chewed away at most of the federal help we had back in 1993. States do a pretty good job maintaining roads on their own, but always have needed federal help for expansion. Nowadays, it appears like this has flipped. Feds help maintain the interstate routes and counties/states have to generate revenue for expansion. Hence why there are more sales tax measures, tolling, etc.
@@RoadGuyRob that sounds good, but in a gaslighty way for Oregon...
I'll breakdown what I stated....
You have a car that we share, it cost
60 a month for insurance
And we figure 25 a month for maintenance & upkeep (oil,tires,ect.)
Fuel costs = the tank will be filled after each use by the user... We get a joint car account from the bank (You have the only card) & we pay our half's of 1020.00
1st year.... Tot= Ins. 720, maint 300...
Tires are good, but two oil changes -100, that leaves 200 extra ? No those tires are going to need replacing someday, & it will be more than 200).
So 200 in account....
2nd year...(covid) tot = 1020, -50 (oil change) we didn't use it that much so 250, +200=450 in account....
3rd year... tot=1020, -100 (oil changes) so 200 +450= 650 in account.... & You see a deal on a shiny big screen TV & borrow 300, (Your logic, tires & car are ok) now 350 in account...
4th year.... 1020, -100 (oil changes) so 200+350=550 ( I don't know about TV) so I'm thinking 850 tot. & It's a good thing because now we need tires & a tune up... Tires 600, tune up & parts 250 tot=850.... Then You tell me we're 300 short & I need to come up with the difference... (Tolls/added taxes), You=state & federal, me=tax payer
THEY misappropriated the funds on shiny things.... They used the federal money to maintain while using the allocated state money elsewhere... Hoping we wouldn't see their ineptitude, & covering the theft by gaslighting us with a need for tolls and taxes.... so they can do it again, & again... (Make a budget, Stick to it, & vote separately on any individual shiny things, so they can be saved for & paid for) it's not surplus money to be spent on whatever feels good in the moment, it's money needed for the projected costs that will come, & like You mentioned, it hopefully added a bit for inflation.... Sorry that got a bit long... & I did enjoy Your video, Thank You
So awesome to see you in my backyard. I wish i knew you were out here! Thanks for the awesome video.
I was thinking the same thing, I live in clackamas and drive over the Abernathy bridge several times a day.
Couple of comments from Austin, Texas:
I35 going through Austin is one of the most congested roads
TX130 was built east of town as a toll road. Even it shows red on Google maps sometimes.
The idea was that a lot of traffic would divert to 130 thus improving I35.
Hasn't really worked out that way. The tolls on large trucks are pretty expensive. So, who pays the toll? Fleet trucks (owned by a single entity) quite often tell their drivers "if you have a choice between a toll road and a free road, take the free road" (because company doesn't want to pay the tolls).
For Owner/Operators, who own their rig, those tolls come right out of their pocket. Maximize take-home pay? Use the free road.
I 35 is being rebuilt to add at least one toll lane in each direction. It might be done a few years from now.
We have one road on the west side of town that does have a congestion based pricing and traffic usually is moving pretty quick. Until... the speed limit on that toll lane is 70. Invariably, someone who is at a slower speed means everything stacks up behind them.
And then... what separates the toll lane from the free lanes are just those rubber posts that bend out of the way. Occasionally, a car in the free lane next to the toll lane decides "I'll just cut over here" without watching for traffic already in the toll lane. Quick, multi car wreck and ALL the lanes come to a standstill. And if you're really unlucky, the incident is visible to traffic going the other direction. This leads to the gawkers who feel it necessary to slow down, thereby jamming up the other lanes.
I-90 was supposed to be free in NY by now. But the tolls apparently help maintain it. Wouldn’t be able to tell driving on the bridges that they maintain it but that’s whatever haha
They "maintain" a dozen or so elites is what they do..... Its called Elite socialism, which is what the USA currently is..
