How did Tina Kotek’s 2023–2025 and 2025–2027 budgets affect ODOT funding levels?

1. Kotek’s first budget prioritized housing and services but left ODOT stress visible

Kotek’s initial 2023–25 budget proposals emphasized housing, education and behavioral health — the headline numbers were a $32.1 billion proposal and a larger moral agenda — not sweeping transportation increases, and that framing set the context for later emergency moves as ODOT revenues weakened and costs rose ^{[6] [7]}. Available sources do not detail explicit baseline ODOT appropriations inside that 2023-25 package beyond the agency’s later warnings about maintenance shortfalls (not found in current reporting).

2. Emergency infusions in the 2023–25 biennium to avert winter breakdowns

After ODOT warned it would scale back winter maintenance, Kotek and legislative leaders secured a one‑time $19 million infusion for the 2023–25 biennium aimed at snow‑plowing, plows and de‑icer; the governor’s office separately cited $8 million specifically for winter maintenance items and changes to overtime rules — moves described as stopgaps to maintain basic safety as fuel‑tax revenues and inflation pressure ODOT operations ^{[2] [1]}.

3. Accounting and revenue headwinds produced an acute 2025 shortfall

ODOT and lawmakers said a shortfall of roughly $300–$354 million threatened the agency’s operations entering the 2025‑27 biennium; reporting ties that gap to a combination of declining fuel‑tax purchasing power, higher project costs and a separate ODOT accounting error flagged earlier in 2025 ^{[8] [4] [9]}. Different outlets use slightly different numbers — 300, 350, 354 million — but all characterize the hole as large enough to force ~10% layoffs and maintenance‑station closures without new revenue ^{[8] [4] [10]}.

4. Special session: a revenue package to refill ODOT’s near‑term coffers

Facing those risks, Kotek called an August 2025 special session and promoted a package that included a six‑cent gas tax increase, higher registration/title fees and a temporary payroll transit tax increase; state spokespeople and coverage estimated the measures would generate roughly $595–$650 million for ODOT in 2025–27 and $4.3 billion over a decade — sums the governor said would close the two‑year shortfall and avert layoffs ^{[11] [3] [5] [4]}.

5. Tradeoffs and political consequences: taxes, accountability and referendum threats

Kotek paired revenue proposals with accountability changes (audits, project oversight) and sought to eliminate some tolling language to blunt opposition; opponents framed the taxes as unnecessary or harmful and pushed a referendum effort that, if successful, would pause the revenue and likely reopen the roughly $300 million gap and potential layoffs ^{[11] [12] [13]}. The political dynamic mattered: Kotek delayed signing HB 3991 at one point to manage referendum and timing risks while unions and local governments pressed for passage to protect jobs and services ^{[14] [13]}.

6. Outcomes: temporary fixes, larger structural questions remain

By late 2025 Kotek had shepherded a bill expected to raise $4.3 billion over a decade and produce hundreds of millions for the 2025–27 cycle, but reporting shows persistent uncertainty — petitions could suspend the taxes, and some revenue estimates on early drafts showed less near‑term money for ODOT than the agency said it needed ^{[5] [15] [3]}. Sources report that without legislative action ODOT faced layoffs and station closures; with Kotek’s package the immediate layoffs were delayed or reduced, but long‑term solutions for declining fuel‑tax purchasing power and rising project costs were left for ongoing political debate ^{[10] [16]}.

7. What reporters warn readers to watch next

Coverage recommends watching three things: whether referendum petitioners qualify and suspend the law (which would recreate the funding hole) ^[3], whether legislative revenue projections hold up and deliver the roughly $595–$650 million estimated for 2025–27 ^{[4] [3]}, and whether accountability reforms materially change project cost performance ^{[15] [11]}. Sources differ on precise dollar‑figures and timing; readers should treat the $300–$354 million shortfall and the roughly $595–$650 million 2025–27 remedy as the key contested numbers anchoring the policy fight ^{[4] [3]}.

Limitations: reporting varies by outlet on exact dollar amounts and timing; some detailed line‑item ODOT budget shifts in Kotek’s 2023‑25 budget are not provided in these sources (not found in current reporting).