KRBN Internet News Talk Radio

28/09/2025

Commentary on Flock Safety Cameras in Oregon

In recent months, cities across Oregon have begun installing Flock Safety license plate reader cameras with the help of state grants. These grants come from the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission’s Organized Retail Theft (ORT) Grant Program, a funding stream the Oregon Legislature set aside in 2023 as part of a budget bill to address rising retail theft and related crime.

Cities Using the Grant

Springfield: Installed 25 cameras with about $93,000 in ORT grant funding.

Eugene: Received a much larger award, $391,000, to roll out 57 cameras across key arterials.

Other Oregon communities, including Oregon City, Florence, and North Bend, are also adopting this technology through similar funding sources.

What These Cameras Are For

Identifying stolen vehicles, vehicles tied to organized retail theft, or those linked to Amber Alerts and serious investigations.

Assisting police in building cases by providing reliable license plate and vehicle image data.

Serving as a crime prevention tool at major roadways and commercial corridors.

What These Cameras Are Not For

They are not designed for general surveillance of residents’ daily activities.

They cannot capture faces or people — only vehicles and plates.

Eugene, for example, has pledged not to share data with immigration enforcement or outside agencies beyond specific criminal cases.

Data is typically retained for only 30 days before automatic deletion, unless tied to an investigation.

12/09/2025

COMMENTARY: Oregon Weighs Revenue vs. Tax Relief - Lawmakers to block some of Trump tax cuts

When Congress passed the 2025 federal tax bill this summer, workers and small businesses were promised a break. Overtime pay and tips would no longer be taxed at the federal level, and companies could fully deduct the costs of new equipment.

But here in Oregon, those same changes create a problem. Because our state tax code is tied to federal law, the cuts automatically flow into Oregon’s income tax rules. That means less state revenue — an estimated $800+ million over the next two years.

Rather than letting Oregonians enjoy the full benefit of those cuts, lawmakers are already talking about pulling them back. Sen. Mark Meek (D-Gladstone), who chairs the Senate Finance & Revenue Committee, says the Legislature will explore “disconnecting” during Legislative Days (Sept. 29 – Oct. 1). Disconnecting would keep overtime, tips, and business deductions taxable at the state level — protecting the budget but shrinking the benefit for taxpayers.

This debate doesn’t happen in a vacuum. The 2025 Legislature already raised taxes, fees, and tolls, and now a $1 billion gas tax/wage tax package is waiting in the wings. To many Oregonians, it looks like revenue protection always comes before taxpayer relief.

Supporters argue the state can’t afford to give up that much money without risking cuts to schools, healthcare, and public safety. Opponents say Salem is more interested in keeping its own coffers full than letting people keep what Washington, D.C. promised them.

The bottom line: Oregon’s leaders could use a refresher in Econ 101. President Trump — someone who has actually signed the front of a paycheck — understood that when you put money in people’s pockets, they spend more, and that spending grows the economy and tax revenue. By taking more money out of people’s pockets through things like the CAT tax and now potentially blocking federal tax relief, Oregon is pushing families and businesses to cut back or move to states where they can afford to live. Oregon has already shown itself to be unfriendly to business, and people like me struggle every year just to keep up with rising property taxes. We’re forced to cut back — it hurts. Maybe it’s time for Oregon to learn to do the same.

11/09/2025

NEWS COMMENTARY — SEPTEMBER 11, 2025 | MORNING UPDATE

PROVO, Utah — Conservative commentator Charlie Kirk, 31, was shot and killed during a public event at Utah Valley University on Wednesday, September 10. The shooting, which unfolded in front of a live audience and was captured on video, sent shockwaves through both the campus and the national conversation.

Authorities confirm that two individuals were initially detained but later released after investigators determined they were not involved in the attack. The search for the suspect is ongoing.

For those who saw the video — myself included — this was no distant headline or statistic. It was real. One moment Kirk was speaking mid-sentence, the next moment blood sprayed and his body went limp. That image strips away the abstraction we often feel when we hear about “another tragedy” in the news.

This event underscores a larger reality: words matter. As President Trump has often warned, when hateful rhetoric is normalized in media, politics, or everyday conversation, it risks fueling more hate — and sometimes that hate erupts in violence. Whether you supported Charlie Kirk, opposed him, or felt indifferent, disagreement should never be resolved with a bullet.

I didn’t agree with everything Charlie said, but I respected his courage to defend his views. He was sharp, articulate, and unafraid to face critics head-on. That conviction — rare in today’s public square — made him both controversial and compelling.

