Almost by their nature, elections send mixed signals. It is frequently hard to reconcile competing results – voters in Oregon may vote John Kerry for President, but outlaw gay marriage in the same election. Sometimes, however, election results on similar measures from different parts of Oregon can produce some clarity for policymakers.

Last month, Oregon voters in three communities – Eugene, Junction City and Sandy – all rejected chances to increase gas taxes. Voters were told these funds would be used to improve roads in their towns in an effort to persuade them that they would see local results, yet they still rejected the increased taxes. In Eugene, where the City sought an increase in the existing gas tax, the measure received only 44 percent. In Junction City, whose City Council tried to simply enact a new local gas tax but had the measure forced to the ballot by citizen complaints, 64 percent voted against the idea. In Sandy, 63 percent of voters rejected increasing the gas tax.

To students of Oregon political history, these results should come as no surprise. During my first legislative session in 1999, my colleagues attempted to enact a statewide gas tax. The measure was ultimately referred to the ballot via signature gathering. Only 12 percent of voters in the subsequent election supported increasing the state gas tax. This is perhaps the least popular tax increase in Oregon history, rivaling a statewide sales tax in lack of support.

For some, the elections in Eugene, Junction City and Sandy were seen as a stalking horse. If these measures were successful, voters might be ready to consider another statewide measure for increased gas taxes. The resounding defeat this month should end talk of additional gas taxes for roads and bridges at the state and local levels.

What, then, to do to address Oregon’s crumbling infrastructure? First, something must be done about the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). It has built virtually no new lane-miles of roadway despite spending billions of dollars in the past decade and seems to have an emphasis centered on mass transit projects and bicycle lanes, benefiting primarily the Portland area. The recent proposal to spend $56 million for 1.2 mile bike path and greenway along the Willamette River in Portland is a classic example of misplaced priorities of state and local transportation authorities. Voters have recognized this and have correctly rejected the idea of higher gas taxes to solve congestion, capacity and infrastructure problems. It is time for a new approach.

The Legislature, during the 2008 Special Session, should consider creating a Joint Commission on Transportation Accountability. This Commission should be made up of Members from both legislative houses that would exercise appropriate oversight of state agencies with transportation responsibilities. The Commission’s mandate – and really, that of transportation agencies statewide – should be to prioritize congestion relief by building capacity and do so as efficiently as possible at the lowest possible cost. Ideas such as privatizing segments of ODOT functions, outsourcing of some transportation services and allowing county road departments and the private sector to compete for capacity building projects should be examined. The Governor should take the lead in this effort, making it clear to the Agencies involved that they must do more to improve Oregon’s transportation system for the vast majority that choose to travel via personal motorized vehicles.

Oregonians have said repeatedly they do not believe additional taxes are necessary to fix Oregon’s roads. State policymakers should approve a plan to bring more efficiency to the creation of new auto and truck transportation infrastructure and get our state moving again.

Jeff Kropf