INFORMATIONAL MEETING

 

TAPE 81, 82, A-B

 

HOUSE REVENUE COMMITTEE

MARCH 14, 2003   8:30 AM   STATE CAPITOL BUILDING

 

Members Present:                        Representative Lane Shetterly, Chair

                                                Representative Joanne Verger, Vice Chair

                                                Representative Phil Barnhart

                                                Representative Vicki Berger

                                                Representative Pat Farr

                                                Representative Mark Hass

                                                Representative Elaine Hopson

                                                Representative Max Williams                                               

 

Members Excused:                      Rep. Wayne Scott, Vice Chair

 

Witness Present:                        Bruce Warner, Oregon Department of Transportation

                                                Paul Mather, Oregon Department of Transportation

                                                Mike Marsh, Oregon Department of Transportation

                                                Olivia Clark, Tri-Met

                                                Roger Martin, Oregon Transit Association

 

Staff Present:                            Paul Warner, Legislative Revenue Officer

                                                Dick Yates, Legislative Revenue Office

                                                Kathy Tooley, Committee Assistant

 

TAPE 81, SIDE A

004

Chair Shetterly

Calls meeting to order at 9:03 a.m.

 

 

022

Dick Yates

Discussed nearly complete Highway Cost Allocation Study.  Asked Oregon Department of Transportation to discuss highway financing and federal policy.

 

034

 

 

 

091

 

Bruce Warner

 

 

 

B. Warner

Discussed of state, city, county highway and roadside needs, excluding air, marine, mass transit.  Highlighted needs, discussed 2001 Oregon Transportation Investment Act, OTIA, (Exhibit 1).

 

Discussion of requests, funds allocated.

100

B. Warner

Discussion of monies lost to inflation.

 

123

B. Warner

Discussed affect of rising fuel efficiency.

 

127

B. Warner

Discussed highway fuel revenues.

 

142

B. Warner

Discussed increase in population and registration of vehicles.

 

157

B. Warner

Discussed increase in vehicle miles traveled.

 

164

B. Warner

Discussed increased congestion.

 

170

B. Warner

Discussed additional challenges, aging infrastructure, endangered species act, culvert replacement for fish passage, sediment control measures.

 

182

B. Warner

Discussed annual maintenance/preservation unmet needs.

 

191

B. Warner

Discussed maintenance activities and citizen expectations.

 

230

Rep. Verger

What do you see as your department’s relationship to cities and counties?

 

235

B. Warner

Interaction, dissolving differences, currently sharing equipment and joint facilities, people don’t care what jurisdiction fixes the roads, just want them maintained.

 

275

Rep. Farr

State highway system does that include interstate? 

 

280

 

302

Paul Mather

Answered affirmatively.

 

Discussed strategy for bridge crisis.

 

306

Mather

Discussed bridge conditions, freight issues.

 

314

Mather

Discussed background of bridges, including aging, many reaching 50 to 100 year life expectancy.

 

335

Mather

Discussed posting of cracked state bridges, bridges built in the 1950s and weight limits issues.

 

355

Mather

Discussed bridge crisis, emergency repairs from 1997 to 2003; expecting 5% to be restricted, by 2010 850 will be posted.

 

380

Mather

Discussed recent bridge emergencies and resulting emergencies.

 

391

 

Questions and discussion regarding trucks through Monroe.

 

388

 

Discussion regarding Coos Bay Bridge.

 

418

Mather

Discussion of Bridge Task force June 2002. Recommended selection process away from worst first, to a corridor approach; starting with I-5 and I-84 first.

 

440

Mather

Discussed OTIA funding and bridge repairs it has been able to fund.

 

449

Mather

Discussed freight shipments and importance to economy.

 

 

TAPE 82, SIDE A

 

021

Mather

Discussed over a third of trucks carry loads over 80,000 pounds gross weight; divisible loads and indivisible loads.

 

024

Hopson

Is there data on the safety of the triple trailer rigs?

 

028

Mather

Can get it.

 

032

Mather

Description of trucks and goods they carry.

 

044

Mather

Discussed points of origination for truck transit.

 

050

Mather

Discussed regional areas of production dependent on roads and importance on local economies.

 

059

Mather

Results of study described a $5 billion problem in needed bridge work over the next 10 years to remove restrictions from bridges.

 

060

Chair Shetterly

State, City, and County?

 

062

 

065

Mather

Answered Affirmatively.

 

Discussed weight restrictions to 64,000 pounds will result in more trips; discussed effect on economies $122 billion by 2025, loss of 88,000 jobs.

