Text Size:   A+ A- A   •   Text Only
Find     
Office of Innovative Partnerships and Alternative Funding

Road User Fee Task Force
Reports
Public Involvement & Road User Charge Development: Oregon's Experience

2005 Report to the Legislative Assembly
 
Appendices
  • A: Oregon Road User Fee Task Force Background and Membership List
  • B: Oregon Demographic, Income, and Road Use Data
  • C: Long-Range Projections of Market Penetration for Light Duty Hybrid Electric and Diesel Vehicles and Impact on Oregon's Highway Fund Reserve
  • D: Sub-task 1.1 – P240S Stakeholder Needs, prepared by Professors David S. Kim and J. David Porter, Oregon State University, College of Engineering
  • E: Projected Shift to Mileage Fee Payments at Retail
  • F: Technology Development and System Integration for a Vehicle Miles Traveled Based Revenue Collection System Prototype, prepared by Professors David S. Kim and J. David Porter, Oregon State University, College of Engineering
  • G: Focus Group Reports
  • H: VMT Administrative Processes

2003 Report to Legislative Assembly
 
Appendices
  • A Enrolled House Bill 3946
  • B Road User Fee Task Force Membership Listing 2001-2002
  • C VMT and Fuel Efficiency Data
  • D State Highway Mileage Summary
  • E Highway Fund Revenue Forecast Assumptions
  • F List of Reports and Presentations to Road User Fee Task Force
  • G Summary of Public Comment
  • H Presentations by the Road User Fee Task Force
  • I Revenue Neutral VMT Fee: Revenue from Selected Rural Highway Segments
  • J Comparison of Annual Vehicle Miles Traveled in Non-Interstate Oregon Counties
  • K County Characteristics and VMT
  • L Potential Revenue Sources Considered
  • M Six Mileage Fee Scenarios
  • N Mileage-Based Fee Scenarios—Advantages and Disadvantages
  • O Mileage-Based Fee—Options for Scenario One
  • P Mileage-Based Fee—Options for Scenario Two
  • Q Mileage-Based Fee—Options for Scenario Three
  • R Mileage-Based Fee—Options for Scenario Four
  • S Mileage-Based Fee—Options for Scenario Five
  • T Mileage-Based Fee—Options for Scenario Six
  • U Economic Analysis of the Affordability of Retrofitting Odometer Tag Technology During Phasing In of Mileage Fee
  • V Motor Vehicle Registrations by Year of Manufacture
  • W VMT Fee Implementation: Potential Methods and Capital Cost Implications
  • X VMT Fee Implementation: Potential Methods and Operating Cost Implications
  • Y Cost of Auditing VMT Fee Collected at the Fuel Pump
  • Z Estimated Annual Administrative Cost for Central Collection of VMT Fee
  • AA Taxing Gasoline at the Pump
  • BB RUFTF VMT Overlays
  • CC Comparison of Fuel Tax and VMT Fee Payments
  • DD Options for Congestion Pricing
  • EE RUFTF Pilot Test Program Recommendation 2003-2006
  • FF Pilot Test Program Evaluation Criteria
  • GG Road User Fee Task Force Meeting Minutes for November 30, 2001
  • HH Road User Fee Task Force Meeting Minutes for February 1, 2002
  • II Road User Fee Task Force Meeting Minutes for March 8, 2002
  • JJ Road User Fee Task Force Meeting Minutes for April 12, 2002
  • KK Road User Fee Task Force Meeting Minutes for May 3, 2002
  • LL Road User Fee Task Force Meeting Minutes for July 12, 2002
  • MM Road User Fee Task Force Meeting Minutes for September 6, 2002
  • NN Road User Fee Task Force Meeting Minutes for November 15, 2002

Research Reports of the Road User Fee Task Force