Split Bend council commits to March gas tax vote

Two days after voting 4-3 not to send a proposed, controversial local fuel tax to the November ballot, Bend city councilors voted 4-3 Wednesday night to instead place such a measure on a special election ballot next March.

And this time, the topic of sharp and at times heated debate was whether that early move ties the hands of a new citizen working group that will study broader transportation funding issues, or instead gives them clear direction and a firm foundation to build on.

Indeed, Councilor Sally Russell’s motion – “to place a fuel tax measure on the city of Bend ballot in March 2016” – leaves a lot to be decided by this fall’s measure-filing deadline, such as how big a tax (five or 10 cents a gallon have been the two discussed options), and whether other items, such a transportation utility fee, also will be levied (that one wouldn’t need voter approval) to spread the tab for an estimated $80 million backlog in road fixes.

Councilor Nathan Boddie seconded Russell’s motion, which also was supported by colleagues Barb Campbell and Mayor Jim Clinton. But the foes – Victor Chudowsky, Doug Knights and Casey Roats – were vociferous in their displeasure of a move they claim could derail any effort to head off strong opposition from fuel dealers or other residents against the move.

It’s not a final vote, by any means – that would come when a formal measure is drafted and submitted to the county clerk, probably in November. And city councilors can and do change or even reverse course on smaller matters all the time. Also the rift didn’t last all night, as councilors joked with each other as usual on other topics later on.

But for a while, things got a might testy, after Clinton assured he’d only back a money measure that ensures “the money raised is to fix the roads” – what he termed a simple solution to a simple problem. Russell repeated from previous debates the staff’s note that the city falls some $10 million or more behind every year, in terms of road deterioration, the longer the solution isn’t found and implemented.

And the pluses of a sales tax were familiar to all: that not just residents, but the millions of visitors who stay in or travel through Bend each year would help pay to keep up the roads they drive on.

“It’s not a complicated issue – we’re either going to fix it or not,” Boddie said, adding that he feels confident the only way to seriously address the issue is the funding a gas tax would provide.

But Knight bristled at the idea that councilors would back a move that “need not be top down, the council dictating” all or most of that solution.

“We don’t have clear information yet,” he argued, such as a prioritization map or list of projects to be addressed, as well as the level of street condition – the PCI, or pavement condition index – the city will set as its goal. He also said he wants a package that is not just about streets, but also addresses “multi-modal and sidewalk needs.”

Clinton said Wednesday’s vote puts nothing on the ballot, and Russell said it still “allows a lot of conversation and a lot of discussion to go forward.”

But Roats sided with Knight and said, “We don’t need to put people (on a committee) through this, if there’s a pre-determined outcome.”

Chudowsky, who attended the meeting by phone, said he saw “some exaggeration” among colleagues who said the city had exhausted all the other available options. But Clinton said the gas tax vote only tells the working group that a majority of the council believes a local fuel tax is a “necessary component” of the final product.

Campbell noted that if Russell had moved instead to impose a transportation utility fee, “we don’t get any money from visitors and people don’t get a vote. I believe the committee will have very real and very important work: How much money will it be, will we phase it in, or phase it out, what are we going to do with that money?”

After the 4-3 vote – actually the first of three, as the resolution to create the working group needed to be revised and adopted – Roats said he believes it will hurt the odds of more widespread support and success at the polls. The resolution was changed to no longer charge the working group with providing two options when they report by late October – one with a gas tax and one without.

Roats said critics will look at the council and say “the first thing they do for a major ask is a tax increase without a hard, hard look at what else there is to do.”

“I’m not just taking my ball and going home,” Roats said, but he still called it “a very unnecessary and symbolic vote.”

“Mr. Mayor, you have been on council for 10 years. I and two of my colleagues have been here six months,” Roats said. “We need a good committee process that I can take to my bases of support and have a leg to stand on, that tells them we are looking outside the box. I can’t do it.”

Chudowsky told the backing councilors that when a Voters Pamphlet is compiled, “your action this evening probably tripled the number of arguments in opposition” to the fuel tax.

Knight added, “A gas tax may be a more efficient way to solve the problem, but I would like to make an informed decision.”

Russell responded that whenever and however a gas tax is proposed, “there will always be a lot of hot rhetoric, as is true of many issues.” But as residents continue to hit potholes on their travels and want something done, “I am very hopeful we can come to a fiscally responsible, fair, effective solution.”

“I urge councilors” – and she included herself – “to be brave and not get stuck in our rhetoric and respective corners. We need to stay open and flexible.”

Roats later added, “My concern is that people won’t be against the fuel tax, but the actions of the council. I hope we can fill the committee, but if we don’t, I won’t be surprised.”