Oregon House Bill HB4126

Oregon 2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/2/26
• Refer: 2/2/26
• Refer: 2/18/26
• Failed: 3/6/26

Caption

Requires the Department of Transportation to submit a biennial report to the Legislative Assembly recommending a rate for the per-mile road usage charge that would sustainably raise the revenue necessary to maintain the public highways in this state.

Summary

HB 4126 requires the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) to provide a biennial report to legislative transportation committees recommending a per-mile road usage charge rate that would generate enough revenue to sustainably maintain the state’s public highways. The report must be submitted every even-numbered year by September 15, with the first report due by January 31, 2027. The measure is framed as a planning and rate-recommendation bill rather than a direct fee-setting bill, but it is intended to guide future policy on road usage charges. The required report must estimate the total cost of maintaining and preserving Oregon’s transportation system, including local systems, and estimate total vehicle miles traveled on public highways using the most recent available data. Those mileage estimates must be broken out by vehicle weight categories, from vehicles weighing 10,000 pounds or less up through vehicles over 26,000 pounds. ODOT must also establish metrics for evaluating maintenance needs, including pavement condition targets, striping and painting standards, bridge replacement timelines, and administrative costs tied to maintenance and preservation.

Impact

If enacted, the bill would amend Oregon’s road usage charge statutes by adding a recurring reporting requirement to ORS 319.883 to 319.946. It would not itself impose a new road usage charge rate, but it would require ODOT to develop the cost and mileage data needed to recommend one, potentially shaping future transportation funding policy and highway maintenance financing. The bill also accelerates the first report due date and takes effect immediately upon passage because of the emergency clause.

Sentiment

The available vote suggests moderate support in committee, with the House committee advancing the bill 5-2 on a do-pass recommendation with amendments and referral to Ways and Means by prior reference. The absence of transcripts limits insight into detailed debate, but the committee action indicates the measure was viewed favorably by a majority of members as a transportation funding and planning tool. The emergency clause and the focus on sustainable highway maintenance suggest the bill was treated as time-sensitive and practical rather than controversial in its basic purpose.

Contention

The main point of contention is likely the broader policy direction toward a per-mile road usage charge, which can raise concerns about how drivers are taxed, how rates are calculated, and whether heavier vehicles or high-mileage drivers would bear more of the cost. Because the bill requires ODOT to recommend a rate based on maintenance needs and vehicle miles traveled, debate may center on fairness, privacy, administrative burden, and the potential impact on rural drivers, freight operators, and owners of heavier vehicles. The committee split of 5-2 indicates some opposition remained, though the specific objections are not documented in the provided materials.