If only the speed limit was 70 or 75
It’s already told it’s called gas tax. That’s what it was, therefore and meant for…. Why is it worth seen all these ideas and concepts that were done in California and other states all of a sudden now in Oregon. We have a high enough gas as it is and if you’re concerned about gas cars just understand that electric cars way more than gas cars and they ruined the road faster we’ve spent enough money on the bridge with no results..
Why not add laws to add tax at the charging stations? Or tax for electric vehicles at registration and tab renewal?
They already have much, much higher registration and renewal costs for EVs.
They already do. This video is very misleading. Maybe Rob just doesn't know or he's anti-ev.
Oregon charge a $115 annual EV registration fee. Oregon offers a road usage charge program as an alternative to the registration fee. $200 annual EV registration fee (2025) that increases to $250 annual registration fee (2026).
@@JeanPierreWhite 115? I just bought a model 3 here in Oregon, and it was like a 1000 bucks for the registration.
@@GrumpyWolfTech Initial registration is always higher, the numbers quoted are for renewals.
I'd be happy have my gas taxes subsidize electrics - but I think a tax at public charging stations would be a reasonable add. the biggest thing is we do need to raise the gas tax. - and Portland already has a local gas tax in addition to the state and federal gas tax, IIRC. (yes, verified at 10 cents per gallon)
Commerce Clause should kick the SHIT out of this idea. Interstates were funded by the federal government for commerce and military security. Back in 2020, federal courts slapped down Indian Reservations for attempting to strangle travel along federal roads under the pretext of COVID.
Just an addition to why New Jersey is so mad about the congestion pricing.
To drive into New York, people driving in from New Jersey ALREADY pay a toll to cross the river into Manhattan in the tunnel.
This is NOT the case when driving into Manhattan from Brooklyn. All NJ is asking for is to toll ALL the river crossings so there is not a disparity between which river crossing is used. So either toll the East River bridges to bring all them into alignment, or exempt the New Jersey drivers from the congestion pricing since they are already paying to enter the area.
THAT is why NJ is mad about it.
Why should New Yorkers pay an additional toll on a bridge that is wholly within their city, managed by NYCDOT, and wholly paid for by their higher than NJ taxes? The Port Authority receives zero dollars in funding from taxpayers in either New York nor New Jersey, tolls are the only way the Holland and Lincoln Tunnels are funded, as Port Authority holdings, along with the GWB and all three of their crossings from NJ to Staten Island.
@@sblack53 Wholly paid for by higher taxes?
Uh, no. All of the repairs on those bridges were partially or fully funded by FEDERAL money. Check Skanska's website for details on the most recent Williamsburg bridge repairs.... The line for East river bridge maintenance funding in the NYC budget is a rounding error. (see page 3 of the DOT budget)
And the goal here is CONGESTION reduction. The tolls already reduce the number of cars from New Jersey. Applying tolls on the NYC bridges would reduce the number of cars going into the area and probably succeed at reducing congestion.
The credit of $3.00 isn't enough, what it will do will just shift more people from the QMT and HCT to the 4 toll-less bridges.
If NJ residents are so upset, just find a job in NJ and stay out of NY. It’s hard enough for NYers to find jobs that NJ residents are taking. So they shouldn’t complain about Congestion Pricing if they’re contributing to it by working in NY and taking their money back to NJ. You have to Pay to Play baby.
@@justin423it was difficult and costly enough to get the existing toll system to this point. Congestion will be reduced regardless and that's not even the only goal. Tolling the other bridges can and should come later, but NJ should have no say over infrastructure outside of its borders.
@@HeavyRayne My point was that the congestion charge is likely not going to decrease vehicles from New Jersey since they already pay a sizable toll to enter, and tolling the East River bridges could have been an easy first step to reduce congestion. (The E-toll readers could be installed in a weekend, see the bridge between Manhattan and the Bronx with just e-toll readers)
If NY had done that, the people in NJ would not be as mad about it.
