What are your transportation priorities? Take our survey.
Roland Chlapowski
Because less of Oregon state's gas tax revenue will be allocated to Portland over the next 5 years, the Portland Office of Transportation is having to deal with a long-term and structural gap between its revenues and its expenditures. Sam, the PDOT Budget Task Force that he formed, and the dedicated staff at the Office of Transportation are currently in the process of scrutinizing PDOT's budget to find the best ways to save money and close this budget gap.
During the campaign, Sam pledged he would not levy any new taxes until school funding was adequately secured, and he is sticking to his word; Sam will not seek any additional tax revenue until he convinced that PDOT's budget is being used as effectively as possible and that any inefficiencies in the agency that exist are rectified.
But, to make sure we do this right, Sam wants and needs your input. Please take this quick survey so we can better understand what services matter to you most, and what values we should keep in mind when we are making decisions about how to allocate PDOT's limited budget.
Take the survey to share your priorities for Portland's transportation system by clicking here.
If you'd like more budget information, this excel document contains figures and graphs outlining PDOT's revenues and expenditures.
Posted by Roland Chlapowski on December 14, 2005
(22) Comments | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
Filed Under Front Page, Office of Transportation, Transportation
Comments by site visitors
Jack, I had the same thought. I bet a swift death for the aerial tram is a transportation solution most of Portland would get behind.
Posted by: Paul Souders | Dec 15, 2005 6:14:46 AM
My biggest issue is traffic safety and the top of that list is the running of red lights & stop signs, and speeding. There seems to be virtually no law enforcement of these very dangerous violations.
Second, the OHSU aerial tram was a nifty idea until the costs became clear. Now it appears to be a silly and terribly costly error in judgement.
Posted by: Michael | Dec 15, 2005 7:19:54 AM
Might there be an ADA interface to the survey somewhere?
Posted by: Ali Corbin | Dec 15, 2005 8:57:21 AM
Ali, I was thinking the same thing. senior and ADA services aren't mentioned and they should certainly be up there at the top of the priority list.
Posted by: Jen | Dec 15, 2005 9:44:43 AM
What is the diff between maint and operations budget since some of these overlap (e.g. street lighting is in both) and I thought maint would be mostly predictable (albeit some contingency items exist) like operations?
Posted by: Steve | Dec 15, 2005 11:24:08 AM
Michael - I understand your concern about enforcement, but that seems more like a police issue than a PDOT (transportation bureau) issue. This survey is about PDOT's budget priorities. Just my 2 cents.
Posted by: bob | Dec 15, 2005 11:45:28 AM
Bob, I could not agree with you more. This issue is one where I am shaking every tree trying to get some fruit to fall. Portland transportation is all about moving people and goods safely. If we are in unreasonable danger due to the negligence and recklessness of others, then we have a transportation issue, too.
Posted by: Michael | Dec 15, 2005 6:10:53 PM
Travelers from out of town who are coming to shop, go to the airport or go through town don't have any interest in biking,amd little interest in mass tranport but are interested in predictability, ease of travel, availabilty of parking and safety.
Posted by: Bob Reid | Dec 16, 2005 10:52:39 PM
Don't know who Bob's out of town traveler friends are, but mine usually use MAX from the airport or arrive via Amtrak; and they love the Streetcar, busses & MAX for shopping, gallery visits and dining. Of course, us downtown dwellers are always ready to show them how.
Posted by: Linda Crum | Dec 17, 2005 9:46:08 AM
The Airport MAX is great. Too bad all those drug dealers and homeless people don't have anyplace else to stay warm (like government shelters, jails, or housing the city could have built with "Voter Owned Elections" funding).
Linda: do you have any friends that have been assaulted downtown by the twentysomething Sp'angers? I do.
Have you seen a seemingly "sound mind and body" thirty-something male defecate on the sidewalk next to an ATM (less than a block from MultCo's community justice building) at 5:00 p.m. on a Friday afternnon? I have.
Have you watched two middle age men get off a TriMet bus -- talking loudly about how much they are enjoying their Acid Trip -- and literally run up to the Swarovski Crystal shop in Pioneer Place (happened last week, while we were taking my son to visit Santa for the first time). You can't make this stuff up.
I'm not blaming public transit, but where are the transit cops (answer: sitting in a warm pick-up with the motor running, or guarding an office), where's Portland's Finest? Why did the Police Department seemingly abdicate downtown law enforcement to let "Downtown Clean and Safe" take over that responsibility?
These are transportation related problems, because public transit is concentrating crime and criminals in the transit corridors. Mainstream folks will not continue to use public transit if they are squeezed off by the selfishness and criminality of others.
