In a pivotal meeting of the Oregon House Committee on Rules, held on June 27, 2025, the future of transportation funding in the state took center stage, igniting passionate discussions among lawmakers and stakeholders. The atmosphere was charged as representatives from various organizations voiced their concerns over proposed amendments to House Bill 3,402, which many believe could jeopardize the integrity of Oregon's transportation system.

Jim McCauley, legislative director for the League of Oregon Cities, opened the dialogue with a stark warning about the potential fallout from the Dash 3 amendments. He emphasized the longstanding partnership between cities and the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), highlighting that the proposed changes could lead to job cuts and further strain local governments already grappling with financial challenges. "Fifty, thirty, twenty is our lifeblood for cities across the state," McCauley stated, urging the committee to reconsider the amendments and seek a more comprehensive solution.

Echoing these sentiments, Mallory Roberts, representing the Association of Oregon Counties, expressed strong opposition to the amendments, labeling them as a significant departure from the collaborative efforts that have characterized the state's approach to transportation funding. "Passing House Bill 3,402 with the Dash 3 amendment undoubtedly will set the transportation system behind for many years to come," Roberts warned, underscoring the importance of maintaining a safe and efficient transportation network.

Tom Powers from Multnomah County reinforced the call for a unified funding strategy, criticizing the proposed bill for sidelining local governments. "It creates a new formula, 100, 0, 0," he explained, referring to the potential exclusion of counties and cities from future revenue streams. Powers urged the committee to act swiftly to prevent the passage of what he deemed a detrimental bill.

As the meeting progressed, Chris Smith, a multimodal transportation advocate, and Garland Woodsong from the Place Initiative added their voices to the chorus of opposition. Smith called for a holistic investment in the transportation system rather than a narrow focus on one agency, while Woodsong criticized the bill for neglecting critical areas such as public transit and climate considerations.

The discussions highlighted a growing concern among local leaders and advocates about the direction of transportation funding in Oregon. With the clock ticking down on legislative deadlines, the committee faces mounting pressure to find a solution that honors the collaborative spirit of past efforts while addressing the urgent needs of communities across the state. As the meeting concluded, the future of Oregon's transportation system remained uncertain, leaving many to wonder what steps will be taken next to ensure its sustainability and effectiveness.