Rest in peace, Charlie Kirk. Your life ended too soon at just 31. The words you spoke, the debates you waged, and the presence you carried will echo beyond this tragedy. May your memory remind us to choose discourse over division — and respect over violence.

31/08/2025

Paying for Oregon’s Roads: Past, Present, Future”

When people hear about Oregon’s OReGO program today, most think of it as a flat, per-mile fee for certain cars — simple, voluntary, and not all that different from paying a gas tax.

But it’s worth remembering that the program didn’t start out that way. Back in the mid-2000s, when the Legislature’s Road User Fee Task Force was testing new ideas, the original pilot wasn’t just “pay by the mile.” It was variable pricing, tracked by GPS.

Drivers in the pilot had on-board devices that could tell when they were on congested roads, and the charge would change depending on time and location. In some cases, the fee was as high as 10¢ a mile during rush hour in Portland, compared to less than half a cent at other times. The idea was straightforward: make people think twice about driving during peak congestion, and give the state a way to fund roads as fuel taxes fell.

That was the bold vision — and it actually worked in the test runs. Congestion charges did reduce peak-hour driving. But the politics of GPS tracking, privacy concerns, and the complexity of explaining a “variable road tax” made it a very tough sell.

So when OReGO officially launched in 2015, it looked very different:

Voluntary participation.

A flat per-mile charge (about 1.8¢ today).

Credit for gas taxes already paid.

No GPS requirement — drivers could choose simpler reporting.

Fast forward to today: OReGO is still voluntary, but lawmakers are debating whether to make it mandatory for newer, high-MPG and electric vehicles starting in the next couple of years. The idea is to replace the big registration fees on efficient cars with per-mile charges instead.

What you won’t hear much about anymore is that early idea of congestion pricing. It’s not in the current proposals. It’s sitting quietly in the background — proven technically feasible, but politically shelved.

That’s the arc: from a high-tech, variable tax aimed at both funding and congestion relief, to the simpler flat-rate system we see today. And now, with the Legislature still in session, the next chapter may be whether OReGO shifts from voluntary to mandatory for certain cars.

ODOT is facing a $350 million budget gap. Lawmakers are in a special session right now trying to figure out how to keep the roads funded and services running.

Here’s what’s on the table:

Gas tax increase: 40¢ → 46¢ per gallon

Higher registration and title fees

Larger payroll tax for transit

Electric and plug-in hybrid drivers: must join OReGO (~2.3¢ per mile) starting in 2027 or pay a flat $340 per year

The goal is to replace declining gas tax revenue and keep Oregon’s roads maintained. But it’s already stirring debate about privacy, fairness, and how it could affect EV adoption.

22/08/2025

https://olis.oregonlegislature.gov/liz/2025I1/Downloads/CommitteeMeetingDocument/309800

2025 Special Session Draft..."Imposes a mandatory per-mile road usage charge for electric and hybrid
vehicles. Allows an annual fee in lieu of the mandatory per-mile road usage
charge..."
What the Act Does:

Raises and adds new taxes on roads, cars, trucks, and buses. It also explains how the money must be used.

Road usage fee: Instead of just paying gas taxes, drivers would eventually be required to pay a per-mile fee for using the roads. As an option, people could choose to pay a yearly flat fee instead of tracking every mile.

Audits: The state auditing division must review how the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) is performing. The Governor would appoint the Director of Transportation.

Higher fees and taxes: Increases transportation-related fees to bring in more revenue.

Electric & hybrid vehicles: Owners would have to pay the per-mile fee too, but there’s an option to pay an annual flat fee instead.

Repeals the old toll program.

Fuel taxes: Diesel fuel will be taxed the same as gasoline.

Weight-mile tax: The formula for trucks that pay by weight and miles is revised.

Timing: The law would go into effect 91 days after the legislative session ends.

My alternative to the per-mile tax:

Why not just tax EV charging the same way we already tax gas? Add the road tax at the charger. Public stations are easy, and home superchargers could be separately metered.

As for trickle-charging on a wall outlet, that’s such a tiny slice it’s like filling a neighbor’s car from a gas can — not worth building a whole bureaucracy to police.

If every state did this, we’d have one consistent, fair system instead of complicated mileage-tracking schemes.