 

081

Mather

Discussed impact on jobs, investment and regional economic implication.

 

092

Hopson

Why does Rogue Valley have the highest incidence of cracked bridges?

 

088

Mather

Has to do with the time period in the late 1950s, early 1960s in which they were built.

 

091

Mather

Livability declines when bridge emergencies are in effect, safety risks, maintenance costs increase.

 

105

Mather

Impacts on industry if weight restricted to 80,000 lbs; costs will increase and be passed on to the consumer.

 

112

Mather

Discussed recommendations of task force.

 

115

Mather

Four key priorities:

 

·         Fix interstate keeping trucks off local streets. 

·         Fix important freight routes that link to interstate system. 

·         Fix economically critical city/county bridges that links network construction.

·         Secure, emergency funding source, for bridges of lower priority, that would allow minimal services for all communities.

 

124

Mather

Recommend staged approach with assumption projects would be done within 10 years; ODOT feels it can be done in 7 years.

 

128

Mather

Discussed process, needs and impacts, and database of use to understand cost/benefits.

 

134

 

 

 

147

Mather

 

 

 

Mather

Oregon Transportation Commission issued a draft report in January, that said the staged approach did not fix the interstate fast enough, and needed to reach more areas of Oregon.

 

Presented revised report to the Committee with 5 stage process and priorities.

 

148

Mather

Discussed Stage 1, Highway 97, discussed importance, provided within existing funds, discussed assumptions.

 

175

Mather

Discussed Stage 2, main priority is interstate highways, portion of I-5, I-84, I-205, rationale and costs.

 

183

Mather

Discussed Stage 3, balance of I-5.

 

 

 

Questions and discussion regarding number of bridges, overpasses, repairing/replacing.

 

206

Mather

Discussed Stage 4, begins network of repairs beyond the interstate, focus on important economic regions.

 

212

Farr

Does that tally include bridges over the interstate?

 

214

Mather

Does not include all overpasses and interchanges, looked from a strategic standpoint, which were most important, compared to routes in Stage 4 and reviewed trade-offs.

 

227

Mather

Discussed list of bridges and costs.

 

220

Mather

Discussed shift in thinking in Stage 5, prior stages built to accommodate any load.  Stage 5 accommodates 95% of loads for greater economic gain, including 105,000 pound loads.

 

270

Mather

Discussed need for emergency bridge funding for those that are not included in 5 Stages.

 

278

Mather

Summarized key priorities.

 

283

Mather

Discussed recommendation for funding all 5 Stages, $2 billion.

 

297

Mather

Discussed funding options, assumes bonding package that aggressively rebuilds bridges; need $150 million annually to fund.

 

306

Mather

Summarized state of bridges and affect on economy, impacts if not funded.

 

312

Mather

Discussed stimulus on economy, could be complete within 7-10 years; generation $1 billion in wages.

 

304

Rep. Verger

These stages reflect today’s industry and trucking needs, how would new business affect priorities?

 

333

Mather

Discussed strategy and timing of Highways 38 and 42.

 

342

Rep. Hass

Discussed prior legislation, is there analysis of local funding to fix local priorities?

 

Questions and discussion regarding local option.

 

400

Rep. Barnhart

Bills from Congressman DeFazio would put a weight limit on divisible loads, encourage freight traffic, with heavier traffic handled by rail, do you have an economic analysis? Does limiting weight limits make a difference in the work that needs to be done and costs.

 

005

Mather

The system is in crisis; have bridges that are going to fail and not accommodate any load.

 

028

Rep. Berger

What’s the life span of the new 217 bridge just completed?

 

034

Mather

The expect lifespan of 217is 75 to 100 years, built to current seismic and load standards.

 

040

Rep. Berger

When we get to Stage 3, what are they doing in Northern California and in Idaho as part of a grid? 

 

048

Mather

Oregon has dramatically more critical problems than neighboring states, Washington, Idaho and California.

 

040

Rep. Verger

Regarding bidding process; described Florida company that painted North Bend Bridge, will Oregon business lose to out of state business and not put Oregonians to work?

 

067

B. Warner

For every $1 million invested in transportation projects, there are 19 family wage jobs.  Under current law, lowest bidder gets the project.  Looking at level of investment under discussion, have to look at other than standard low bid, look at qualifications of consultant/contractor team, cost, timeliness; need for clarity from Legislature as how to do that and keep jobs in Oregon.

 

097

Chair Shetterly

Discussed complicated process, retaliation in vying for out of state bids if Oregon is given preference here.