Oregonian here, who lives near the George Abernathy Bridge and uses it almost every day: The State is swimming in cash. In 2021-2023 the State ran a $5.6 billion surplus. It feels like the problem is an unwillingness to spend it on anything useful and instead it's used to fund big flashy refund cheques to residents. They call it the "Oregon Kicker", and last year they refunded thousands of dollars to each taxpayer. That's not in itself a bad thing, and in fact, it's very popular, but when you have things like road construction projects begging for money or the Bureau of Labour and Industries backed up several years investigating wage theft claims, it seems like a portion of this money is really better spent improving public services rather than just being used for a publicity stunt by politicians to show how "thrifty" the State is.
And really, the opposition of tolling is just classic NIMBYism. Everyone wants to use the road but nobody wants to pay for the road. We all want to drive on the road for free and have someone else pay for it.
Absolutely this. Whenever something about state funding in Oregon comes up, I think about the kicker.
We're not missing the sources of funding. We're missing the willingness to DO something with it.
The kicker was put in place to handcuff the state from unbridled spending. It works.
The kicker about that kicker (which I had not heard of before, but which instantly bothers me) is that it shows two crucial things:
1) The state is collecting more tax than it "needs" from citizens (keeping in mind that it is wrong in itself and kills economic growth by disincentivizing people and commerce to be in your polity)
2) The state is paying money that it otherwise wouldn't pay in order to process and return that excess tax.
Therefore, the money is taken from citizens and businesses immediately, when it would be most useful (and due to inflation/interest, most powerful) for them, held by the government as an interest-free loans, effectively taxed (since someone has to crunch the numbers and send it back), and people celebrate this?
@NightKnight347 the state collects income tax at their normal rates. When income goes up, they do collect more money. When the tax revenue exceeds their projection, they give back the excess. Sounds good to me.
@@jpatrickmoore5158 I don't agree. Giving back the excess is almost the worst way to deal with the money. With $5 billion, the State could have created a huge sovereign wealth fund to invest in Oregon companies that would pay dividends for generations to come. It could have used that money to fund ODOT and scrap this rolling scheme altogether. It could build tens of thousands of new housing units across the state solving the housing shortage immediately and generating perpetual income for the government through rent payments. It could lower taxes to keep more of that money in the pockets of citizens to begin with. There are just so many better uses for the money than just writing cheques to everyone.
I enjoyed the video. Oregon invited and encouraged such an influx of people but didn’t prepare. Plus, the roads have to be built around lava flows with houses already built on them. I-5 at the Moda Center goes down to 1 usable lane for several hundred yards. That doesn’t work for all the traffic going between Seattle and LA.
An advantage is that the MAX system is genuinely really good. And the City of Portland has been aggressive at letting market demand better use land near rail lines (rather than freezing land use as old houses). Any land use demand that can happen near a MAX line can help delay a freeway expansion and save the state some money.
I reached out to ODOT a few years ago when this first came up. I am a truck driver and I go through Portland a lot. I suggested multiple ways to reduce traffic without forcing people out of their vehicles.
The email I got back basically said "we are going with tolls end of discussion, we don't care that most truck drivers don't pick their loads or routes, we don't care that drivers, not their employers will have to pay the tolls, if you don't like it change jobs".
The problem with our road system is that its designed, built and maintained by people who spend most of their time in an office running numbers and some of their time operating the equipment used to make the roads.
Don't get me wrong the numbers you show are not entirely useless but they don't account for human behavior.
A good example of accounting for human behavior is road construction in Nebraska. When they do work on I-80 they just set up cones and leave the freeway running at 70mph. People are given ample notice to get over into the correct lane. As a result no one slows down and because everyone is doing 70mph through the cone zone, no one is stopping to look, everyone is paying attention to where they are going and the vehicles in front of them. As a result accidents in construction zones in Nebraska are rare because everyone is going to fast to get distracted by the road crews.