06/07/2025

KRBN Internet News Talk Radio Commentary
Title: ODOT, HB 2025, and the Taxpayer Tipping Point
By: The KRBN Editorial Desk
Folks, we’ve spent the last few weeks doing something the state government apparently refuses to do: dig into the facts, follow the money, and actually ask who’s paying for all this. What we found should concern every Oregonian, regardless of political party or whether you drive a truck, a Tesla, or a bicycle.
Let’s start here:
ODOT’s $1.1 Billion Mistake
Yes, you read that right. In early 2025, the Oregon Department of Transportation admitted to overestimating $1.1 billion in expected federal revenue. That mistake wasn’t a rounding error — it was nearly 20% of their entire budget. The fallout? Internal audits, delayed projects, and legislators from both parties demanding accountability.
Yet instead of hitting pause and reassessing priorities, lawmakers tried to push through HB 2025, a monster of a transportation bill loaded with over $1 billion a year in new taxes and fees — much of it hitting average, working Oregonians right in the wallet.

What HB 2025 Would Have Cost You
Let’s lay it out clearly:
• Gas tax increase: Up to 15¢ more per gallon
• Vehicle registration: $43 → $113
• Driver’s license renewal: $48 → $74
• CDL renewal: $61 → $104 (a 70% jump)
• EV road usage fee: $340/year or a per-mile charge
• Vehicle title fee: $77 → $182
• Transfer/privilege tax:
– 2% on new vehicle sales
– 1% on used vehicles sold over $10,000 — even private party sales
• Per-mile tax rollout:
– Begins 2026 with EVs, expands to hybrids by 2028
– Eventually applies to everyone, not just EV owners
– Based on 5% of the gas tax per mile — about 2¢ per mile driven
Add it up, and the typical Oregon family would pay hundreds, possibly thousands more every year just to keep their vehicles legal and mobile.

But That’s Not All — Where’s the Money Going?
You’d think this money would go toward paving roads, fixing bridges, and making travel safer. Think again.
ODOT’s budget is filled with non-essential spending far beyond basic road maintenance:
• Bike lanes and pedestrian infrastructure, mandated by law to get at least 1% of highway funds
• Single-use bridges, sidewalk projects, and “multimodal transit hubs”
• Transit subsidies, EV charging programs, urban development grants
• A growing DEI (Diversity, Equity & Inclusion) bureaucracy — 57 positions at ODOT alone, totaling an estimated $13 million annually
• And most recently, proposals for congestion pricing and toll roads that could cost households $500–$1,000+ per year
In fact, I-205 tolling is projected to bring in $132 million annually — not to fix rural roads, but to fund “corridor improvements” and multimodal priorities. That’s not congestion relief — it’s congestion monetization.

Are We Even a Transportation Department Anymore?
Let’s ask the obvious: when did ODOT stop being about roads?
We’re now funding climate strategies, DEI consulting teams, infrastructure “equity mapping,” and progressive transit experiments — all while essential projects sit on hold and roads deteriorate. And if you speak up? You're called anti-progress.
We support safe roads, clean communities, and responsible infrastructure. But not at the expense of transparency, fiscal discipline, and working families who are already being taxed out of their homes and driven out of their businesses.

The Takeaway
ODOT made a billion-dollar mistake, and the political class’s answer was: “Make the taxpayers pay more.”
Oregonians narrowly avoided HB 2025 — for now. But the ideas behind it? The fees, the taxes, the social engineering built into transportation? They’ll be back. That’s why it matters that we stay informed, vigilant, and engaged.
If we want a transportation system that works, we need leadership that fixes roads, not one that tries to rebuild society through toll booths and license fees.

28/05/2025

Surveillance in Eugene: What’s Being Watched — and Who’s Watching?

KMTR recently reported that 57 new License Plate Reader (LPR) dome cameras have been installed across Eugene. These cameras track vehicle movements and capture license plates in real time. The city says the data is stored for 30 days and is used for things like locating stolen vehicles, responding to Amber Alerts, and investigating major crimes.

But what’s not getting as much attention is something else I’ve been noticing around town: the growing number of dome-style PTZ (pan-tilt-zoom) cameras mounted on poles at intersections. These aren’t traffic control devices. They’re actively operated by law enforcement to monitor public spaces and track movement — in real time.

According to city sources, these PTZ cameras have already been used to identify suspects in assaults, car break-ins, and other incidents downtown. Police describe them as “force multipliers,” giving officers the ability to monitor multiple areas without being physically present.

So here’s the bigger question: Are we getting close to a ‘Big Brother’ scenario where someone is always watching and tracking us?

Personally, I think if a camera is mounted on a public pole, it should be clearly marked or identified — with a license number or ownership tag — so we know who operates it. Even if there’s no legal expectation of privacy in public spaces, I believe we at least have the right to know who’s watching us, and why.