 

106

B. Warner

It should be one of the considerations when you look at a proposal to move forward with a package.

 

113

Rep. Barnhart

Concern regarding job bundling, difficulty of bidding for local business, how can a small business get an opportunity?  Are you looking at separating design now/building later for the purpose of speeding up and lowering costs.

 

135

B. Warner

Standard design/build process won’t work on projects of this magnitude.  Other than low bid can get to use of local contractors.

 

142

Rep. Barnhart

What you really bought was management for a set of projects?

 

147

B. Warner

What we are discussing is a design/build process, giving responsibility for design and construction.

 

151

Chair Shetterly

Incorporating a period of responsibility for repairs as well?

 

155

B. Warner

Answered affirmatively.  Instead of using a low bid, ODOT would use a preference to weight and figure out best combination to assure accomplishing projects or avoiding issues.

 

158

 

166

Mike Marsh

 

Marsh

Discussed overview on financial change (Exhibit 2).  

 

Discussed federal financing tools; innovative finance process, Road User Fee Task Force.

 

171

 

185

Marsh

 

Marsh

Discussed federal financing tools.

 

Discussed benefits of advance construction, use of existing funds to begin a project and replace with Federal Funds later.

 

205

Marsh

Discussed flexible match, allows private contribution, in-kind match; using what’s available to get a project moving forward.

 

189

Marsh

Discussed tapered match, using 100% federal funding up front, with ending balance or reserves at end of biennium.

 

228

Marsh

Discussion test and evaluation funds as match for federal projects.

 

238

Marsh

Discussed analysis of highway cost to ensure reserve is appropriate to pay future debt.  Discussed highway cost allocation study.

 

249

Marsh

 

Discussed Innovative Finance Advisory Committee.  Major tool, using venture capital and private sector.

 

277

Marsh

Discussed upcoming legislation for changes in contracting procedure.

 

275

Marsh

Discussed prequalification methods; unsolicited bid system.

 

280

Marsh

Discussed imminent domain process.

 

286

 

294

Marsh

 

Marsh

Discussed Federal financing, Garvee bonds. 

 

Discussed Road User Fee Task Force discussed purpose and upcoming information.

 

292

Marsh

Discussed hybrids and planning required.

 

310

Marsh

Discussed task force review of alternatives, trying to come up with a user fee approach.   Mileage fee approach has been recommended and moving forward and would replace fuel tax with user system.

 

310

Marsh

Other options being reviewed:  Congestion pricing with rate adjustments according to system needs; tolling with alternative routes; studded tire use fee, dealing with damage, providing incentives for reducing usage.

 

420

Olivia Clark

Discussed Tri-met mass transit, “How We Get There Matters”, (Exhibit 3), history, increases in ridership, pollution abatement.

 

020

 

 

032

 

 

056

Clark

 

 

Clark

 

 

Clark

Discussed productivity improvement process as a model for the country for productivity improvements.

 

Discussed federal air quality attainment requirements, discussed economic consequences for not meeting requirement.

 

Discussed statutorial funding by payroll tax, which provides half of operating budget; 25% fare recovery, balance funded by federal grants, enterprise activity and advertising.

 

071

Clark

Discussed federal funds transit discretionary dollars and 6 year re-authorization of federal Surface Transportation Act.  Tri-met expects to compete at the federal level for $400 million in discretionary dollars for 6 years to pay for light rail.

 

087

Clark

Discussed federal requirements:  Must be a good project, have local match, and can be operated for 20 years.  Cannot show with current revenues that operating dollars will be available into the future for another light rail line.

 

107

Roger Martin

Discussed executive summary of recent study “Oregon’s Transit Network: Status and Condition the Statewide Transit Fleet” (Exhibit 4).

 

150

Martin

Discussed affect of freezing cigarette tax on large and small transit systems.  Some small systems which do not have reserves are shutting down as of April 1.  Discussed fear of losing 2 cent cigarette tax in the next biennium primarily affecting seniors and handicapped statewide.

 

 

 

 

Meeting adjourned at 10:40 a.m.

 

 

 

 

 

Tape Log Submitted by,

 

 

 

Kathy Tooley, Committee Assistant Reviewed by Kim Taylor James

 

Exhibit Summary:

1.       B.Warner, “Transportation System Update”, 59 pages

2.       M.Marsh, “Overview on Financial Change”, 5 pages

3.       Clark, “How We Get There Matters”, 11 pages

4.       Martin, “Oregon’s Transit Network:  Status and Condition the Statewide Transit Fleet”, 2 pages