Less than three months after launching<\/a> a bid to raise more revenue for transportation, Councilor Olivia Clark has heard enough: At a meeting of the Portland City Council Transportation and Infrastructure Committee this morning, Clark said she was so \u201cmoved\u201d by the level of support for two new fees that she was ready to put forth a proposal.<\/p>\n \u201cI did not start out at this point, but given all the community feedback,\u201d Clark said, \u201cI\u2019m going to take a risk here, and I\u2019m going to open up with a funding proposal for you to discuss.\u201d<\/p>\n Clark\u2019s confidence came from a presentation<\/a> by Portland Bureau of Transportation staff that summarized public feedback from four recent open houses and an online survey. Over the past several weeks, PBOT hosted open houses in each district. 254 people attended the in-person events and another 477 completed the online survey. While obviously not a scientific sampling of opinion, Councilor Clark feels like it\u2019s time to move forward.<\/p>\n Clark plans to draft legislation that would authorize the City of Portland to pursue a Transportation Utility Fee (TUF) at around $12 per household (or $9.50 per multifamily unit) and a Street Damage Restoration Fee (SDRF) at $10.30 per square foot. The TUF is something 31 other Oregon cities have already implemented. It would be charged on utility bills and would elevate well-maintained streets to the same level as other basic city services like sewer, power, and water. The SDRF would be charged to utility companies and other contractors who dig up streets. The fee would compensate PBOT for damage done to the right-of-way.<\/p>\n Despite the conventional wisdom that voters are reflexively against any new taxes or fees, PBOT\u2019s recent outreach showed that 78% of those who offered feedback support the TUF and 87% support the SDRF. Of those who support the TUF, 48% said it should be the same as the regional average, or about $12. This is significant, because folks were given options to support $6 or $9 per household \u2014 yet they still chose $12. (Note: The TUF is technically a fee, not a tax, so it doesn\u2019t need a public vote.)<\/p>\n PBOT says they must fill a $25 million budget in the short-term, but the overall cost to address their maintenance backlog is $6 billion.<\/p>\n Taken together, the TUF and SDRF would raise about $68 million per year and would give PBOT a flexible pot of funds they\u2019d have discretion over. This is a key point given that the vast majority of PBOT\u2019s funding is from sources that are dedicated to specific projects and programs. Add in the $18 million (or so) per year PBOT brings in from the Fixing Our Streets (10 cent local gas tax) program and the bureau would have enough to fill their budget gap and make headway on that maintenance backlog.<\/p>\n There are still a lot of details to hammer out. Clark said she\u2019d likely include language in the ordinance that would mandate a certain amount of funds raised from the TUF be spent on maintenance. But Clark wouldn\u2019t stipulate an end to PBOT\u2019s existing local gas tax, which is an idea floated by Mayor Keith Wilson at the open houses. Councilors Clark, Smith and Angelita Morillo said that gas tax conversation should not be mixed with conversations about new alternatives.<\/p>\n \u201cThis is an important moment in Portland history.\u201d<\/p>\n \u2013 Olivia Clark, city councilor<\/cite><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n At council Monday morning, Clark\u2019s proposal was met with strong approval from the other four members of the committee. Councilor Loretta Smith voiced her support, seeing it as a way to fund her Sidewalk Improvement and Paving Program.<\/p>\n Councilor Mitch Green also said he\u2019s ready to support the proposal. He also said the future of Portland local gas tax could be a moot point if city planners use new revenue to, \u201cShape the transportation system that gives people options to not drive their car.\u201d Green said the U.S. war in the Middle East could soon lead to lines as gas stations and provide a strong impetus for people to drive less and\/or seen other options. \u201cWe have an opportunity here,\u201d Green said, \u201cTo use that geopolitical crisis as an opportunity for us to lead a city forward that\u2019s not exposed to that kind of energy shock.\u201d<\/p>\n Two other alternative funding sources \u2014 a retail delivery fee and a third-party food delivery fee \u2014 were considered not quite ready for prime-time and won\u2019t move forward in this proposal.<\/p>\n As leader of this effort, Councilor Clark wants to move forward at relatively breakneck speed. She hopes to have legislation drafted and delivered to the full City Council by next week and continue the conversation at the (newly assembled) Committee of the Whole on April 2nd (which will be the first opportunity for public testimony). If all goes according to plan, the proposal will be in front of full City Council on April 8th, before the city budget process officially begins.<\/p>\n \u201cLet\u2019s move on,\u201d Clark said at the end of this morning\u2019s conversation. \u201cThis is an important moment in Portland history.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/bikeportland.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/ppiyhos.jpg\")
<\/a><\/figure>\n<\/a><\/figure>\n<\/a><\/figure>\n<\/a><\/figure>\n<\/figure>\n<\/figure>\n\n