Posted by: W. Bruce Anderholt II | Dec 17, 2005 11:13:08 AM
Before making budget recommendations and decisions that are deemed to be constructive, it is my suggestion that you do considerably more stakeholder outreach to the approximately the eighty percent of constituents who choose to drive as their primary means of transportation, and actually pay taxes when their wheels are turning, equal in effort to the amount of coddling up to the BTA lobby folks who appeared to disproportionately attend the transportation forum and will undoubtedly make a disproportionate response to the online survey making the outcome far more subjective than conclusive. Direct motorist representation must also be included on all transportation related citizen committees and task forces if a balanced cross section of the public is to exist. Even with the somewhat asymmetrical attendance at the forum, fifty-five percent of the attendees said yes to some form of bicycle license, registration or tax when asked the question “Should bicyclists help pay for bike infrastructure?” Had the demographics for attendees at the forum been more proportionately representative to actual road usage, the response would have had a far greater percentage of yes votes. Therefore, this yes response can not be ignored and some form of bicycle taxation must now be placed on the table as a target resource to provide equity when filling any gaps in transportation funding
Posted by: Terry Parker | Dec 17, 2005 2:26:10 PM
You would be surprised how many visitors will drive two or three hours to visit Portland. Some will use public transit when they arrive; most will rely on their cars (packages, luggage, baby strollers, etc.). Awfully hard to carry any of that stuff on your bike if you're just visiting for the day.
Most visitors arriving by plane will rent cars, or depend on friends and relatives to shuttle them around. That doesn't mean they won't hop on the trolley or ride MAX downtown if it will save them some time or money; very few visitors will go shopping on their bikes.
Many in the "two wheels good; four wheels bad" crowd would prefer to ban the devil automobile entirely. The other 90% of us laugh out loud at the mere suggestion of it. I would love to know what percentage of city transportation dollars were spent on roads vs. all other forms of transit in the past decade.
How many of you will be riding your bike to work if we have freezing rain on Monday? Anyone....Anyone? Who's going to bike their kids to daycare in 27 degree weather with the threat of freezing rain? Not me.
More importantly, tell me we aren'going to replace the overworked Sellwood Bridge with another bridge that will be outdated 10 years after construction. Any new structure built with a 75 year useful life should include the flexibility to handle the traffic volumes anticipated over the next 75 years.
The Sellwood is the southernmost (still in Portland) bridge: that's why it draws such heavy traffic. If we replace it without adding any automotive capacity, Lake Oswego needs to get a bridge on the drawing boards (or Highway 43 will simply get worse and worse).
The high cost of housing will also exacerbate the bridge traffic: I have several friends that live in Tigard, Beaverton, or NW Portland, that will commute over the Sellwood bridge (twice) daily.
Posted by: W. Bruce Anderholt II | Dec 17, 2005 4:20:17 PM
What kind of survey is this?
One which the transit and bike crowd can pack and misrepresent public opinion.
If Commissioner Adams wants to know the public opinion on transportation he should hire Hibbits, Riley or some other legitimate polling company and make sure the questions are sound, have the right options and no steering.
When the legitimate polls are in, release them to the public and then start doing what the public wants instead of the status quo.
Public officials have no business relying on people who stack public meetings, committees and this web poll as if the greater public opinion is the same.
That's like cooking the books.
It's dishonest and unethical.
Posted by: Steve Schopp | Dec 17, 2005 5:05:55 PM
Has anyone noticed that every time we cut the police budget (state, county, or local) the accident rate and deaths on our highways goes up.
Posted by: John Elliott | Dec 17, 2005 10:17:39 PM
Transportation Options a priority for older Americans:
http://www.apta.com/media/releases/051219mobility_voted.cfm
Posted by: Jen | Dec 20, 2005 10:41:39 AM
I drive a car. I take the train. I fly on commercial airlines. I walk. I take a bus. I ride the MAX. I ride a bicycle. Which mode of transportation I use depends on where I am going and what I have to do.
The great thing about transportation in Portland is that we have a /choice/ of modes of transportation, and we are actually able to make intelligent choices. Riding my bike to a ski trip in the mountains doesn't make sense; driving my downtown office doesn't make sense either.
So lets have a bit less of the "motorist lobby" and the "bicyclists lobby". Transportation means making room for all of the options. Most of us use all of the transportation modes, or at least would use them if they worked better. We don't want to turn Portland into another LA or Houston, where those who cannot drive because they are too old, too young, legally blind, or too poor are housebound.
Posted by: apb | Dec 21, 2005 8:18:29 PM
In response to Terry Parker, December 17:
1. You describe Commissioner Adams as "coddling up" to the BTA lobby, who attended the forum in "disproportunate numbers"? Hey, it was an open forum: Any number of car drivers could have attended. The fact that most car drivers chose to stay home or drive somewhere else that evening shows how much they care about Portland's transportation priorities.