Portland on the other hand is an example of not accounting for human behavior. Too many interchanges, too many exits, too many people using the interstate as downtown bypass to get to work or go home. The biggest problem is trucks like mine, rarely are we actually going into Portland, most of us are either going to 84 or going into Washington. The law forces us to stay in the left lane and because of this coupled with cross town traffic, we have to slam on our brakes every time a car gets on the freeway. It takes a car seconds to accelerate, it takes us minutes. If they made the left lanes a free bypass for traffic not stopping in Portland and made it against the law to enter the bypass or exit it once inside city limits, most of us would take that bypass and traffic would be unplugged.
What is really needed are dedicated truck lanes for through traffic. Take the trucks out of the passenger car traffic and both will flow better.
@@jpatrickmoore5158 Yes, all highways need to be 8 lanes for every special driver.
I agree with all of the part about human behavior and idiots in charge of highway planning. (And most states don't mandate drivers ed to get a license if 18+, compounding the issue.)
But they are right that if you don't like the truck-driver covering the cost of the toll you should switch jobs, or more reasonably put toll costs in your contract. Your lack of basic business skill really isn't anyone else's problem.
@@TheDuckofDoom. I mean, to suddenly place a toll on an established trucking route, and telling the Transportation Industry to kick rocks is a bit harsh. Yeah, they can take a longer route and avoid I5. I'd love less trucks on it, but will be ready for the price increase of goods.
@@Puddingskin01 That isn't the point at all. The comment was about the emotional plea for the little guy, as if his internal company compensation is a valid argument against the toll its self.
Yes, tolls have problems especially the way the dolts in OR want to apply them 24-7 (Giving drivers zero incentive to reschedule).
In London (ish), we do already have a congestion charge on the Dartford Crossing, and from next year on the (new) Silvertown tunnel and the (existing) blackwall tunnel.
These are different to infrastructure tolls, which pay for the construction only, in that they can generate a profit for the government.
The Silvertown tunnel will also be the first new (major) road in London within my lifetime.
I don't know a single person Oregon who would be opposed to more lanes on the freeway!! Lived here my entire life
I am. Many of us want to move away from car dependence.
@@jakew1362Not wanting to drive is up to you. Thanks for forcing your choice on others.
@@emouselOregonWanting to drive is up to you. Thanks for forcing your choice on others.
What a mindless statement. Having less car-dependence is great and means *more* choice, not less. It doesn't mean not being able to drive, only that *not* driving becomes a realistic (and perhaps even attractive??) option more often. Public and private transport are both important; let's not pretend there should only be one blessed way to get around.
@jakew1362 That's great. But as he stated, unless you live in the inner part of the metro, it just doesn't work. I live fairly close to 2 max stations. But it would more than double my commute time to use them (80 minutes instead of 30). It also doesn't allow for the stops I make along the way: grocery store, bank, post office, picking up my kid from school. There are simply not enough hours in the day. As well as still having to have a car to get elsewhere, so not saving money by not paying for car insurance, registration, and maintenance.
Because building more lanes has ALWAYS solved traffic everytime it’s been tried….
The problem with I 5 is the Marquam bridge bottleneck and even worse is the lloyd district bottleneck. The lanes split in half at the junction with I 405, yet almost everyone is staying on I 5, and i think the desiign there just doesnt really reflect the traffic flow.
It's ridiculous that it goes from 3 lanes to 2 lanes, but at the 2 lane road a 4 lane road merges into 2 lanes into 1 lane to merge into the highway. And that happens in multiple places, not just the 405 bridge but up by jantzen beach, airport way, etc.
The real solution is those oregon business' that have the bulk of their employees in Vancouver need to open offices across the river. It's a win for everyone as the workers would no longer pay income tax, wouldn't have to commute across the bridge, etc.
@KahluaBomb I will add, that a lot of people are going from I 5 to I 84 there as well and have to cross those lanes to get to that exit just at the end of the bridge. And most definitely, business needs to be more spread out around the different population areas.
I would be in favor of a sales tax IF we could trust that the money from that tax actually went to what it was intended for.
Semi trucks are the issue. Toll the Semi-trucks, and bring back railroads..
