HOUSE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION

 

 

February 24, 2003   Hearing Room 357

8:30 a.m. Tapes  28 - 30

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:            Rep. Alan Brown, Chair

Rep. Elizabeth Beyer, Vice-Chair

Rep. John Mabrey Vice-Chair

Rep. Jackie Dingfelder

Rep. George Gilman

Rep. Mitch Greenlick

Rep. Cliff Zauner

 

STAFF PRESENT:                  Janet Adkins, Administrator

Ryan Sherlock, Assistant

 

 

MEASURE/ISSUES HEARD:            INFORMATIONAL MEETING – TRIMET OVERVIEW                                                               HB 2579 – PUBLIC HEARING

                                                HB 2428 – PUBLIC HEARING

                                                HB 2542 – PUBLIC HEARING

                                                LC 1812 – WORK SESSION

 

These minutes are in compliance with Senate and House Rules.  Only text enclosed in quotation marks reports a speaker’s exact words.  For complete contents, please refer to the tapes.

 

TAPE/#

Speaker

Comments

Tape 28, A

003

Chair Brown

Calls meeting to order at 8:32 a.m., and opens an informational meeting.

INFORMATIONAL MEETING

005

Olivia Clark

TriMet Executive Director of Government Relations. Introduces herself and Mr. Hansen.

010

Fred Hansen

TriMet, General Manager. Offers written testimony and presentation (EXHIBIT A) outlining the operation and function of TriMet:

  • TriMet Service Area
  • Lift

060

Rep. Mabrey

Asks whether the $16 per ride figure is the cost to the state or the cost paid by those that use the Lift service.

065

Hansen

Explains that the $16 figure is the cost to the State, while the rider pays $1 to $1.25 per ride. Continues with presentation:

  • Lift
  • Medical Transportation
  • Ridership Growth
  • TriMet Rider Profile
  • Transit Oriented Development
  • Transit Tracker
  • Clean Air
  • Congestion
  • Airport MAX
  • Interstate MAX
  • Commuter Rail
  • Public Perception of Tri-Met
  • Fully Developed Transit System
  • Rider Demand and Regional Expectations
  • Transit Investment Plan ;with reference to (EXHIBIT B).
  • Federal Funds
  • Productivity Improvements

370

Hansen

Presents Video: Productivity Improvement Process (Approximately 11 Min.)

TAPE 29, A

001

 

Productivity Improvement Process Video Continues.

125

Hansen

Continues with presentation with reference to (EXHIBIT C):

  • Productivity Improvements
  • Payroll Tax
  • Payroll Tax Increase

190

Chair Brown

Asks how many people TriMet employs.

193

Hansen

Explains that TriMet employs about 2,600 people, and operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

197

Chair Brown

Asks if the recession has had any affect on ridership.

200

Hansen

Explains that the current recession has not caused a drop off in TriMet ridership, probably due to the use of TriMet for non-work related transit.

205

Chair Brown

Asks if the price of gasoline affects the ridership for TriMet.

210

Hansen

Observes that gas price has little effect on TriMet ridership, whereas other factors such as price of parking has a more direct affect.

215

Rep. Mabrey

Asks about Federal I.O.U.’s discussed in the presentation.

220

Hansen

Gives an explanation of the Federal I.O.U program.

240

Rep. Mabrey

Remarks on the success of the PIP program as highlighted in the video presentation, asks how suggestions are handled which are not implemented.

250

Hansen

Details employees continued involvement after an improvement idea is suggested, which causes those employees to recognize the value or lack of value of programs.

285

Rep. Greenlick

Asks hypothetically, what it would take to double ridership on the Westside Max.

290

Hansen

Discusses the link between expansion of service and use, highlighting the Airport Max as an example.

340

Rep. Greenlick

Asks Mr. Hansen to address such issues as park-and-ride, and other means to increase ridership.

350

Hansen

Discusses the importance of local services, and partnerships with private sector to decrease the costs associated with park-and-ride.

395

Rep. Greenlick

Expresses concern for those businesses in Washington County which have difficulty moving light freight to the airport. Asks if TriMet has any plans to address this problem.

415

Hansen

Discusses the difficulty in addressing this concern.

TAPE  28, B

035

Rep. Zauner

Asks how many of the 2,600 employees are management.

040

Hansen

Explains that TriMet is a relatively lean management organization, and indicates he can get the exact staffing figures for the committee in the future.

050

Chair Brown

Asks if the payroll tax has been raised since being introduced in 1969.

055

Hansen

Discusses the payroll tax, and the role of the TriMet Board of Directors in determining the tax.

065

Chair Brown

Clarifies that the revenues received by the payroll tax are used for bonding and operating.

070

Hansen

Concurs that these revenues can be used for either.

