Opinion: Oregon’s path out of transportation mess requires new investment, strong leadership

Sarah Iannarone and Jana Jarvis
For The Oregonian/OregonLive
Iannarone is the former executive director of The Street Trust. Jarvis is president and CEO of the Oregon Trucking Association.
As two advocates, one for walking, biking and transit, and the other for trucking, we frequently have different perspectives when it comes to transportation policy. But as we approach a critical moment for Oregon’s transportation future, we are compelled to share our perspective about what will be required to be successful in the coming year.
Oregon cannot move forward without a significant, sustained investment in transportation and state leaders must be honest with the public about what that requires.
Transportation infrastructure is not optional government spending. It is a core public responsibility that allows people to get to work safely, businesses to move goods efficiently and communities to stay connected. When the system works, Oregon’s economy works. When it fails, everyone pays the price.
Oregon’s transportation system needs a major upgrade. Traffic deaths have risen 51% over the last decade according to a report from the National Transportation Research Nonprofit. Oregon has some of the worst highway bottlenecks in the country, many of which have been exacerbated by the state’s inability to complete key projects that were funded in the last transportation project, like expanding the highway through the Rose Quarter or replacing the Interstate 5 bridge. Key investments and fulfilling previously funded projects are vital to meet the changing needs of our communities. This is an area that demands bold and urgent action from our state’s elected leaders.
These challenges did not emerge overnight, and they will not be solved without bipartisan leadership. Since 2024, there has been a lot of discussion around what’s needed when it comes to transportation funding, as advocates and stakeholders across the state have shared their perspectives. Groups that often disagree worked together to find common ground—or to compromise—for the sake of the state’s transportation infrastructure.
When House Bill 2025 failed and the governor pushed for a special session for a scaled-back transportation package, she indicated it would result in a short-term, band-aid solution, and that a broader conversation would be needed in order to make the long-term investments necessary in order to stabilize transportation funding while investing in long overdue safety improvements, maintenance and critical projects statewide.
The lesson from HB 2025 — and from the fast referral of the scaled-back package — is not simply that the Legislature failed to reach an agreement. It is that we failed to clearly explain to Oregonians what they would receive in return for new investment in our transportation system—and what is at stake if we don’t.
Our leaders cannot make that same error again. With the biggest funding pieces of the short-term transportation package likely to be voted down, leaders must explain the reality of our situation transparently. Any successful transportation package in 2027 will require new revenue. There is no credible path forward without it.
In return for a modest increase in costs — remember that, unlike other states, Oregon does not have tolls or statewide sales tax on all vehicle sales – Oregonians would see tangible improvements such as completion of long-delayed projects, safer streets for children walking to school, reliable freight movement that keeps consumer prices down, investments in revitalizing main streets and an agency equipped to maintain roads, repair bridges and keep mountain passes open during winter storms.
Without a package, the outcome is not savings, it is decline.
Road conditions worsen. Maintenance costs compound. Transit reliability erodes. Freight delays increase the cost of goods. Local governments face growing pressure to backfill state responsibilities. Eventually, Oregon will still need new revenue, but under far more urgent and expensive circumstances, and without the upgraded infrastructure Oregonians have been asking for. In other words, the public will pay more later for less.
Oregon’s leaders must make transportation a priority and own this issue. We were heartened by Gov. Tina Kotek’s commitment to lead the work with legislators from both parties and stakeholders to craft a new package. Only by starting early, creating a transparent process, with a shared commitment from Democratic and Republican leaders, and clearly articulating to Oregonians what is at stake can we overcome the obstacles that resulted in failure last session.
A successful package must clearly explain the tradeoffs, acknowledge that no stakeholder will get everything they want and demonstrate how investments benefit urban and rural communities alike. This conversation cannot be derailed by politics and pitting different users of the system against each other. This is not about cars vs. bikes vs. trucks, it’s about building a system that works for everyone.
We may represent different corners of Oregon’s transportation world, but we share the same conclusion and that is the choice is not between spending and saving, it is between planning and paying for failure. Oregon can choose to invest now or pay more later when the system breaks. Only one of those is a responsible solution.