We're going to need Semi trucks on the roads, at least until they make big drones that can safely fly those big shipping containers from ports directly to the back loading docks of supermarkets and big box stores. I've been around cargo helicopters. It was noisier and breezier than semi-trucks would have been.
Oregon has no sales tax, however the cumulative taxes the State collects are some of the highest in the nation. The bureaucracy never stops attempting to raise them even higher, hence the failed attempt to apply a sales tax onto business. (consumers would pay)
the have some of the highest income taxes in the country they have zero need for tolls
You forgot that we’re controlled by democrats who love to spend money and taxes
Rob, great video. I use those roads daily. Oregon needs to figure something out. I don’t have the answer but thank you for bringing to light some different perspectives.
I’d love to see a video about Lake Oswego’s refusal to expand public transit out of their city and pushback against the plans to build a bridge to Milwaukee despite it likely resulting in greatly reduced travel times.
You should see the maps of proposed freeway routes from the 1950's. I217 was originally to extend from I5 following what is now Kruse(sp?) Way thru the gold course area and across the Willamette at Lake Oswego. The bypass was later made as I205 farther south. And then later, I205 was planned to extend west at Tualatin to connect with a west side bypass that would carry Washington bound traffic across a new Columbia River bridge someplace like Longview. These decisions are made by people that don't care about our opinions. Witness the recent attempt to put the two tolling areas on I5 and I217 instead of one south of the Boone bridge on I5 so that it hit truck traffic heading to Seattle instead of the local population. Don't get me started on Oregon voters who approved of triple trailers so taxes on truck traffic between Washington and California is taxed less while causing more damage to bridges.
The people of Lake Oswego don't want the "Hoi Poloi" traveling through their town.
I don’t think that is Constitutional. What could keep them from making all roads toll roads? I think the government should pay us for allowing them to be the government.
Why don't they do an audit of the Oregon DOT and see where the money goes, clearly they can't handle what they get already, and I am from Oregon by the way.
same, and I think the same thing. Just look at all the people going through DEQ every day and how much they charge per car. Where does all that money go?
If its anything like Washington where the politicians decide what funding and where it goes to, then the politicians are the ones who need to have the pressure put on them. The fact I-5 through Portland looks like it hasn't been modernized at all says it all. At least Oregon for the most part has decent road surfaces just poor planning and anti-car politics.
Well at least with portland they throw money at bike lanes instead. Instead of expanding Powell to 4 lanes they kept 2 lanes and made massive sidewalks and bike lanes
101 down the coast is one of the most expensive roads in the world to maintain,,and it's still a death trap. It washes out every year ,,,check out the Hooskanaden slide area,,,and between Gold Beach and Port Orford,,alot of money gets spent there..101 gets shut down every year in that area.
Oregon needs to tread lightly with the tolls. It is against U.S. Law to charge a toll or any admittance fee to access a roadway constructed with federal money.
A hole in the boat is still a problem. Does not matter if it’s a new or old boat. Water comes in, if you don’t pump it out, you sink. In my case, if Oregon tolls I-205 and I-5, I simply don’t go there and choose spend my money elsewhere. I will use the Washington highways to go east and west. And then go around Portland. It’s annoying and takes more miles, time and maybe even more money. But they get what they want. They congestion price me off the Portland freeways.
Or do what us New Yorkers are doing with the current tolls already and with the congestion pricing they want to do, license plate flippers they flip the plate up and away from the cameras.
As a person that is forced to take toll roads everyday, don't let them start or they will keep expanding tolls on every new / reconstructed road. Then that rate increases every year. The promise that they gave to Dallas was that the Dallas North Tollway was going to be free after they paid for it. That was back in the 60's. Spoiler alert, they are still charging tolls today, they lied! 🤷♂🤦♂
The problem in Portland is, there hasn't been a major freeway or bridge built in the last 40 years. THAT is why there is congestion. You can't have tens of thousands of people move here every year and expect the same old tired infrastructure can handle it. Only two freeways running north/south? Fine, 40 years ago. I-5 only four lanes instead of eight running through parts of town? Fine, 40 years ago. Only two bridges across the Columbia instead of four? Fine, 40 years ago. Tolling will not fix this problem. Only more roads and bridges will, or fewer people.