075

Chair Brown

Thanks Mr. Hansen for his presentation, closes the informational meeting, and opens a public hearing on HB 2579.

HB 2579 – PUBLIC HEARING

080

Janet Adkins

Offers an explanation of HB 2579 with refers to exhibits and testimony presented during the previous committee meeting on Wednesday, February 17th, 2003.

 

Bob Avery

BikePac of Oregon. Offers written testimony (EXHIBIT D) in support of HB 2579.

155

Geoffrey White

Portland, Oregon. Offers written testimony (EXHIBIT E) in support of  HB 2579.

225

Randy Phipps

BikePac of Oregon. Offers written testimony (EXHIBIT F) in support of HB 2579.

270

Adkins

Clarifies that the law suggested by HB2579 would also allow lane splitting in regular traffic when cars are stopped at traffic lights, and asks if this was the original intention of the bill.

285

White

Discusses the original intent of the measure to allow lane splitting on “limited access” roadways such as highways and freeways.

290

Phipps

Discusses the original intent of the measure was to allow lane splitting on major roads with at least two lanes of traffic when traffic is brought to a halt.

335

Rep. Gilman

Asks how the witnesses felt about the proposed amendments which would require that traffic be completely halted and impose a speed limit of 10 mph.

340

Phipps

Suggest that he does not have a problem with either of the amendments.

345

Rep. Greenlick

Asks if there will be testimony from the Oregon Department of Transportation or the State Police. Asks what happens when traffic begins to move after a stoppage, and a motorcycle is not in a lane.

355

Avery

Explains that, due to the ability for motorcycles to move in traffic, they would remerge with traffic when the opportunity for lane splitting ended.

360

Rep. Greenlick

Asks whether any thought has been given to the possibility that those other motorists stuck in traffic would not appreciate this concept.

365

Avery

Points to the effect lane splitting has on reducing traffic and the recognition this would receive.

370

White

Addresses the concerns expressed by Rep. Greenlick in context to his experience in drivers education.

390

Rep. Greenlick

Comments on the possibility of hostility between motorists and motorcyclists.

TAPE 29, B

003

White

Observes his efforts to educate both sides on the issue.

010

Avery

Points out the use of lane-splitting in California and its general acceptance in that state.

015

Phipps

Explains the measures’ intent to bring the concept of lane-splitting to Oregon without the extra costs usually associated with lane splitting.

030

Rep. Mabrey

Discusses his personal concerns of riding a motorbike between cars, asks if there was any thought given to allowing lane splitting in a limited number of lanes.

040

White

Indicates the intention of the amendments is to help limit those unsafe aspects of lane splitting.

050

Avery

Points out the efforts to keep the law uniform, and simple to avoid confusion.

055

Chair Brown

Asks whether lane splitting also allows motorcyclists to use the shoulder of the road.

060

White

Points out that no emergency lane (i.e. shoulder) is included in this bill.

070

Lyle Irons

BikePac of Oregon, Lobbyist. Indicates his groups support for the proposed amendments to HB 2579.

075

Curtis

Oregon State Police, Sergeant. Offers written testimony (EXHIBIT G) regarding HB 2579.

090

Rep. Zauner

Questions the possible restriction of emergency vehicles in practicing lane splitting.

095

Curtis

Discusses his groups concern with the possible restriction, and his groups wish to have HB 2579 apply to law enforcement motorcycles if passed.

105

Chair Brown

Clarifies Mr. Curtis’s request.

110

Curtis

Agrees and explains further concerns regarding the bill.

165

Stan Porter

Oregon Department of Transportation, Motorcycle Safety Division. Offers written testimony (EXHIBIT H) regarding 2579.

185

Curtis

Points out the changes proposed by HB 2579 would require education for both motorists and motorcyclists.

190

Irons

Identifies the efforts of Team Oregon; a group which educates motorcycle riders.

195

Rep. Greenlick

Asks if BikePac would support an amendment which would limit lane splitting to non-city areas or limited access highways, or support an amendment which would create a sunset in the law. Finally, asks the witnesses from the Oregon Department of Transportation and State Police if they support the bill as amended.

210

Rep. Mabrey

Asks how lane splitting would apply to situations of stop-and-go traffic, and what the definition of “stopped” traffic is, in regards to the bill.

220

Curtis

Explains that it would be the responsibility of the motorcyclist to remerge with the traffic lane when that lane began to move again.

260

Rep. Beyer

Asks Mr. Curtis and Mr. Porter if their organizations would have proposed this bill.

265

Curtis

Explains his organizations opposition to the bill as originally written, and expresses his group’s concerned support for the bill with the amendments.

295

Porter

Agrees with Sergeant Curtis.

