Portland committee reviews four funding options as PBOT urges durable revenue to fix streets

The Portland Transportation & Infrastructure Committee on Dec. 12 heard a PBOT report presenting four short‑ and mid‑term revenue options to address an eroding transportation budget and growing maintenance backlog. Millicent Williams, director of the Portland Bureau of Transportation, said the city’s General Transportation Revenue is ‘‘not keeping up with costs’’ and that ‘‘we will struggle to meet the public’s expectations without more sustainable and predictable transportation funding.’'

The report, framed as an options document rather than a staff recommendation, narrowed more than 20 potential tools to four approaches staff called most ready for further exploration: a transportation utility fee (TUF), a street‑damage restoration fee to charge utilities/contractors for trenching impacts, and two delivery‑related fees (a retail delivery fee and a third‑party prepared‑food delivery fee). Mark Lehr, PBOT policy resources and partnerships manager, told the committee the regional average TUF for a single‑family dwelling is ‘‘just over $12 per month’’ and that staff used trenching and delivery‑trip estimates (PBOT staff cited roughly 53 miles of trenching activity and up to 10,000,000 delivery trips per year) as part of their analysis.

Councilors and witnesses emphasized three recurring priorities: accountability for how new revenue would be spent, equity measures to protect low‑income residents, and speed of delivery. Priya Dhanapal, deputy city administrator, described the report as a foundation for discussion and said the goal was ‘‘to be transparent about trade‑offs, feasibility, and implementation considerations so that there are no surprises as these conversations move forward.’'

Testimony from business, labor and advocacy groups reflected differing emphases. John Isaacs of the Portland Metro Chamber endorsed a transportation utility fee as ‘‘broad based, stable, [and] predictable’’ if paired with a phase‑out of fossil‑fuel‑based local gas taxes. Sarah Iannarone, executive director of The Street Trust, urged intergovernmental coordination and identified a specific near‑term opportunity: ‘‘Portland can close the $8,000,000 gap on a 2nd Avenue transit prioritization ASAP using available PSF funds,’’ she said. Labor and union witnesses warned that irregular project pipelines harm small and minority contractors and the city’s skilled workforce; Corky Collier of the Columbia Corridor Association said bluntly that ‘‘maintenance is not about potholes. It’s about fiscal responsibility,’’ citing past audit findings and a maintenance backlog estimate staff placed in multi‑billion‑dollar range.

Councilors pressed staff on oversight and community engagement. PBOT offered existing models—such as the Fixing Our Streets oversight committee and utility discount programs—as templates for accountability and low‑income relief; staff said they have begun conversations with partner bureaus and service‑area stakeholders to design eligibility and discount mechanisms. On timing and scale, finance staff said revenue projections are ‘‘scalable’’ and that exact envelopes will depend on the policy levers chosen; councilors asked staff to return with specific revenue estimates and distribution scenarios in January.

Committee business and next steps: the committee took up and adopted the committee minutes by consent at the start of the meeting. PBOT staff told the committee they are prepared to develop a full engagement plan and to return with more detailed fiscal analysis and public‑outreach materials. Chair Clark closed the committee, noting the next Transportation & Infrastructure Committee meeting is scheduled for Jan. 12, and adjourned the body.

What’s next: staff will develop engagement plans and refined revenue estimates, including equity mitigation options, and return to the committee for continued deliberation in January.