The consensus I get (on background) from consultants who work for ODOT: Three thru lanes on every freeway. No more (except auxiliary lanes for merging). No fewer.
That's why they are working to build out widening the 205 bridges and section near Stafford. And the Rose Quarter section of I-5, which is also just 2 lanes. But they also know that there is a significant portion of residents who strongly oppose wider California-style freeways. Without public support to build something that wide, there's no way it'll get funded.
The federal government may have something to say about that. Here in Pennsylvania, the governor wanted to toll Interstate I80 he was shut down because of the funds that paid for the highway. The federal government stopped the tolling of I80. Without paying the fed back for that road. The federal highway act I believe is what prevented Pennsylvania from tolling that road... Now new roads funded other ways can be tolled. Also special new lanes can be tolled on existing interstate highways but not the original highway act funded sections.
I've said for years in my community. I'm open to public transit, but the system needs to be fixed. Public transit in my community does not run 24/7, so I would only have transit coming home, no way to get to work, they need to bring the commute time from an hour and a half down to 45 minutes or less, and they need to remove the firearm restrictions. If they do those three things, I will gladly take public transit to and from work and leave my car in the garage the majority of the time. I was called entitled for making that suggestion. Okay, I'll take my car for the 20 minute commute, then.
firearm restriction? where are you commuting to that you need a gun?
although i do entirely agree with your first two points, more area served & higher frequency/times is always nice, most busses in london run
@1e1001 Where am I commuting to? Somewhere in town, what difference does it make? They have restrictions that prevent me from using public transit. With those in place, I'll choose to take my car
I live in Portland. you should look into how Oregon and Portland have raised taxes including gas tax to 'fix' the roads- however the money is not used to 'fix' the roads. It is used for everything but the roads, including bike paths- which is not fixing roads
I got a chuckle out of your video. I could tell to the foot where you were recording this. It's in my neighborhood. To the subject of the video. I used to work in Beaverton, on the west side of Portland and lived on the east side. I only occasionally used I205 because the surface streets were faster. The city leaders really-really-really want me and drivers like me to use the Tri-Met transit system. Even if the tolls were $7 (and I couldn't use the surface streets) I would still pay the tolls because even during rush hour, my commute time was 60% less stuck in traffic than using public transit. I have timed it many times, even rush hour traffic is faster than the light rail.
Then they force light rail down our throats and wonder why we aint using it
Another problem with this plan is that there are only two bridges from the Portland area into Washington, and they're both part of interstate highways 5 and 205. The next closest bridge is Bridge of the Gods in Hood River, and then the Lewis and Clark bridge in Kelso, WA. It's simply not fair to toll taxpayers who are supposed to benefit from the Federal Interstate Highway system -- it's called a FREEway, not a tollway. Perhaps they should tax electricity usage on electric vehicle chargers, to make up for the lost gasoline tax revenue, since those vehicles are still using the roads that the gasoline tax pays for.
Ha! You should try living in Sydney, Australia.
The average Sydneysider spends $84 AUD (~$52 USD) per week on road tolls, while many spend over $300 AUD (~$187 USD) per week.
If the taxpayers paid for the roads in the first place then placing tolls on those taxpayer funded roads would be illegal, or akin to double taxation. Interstate highways are federally funded by the taxpayer therefore no tolls.
EV's are much heavier than gas powered auto's, that means more wear on the roads.
But EV's have no "Gas Tax" which pays for roads.
I heard Alberta slapped an additional annual tax on EV's to cover this cost.
They pay higher registration fees than gas or diesel vehicles.
@@Oregonduck09 Thanks. Is that due to no fuel tax collected, if you know?