300

Rep. Beyer

Clarifies that the witnesses would prefer to have an amendment limiting the usage of lane splitting to limited access highways.

305

Curtis

Explains the concerns regarding lane splitting on city streets, and his groups support for an amendment on this issue.

315

Chair Brown

Thanks the witnesses and closes the public hearing on HB 2579.

320

Rep. Greenlick

Asks if the committee could get an amendment creating a sunset clause.

325

Chair Brown

Invites Rep. Greenlick to have the amendment drafted, and opens a public hearing on HB 2428.

HB 2428 – PUBLIC HEARING

330

Janet Adkins

Offers a description of HB 2428.

370

Monty King

Offers written testimony (EXHIBIT I) in support of HB 2428, pointing out his intention to get an amendment removing section one of the bill.

470

Chair Brown

Clarifies that Mr. King is going to obtain amendments to address the concerns he mentioned.

475

King

Answers affirmatively.

TAPE 30, A

030

Kelly Taylor

Oregon Department of Transportation. Offers written testimony (EXHIBIT J) regarding HB 2428.

045

Rep. Greenlick

Asks what is the question regarding the fee.

050

King

Explains the change in the fee.

055

Rep. Greenlick

Clarifies what would be deleted with a proposed amendment.

060

King

Explains that the proposed amendment would delete section one of the bill, not the law.

070

Chair Brown

Closes the public hearing on HB 2428, and opens a public hearing on HB 2542.

HB 2542 – PUBLIC HEARING

075

Janet Adkins

Offers a description of HB 2542.

 

Monty King

Offers written testimony (EXHIBIT K) in support of HB 2542.

120

Kelly Taylor

Offers written testimony (EXHIBIT L) regarding HB 2542.

145

Rep. Greenlick

Questions whether an auto dealer would forget to fill out the correct paper work in the right amount of time.

160

King

Points out that there is no requirement to submit the form.

161

Rep. Greenlick

Inquires why, if there is no requirement to submit the form, there is a requirement to submit the forms within ten days.

163

King

Outlines why there is no reason to submit the form, but a time limit for submitting the form.

175

Rep. Greenlick

Asks Mr. King to clarify lines five through seven of the bill.

180

King

Explains that there is no penalty for not submitting the form, but a time limit for submitting the form.

190

Taylor

Explains the law does require the form be submitted, but the dealer is exempt from the requirement if the dealer is transferring to another dealer or if the dealer is submitting the application on behalf of the buyer.

210

Adkins

Explains that when the original law was passed there was no added penalty, but rather the incentive of non-liability when the form was submitted.

220

Rep. Beyer

Clarifies that individuals who sell cars are not liable for the same things as the dealers.

225

King

Explains that in small claims courts cases regarding this issue; seven percent involve dealers, and ninety three percent involve individuals.

233

Rep. Beyer

Asks if the original owner usually ends up footing the bill when these issues go to court.

236

King

Indicates that there is about a hundred percent success rate.

240

Rep. Beyer

Clarifies that the original owner is the one who pays.

243

King

Explains that the owner who is still on the record is the one who pays.

250

Taylor

Explains that in 1995 the legislature looked at this issue, and decided to add the incentive rather than a penalty.

255

Rep. Zauner

Expresses his concern for the lack of insurance on these cars.

260

Taylor

Agrees, and further discusses the issue of insurance.

285

Chair Brown

Asks why police officers ask for insurance during a traffic stop, while they can get the information from a database.

288

Taylor

Explains why the police ask for insurance.

293

Daryl Fuller

Oregon Automobile Dealers Association. Further discusses the issues regarding the ten day timeframe.

335

Chair Brown

Closes the public hearing on HB 2542, introduces LC 1812 (EXHIBIT M), and adjourns the meeting at 10:24 AM.

 

 

EXHIBIT SUMMARY

 

A – Informational Meeting, TriMet Overview, Fred Hansen, 22 pp.

B – Informational Meeting, TriMet’s Transit Investment Plan, Fred Hansen, Oversized.

C – Informational Meeting, TriMet’s PIP, Fred Hansen, 2 pp.

D – HB 2579, written testimony, Bob Avery, 3 pp.

E – HB 2579, written testimony, Geoffrey White, 2 pp.

F – HB 2579, written testimony, R.M. Phipps, 5 pp.

G – HB 2579, written testimony, Curt Curtis, 3 pp.

H – HB 2579, written testimony, Troy Costales, 5 pp.

I – HB 2428, written testimony, Monty King, 2 pp.

J – HB 2428, written testimony, Kelly Taylor, 1 p.

K – HB 2542, written testimony, Monty King, 4 pp.

L – HB 2542, written testimony, Kelly Taylor, 1 p.

M – LC 1812, draft, staff, 9 pp.