2. There is nothing wrong with elected City officials trying to plan for a transportation infrastructure that encourages citizens to reduce their automobile dependence and broaden and expand more appropriate Portland's transportation options. If you don't like the direction Sam Adams, PDOT, and Portland City Council, are taking, feel free to run for office yourself and see if you could do a better job.
3. You said that car drivers "actually pay taxes while their wheels are turning" as if bicyclists don't pay taxes, or don't pay their fair share. Actually, the reverse is true. The amount of money raised thru gas taxes isn't nearly enough to pay for all the paved road, highway, freeway, and bridge infrastructure needed to support and automobile-based transportation. Most of those funds come from general funds, to which bicyclists pay their taxes just as much as motorists do. Bicyclists don't need nearly as much pavement as car drivers do, and don't put nearly as much wear and tear on the roadways. The truth is, the taxes that bicyclists pay every year are helping to subsidize the convenience of car drivers, not the other way around.
Posted by: Curt Dewees | Dec 22, 2005 7:54:41 AM
I would also like to point out that just because people choose to ride a bike doesn't mean that they don't also own a car. I commute whenever possible by bike. I also use TriMet on those days that I don't feel like riding. But I also own a car, probably like alot of cyclists. I just find it easier and alot more fun to get around on a bicycle.
So those of you that don't think that "we cyclists" actually pay our share are assuming that we are all carless. You are wrong.
Posted by: nancy | Dec 22, 2005 9:21:52 AM
So does Sam actually read any of these comments? Or is this blog just here to pacify us?
I say: Can the Tram. We don’t need it. If OHSU wants to move to Hillsboro, that’s okay. They pay $0 in property taxes and it would be just fine by me if that land went on the tax rolls. The lost payroll taxes could be made up if for-profit businesses were to occupy the buildings on the hill (medical offices, nursing homes, assisted care facilities, etc.) No jobs would be lost to the metro area.
Law enforcement (or lack thereof) apparently does affect PDOT decisions. PDOT doesn’t want to put stop signs in places to improve safety because they think folks will “run the stop signs and cause more accidents.” So PDOT is citing lack of enforcement in their decision-making process. The two, therefore, are intertwined.
As a driver, bicycler, walker, occasional mass-transit rider, and citizen of an ever warming planet, we need to do everything in our power to encourage people to burn less gasoline. Coddling drivers, even if they now make up the majority of transportation miles, is not a far-sighted thing to do. We need to face the fact oil is a finite resource which is quickly being depleted. And as other countries – like China – begin developing and adopting our poor habits, that supply will dwindle at an ever more frantic pace.
Ten or twenty years hence, when fuel shortages rule the day and gasoline prices exceed $10/gal, we’ll wish we had done more to encourage multi-modal transportation and regret the dollars we wasted on expanding the automotive infrastructure.
The days of the private automobile, as we know it today, are limited. The question is are we going to start planning for the future, making all kinds of transportation alternatives viable for a larger segment of our community, or are we going to continue throwing money at a nostalgic pipe dream where the world’s oil reserves are infinite, and pollution and global warming don’t exist?
Posted by: Michael K. | Dec 22, 2005 11:36:03 AM
Portland will be sustainable when it tears up those God-awful interstate highways running through its neighborhoods. Turn the Banfield into a long park.
What's that you say? It would hurt economic growth. Good! Growth is a deal with the Devil anyway.
Posted by: Valerie Strickland | Dec 23, 2005 5:35:20 PM
As a recent returnee (after being gone for almost 30 years)to Portland, where I grew up, I appreciate the opportunity to get on my bike and travel around the city with a sense of being somewhat safte on the bike. I also know it is hard to keep the bike trails and lanes cleaned up in this time of budget crunches, but it becomes a hazard for me (and I am sure other cyclists) to ride through areas with high concentrations of deciduous trees and avoid the downed leaves and branches without encroaching on the lanes of auto traffic. Also, what are the tricks to getting lights tripped so they turn for cyclists? I do my best to pretend to be a car when approaching a red light...and although I am successful some times...it's frustrating when I am not...and sometimes find myself running a red light because it does not switch to green! Also, I too would like us to rethink the OHSU tram, although it's probably to late.
And yes, with two young children, I too forgo the bike more than I would like to accomodate transporting my kids....But as they get old enough to ride in amongst the cars and keep up with me, I will be riding with them on our outings.
And the good news, My eight year old is telling me when he grows up he isn't going to own a car...he'll just ride his bike everywhere!
Posted by: steve c. | Dec 27, 2005 6:45:02 PM
Post your comment
Please note: your email address, although required to post, will not be visible. We remove inappropriate or offensive content, and content deemed improper by State and City election and ethics law. The comments posted do not necessarily reflect the views of the office or the City of Portland.
Where is the button for "The aerial tram is cr*p and should be terminated immediately"? I had trouble finding that one.
Posted by: Jack Bogdanski | Dec 14, 2005 8:51:52 PM