Oregonian tapping in to say, keep it up! super cool to see you were just 3 miles from my house
Why is no one talking about the programs that are eating into the state revenue. So many needless spending programs going on
Like all these senseless road expansion projects.
They don't do that here on the west coast lol. There is a reason why they are always introducing new taxes but we see no actual improvements.
@cmmartti are you that dense? More people have moved in, so every form of basic infrastructure has to be expanded
So glad we moved out of Oregon after the 120 continuous nights of riots in Portland. Tolling roads is the least of their worries; they spend so much money on worthless stuff. Per capita state expenditures grew exponentially in our 40 years there, mostly in the last 10. Where does the money go? The climate scammers, political donors, unions, etc. with no improvement in services and no new highways opened in the last 20 years. Good riddance. It's not a road problem, it's a sanity problem.
When motorists pay for their annual licence plate stickers, a portion could go to road maintenance. EVs could pay a higher fee, to compensate for the taxes not realized from the gas tax. Just a thought…
This is exactly what New Jersey is doing! And I’m still seeing more and more EVs on the road every month
I live in Oregon, I just bought a model 3, I paid over 1k for registration on the thing. I pay around 100ish on a gas vehicle.
This is basically what California is transitioning to now. The gas tax is being shifted to a registration tax. People are balking at making it mileage-based (a whole can of worms there), but basically the gas tax has become ineffective due to high-MPG vehicles and EVs.
our state has an excess of marijuana tax dollars and refunds it back, i don't really understand the reasoning for enacting toll
It has an elevator! Just like Quebec city! Quebec city also has a f ton of stairways, too, and some in a very weird spot. I remember getting lost trying to find on and having to go into a yard to find one... it was a paved parking by looked more like a private yard, surrounded by either the cliff side or houses, densely packed
They act like tolls will solve all their problems, but I say find something else. Once they start they will only expand. Never paid a toll in my life until I went to Florida. Absolute insanity how much it costs to go from Orlando to the beach. Disgusting, imo. Roads should always be free. I had no idea "toll road" meant you pay every 5 fing minutes
Rob, please dial back the music volume. It’s hard to hear your voice over it - at least during the first minute. Love the videos, and this one is local for me! Thanks!
Edit: Nice job pronouncing Tualatin correctly!
Why is light rail being funded by roads! That's asinine. Light rail should be able to cover its own maintenance by ticket sales or it isn't needed!
A vehicle fee based on weight would be a very Equitable way generating Road repair Revenue. As heavier Vehicles do significantly more wear and tear on roads. It also incentivize smaller vehicles that would make navigating urban areas more pleasant and much safer for pedestrians.
That’s a much fairer way to tax EVs imo, since they’ll naturally be a little heavier. Hopefully it’d also make people reconsider driving around massive vehicles, unless they need their utility frequently.
@@zedramer Yeah I'd love that. As an EV driver I get taxed 350 more, even though the weight of my vehicle is the same as combustion. I dont understand how a F350 that weighs 2x as more as my EV is getting taxed hundreds less than my 3K lb EV.
You'd probably want to factor in the number of axles as well. 20 tonnes over 8 axles is going to do less damage to the road than 20 tonnes spread over only 4 axles.
@silvy7394 that's because that F350 could be doing actual work like hauling a load of sheet rock, or gravel or whatever to a house, whereas your heavy EV is just hauling you around running errands. You could be living closer to work and riding an electric bicycle instead.
Semis already pay way way more in road tax than cars.
So awesome seeing my favorite UA-camr doing a video part on my home town and of Newberg.
And this is the situation you get stuck in when you have pursued a car-based suburban-commuter transportation system for decades. Land-use and transportation need to change at the same time, but for the places where it takes more time to change land-use (suburbs resistant to change) there is no sense in spending more money to accommodate that system.
Can tell you are not from Oregon.
We have some of the most restrictive growth laws in the nation. Each municipality has an urban growth boundary and a city cannot annex an area without it being a part of the urban boundary and they have to be out of room to grow within the boundary for 20 years forward.
@@Huntsmen64then they need to change the rules inside the growth boundary to allow for denser housing. And cities like Portland still sprawl out a ton even with the UGB.
@@Huntsmen64 Urban growth boundary or not, this is not just an Oregon problem. It applies to basically every city in the US and Canada
@@sammymarrco47 you keep showing more and more that your a nimby and not a researcher.
@@sammymarrco47 I guess you have never gotten out of the DC area and out west.
The UGB law was passed in the 70s and championed by the republican governor at the time. That governor was such an environmentalist he was also the reason Oregon had one of the first bottle bills in the nation, made the entire beach front in Oregon from having anymore closing access to the public and was instrumental in having the Naito Freeway removed from downtown Portland and made into a park...Tom McCall park.
Look things up before you just write. You might learn a thing or two.
You’re my favorite creator Rob! Thank you for you entertaining and educating!!
How can the name spruce goose not stick in your mind?
My dad told me about it when I was 13 (over 40 now) and I can still remember the name because it's so silly.
Sarcasm
@@petergerdes1094 he was being silly.
@ Fair, I mostly just wanted to talk about how silly the name was too.
I watched this video to understand how they "value price" a freeway. Fully support congestion pricing in NYC because they have alternatives, but does Oregon?
Thank you for this information. It makes me happy when someone confirms it is the right decision to move away from this hellhole.
From the commercial side of things... this is where OR goes to die, logistically speaking. They already harvest a $2,000/truck bond and a mileage-based weight tax from us common carrier types, not to mention their mileage-based cuts of all our IFTA and IRP... adding tolls on top of that is just begging to turn them into the next CA/NYC, wherein the industry carves out "no forced Oregon dispatch" as a caveat in order to attract/retain drivers. And unlike CA, OR doesn't have nearly enough intrastate commerce to afford alienating interstate drivers like that
The Greater Idaho plan is beginning to look so much better for the rest of the state for sure!
Not if your a woman who doesn't wanna die from a pregnancy complications as if we were living yee olden times.
Love your videos Rob, so well researched and so funny. You are the best 😂 Happy Holidays to you and yours and cheers from North Carolina!
You all get what you vote for
I'm assuming this comment is some red vs. blue political nonsense. Guess which two states have the most miles of toll roads? Florida and Oklahoma! Both deeply red states! More than New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania.
@brandonb.5304 I'm simply saying people need to educate themselves about any candidate before going and voting from city council all the way to the president ,too many people don't. And you may need to stop assuming, it doesn't help you
@@brandonb.5304well the majority of the state voted blue and this is the consequence of that
Unfortunately, the problem has no good solution no matter whether your political philosophy is to face the problem or just keep kicking it down the road. Also, where does road congestion realistically rank on your priority list?
I just love the passive-aggressive, quasi-scathing take on UA-cam sponsorships!!
In Oregon, EVs pay higher registration costs, to compensate for not paying gas tax.
It doesn’t offset. EV’s are mostly driven but wealthier people and they are not paying their share of the road maintenance. Not only that but due to their increased weight and characteristics they cause greater road wear.
And just to add, even non EVs pay the highest registration cost in the nation. Oregon registration fees are the highest in the nation-for the purpose of maintaining roads
@@icesk8man *Wrong.* Gas tax in Oregon is 40c a gal. So to reach 350 dollars EV's get taxed on thats about 850 gal of gas. 850 gal at 25MPG is 21,250 miles before you become even with the EV taxes. Average MPG is 24 in a vehicle. Average mileage a year is 14K
Another stellar video Rob!
Never knew about the tolling along 99W back in the day.
They spent years getting the bypass open and hardly anyone uses it.
Pressboard Parakeet? Pfft. Dude doesn't even know the name of the Cedar Condor.
I thought the name was Mahogny Magpie
The Douglas Dodo
Pine Pigeon
The ponderosa pigeon
I always like your videos, but this one is definitely my favorite. Great subject to cover and you did it thoroughly. Thanks