Transparency doesn’t interfere with safety — it protects trust. What do you think?

Flock Safety cameras have made their way into the city of Eugene, and have already proven effective, according to police.The cameras were used to assist a Lane

08/05/2025

The Oregon Robin Hood Tax — SB 686 Unmasked
Oregon’s Senate Bill 686 is being marketed as a rescue plan for local journalism — but let’s be clear: it’s a state-managed wealth transfer from companies like Google and Facebook to select media organizations, with 10% going straight to a new government-run nonprofit called the Oregon Civic Information Consortium.

The bill mandates that certain “covered platforms” — defined as those with massive user bases and revenues — must:

“Pay at least $122 million annually to compensate digital journalism providers for accessing the Internet websites of the providers for an Oregon audience.”
(Section 2, SB 686)

That money is then redistributed:

90% to qualifying news outlets based on journalist headcount — disproportionately benefiting large, corporate-owned media, not small independent voices.

10% to the state-aligned Consortium for journalism-related grants — adding a layer of state-controlled influence over the press.

This may sound noble, but the reality is troubling:

It props up outdated media models that failed to adapt to the digital age.

It hands financial leverage over the press to the state.

It increases operational costs for major tech companies — costs that will be passed on to consumers.

It sends a clear warning to businesses: if you succeed too much, you’ll be forced to bankroll those who didn’t.

And Oregon’s broader business climate isn’t immune. A recent survey found that 41% of small business owners in the state are considering closing, selling, or relocating due to mounting taxes and regulations. Companies are already choosing to expand elsewhere.

We’ve seen this movie before: during North Dakota’s oil boom, aggressive new taxes and regulatory creep pushed businesses out — turning once-thriving towns into ghost towns. Oregon is beginning to show signs of that same dangerous trend.

This isn’t just about journalism. It’s about government picking winners and losers in the private sector — and using feel-good language to do it.

SB 686 is Oregon’s version of a Robin Hood tax — and like the legend, it’s more myth than solution.

01/05/2025

🧠 May is ALS Awareness Month 🧠

Over the last several months, I’ve been working closely with AI to develop an in-depth white paper on ALS — a devastating neurodegenerative disease that still has no cure. What started as a simple conversation evolved into an 85-page research-backed document proposing bold new diagnostic theories, early intervention strategies, and possible paths to regeneration.

Our work takes a systems-based approach, offering fresh — and admittedly speculative — insights into how ALS may begin long before symptoms appear, and how structural, vascular, and metabolic issues might be reversed rather than just slowed.

If you're interested in reading the full paper, message me directly here on Facebook and I’ll be happy to send you a copy.

Let’s keep the conversation going. Awareness is the first step toward progress.

— Robin Simmons
KRBN Internet News Talk Radio

If you're interested in reading the full paper, message me directly here on Facebook and I’ll be happy to send you a copy.

Let’s keep the conversation going. Awareness is the first step toward progress.

— Robin Simmons
KRBN Internet News Talk Radio

04/03/2025

Blog talk hosting service may be no more, but that doesn’t mean we can’t still have interactions. From the things I’m seeing coming up in Oregon’s legislature this year, I should probably start blogging again — and I’ll be announcing the new blog address soon.

But for now, there’s something else I want to talk about today — House Bill 3362, which proposes a 4% excise tax on the sale of new tires. This tax would go toward funding rail transit, tire pollution mitigation, and wildlife crossing infrastructure.

Supporters of the bill claim that the tax could generate up to $20 million annually to help fund public transit initiatives and reduce tire pollution — that’s the black residue you see on the roads.

24/01/2025

"Springfield’s Main Street is consistently ranked as one of the most unsafe city streets in Oregon based on the severity and frequency of traffic crashes" says the department that wanted 9 roundabouts.

what are your thoughts?

here are the links to the Springfield project and my commentary looking at the data.

https://springfield-or.gov/city/development-public-works/infrastructure-planning/

https://robinwonders.blogspot.com/2022/03/9-roundabouts-on-main-street-in.html

29/05/2024

Commentary by Robin:
Yesterday, June 28th, on the steps of the courthouse, Robert De Niro used a scare tactic, claiming that if Trump were re-elected, he would never leave office and would become a dictator.

It's interesting how people skew their words. Trump once mentioned that if he were elected again, he would be a "dictator for a day" as a metaphor for swiftly reinstating some of his policies and gaining control of the border. However, people have misconstrued this term to mean he intended to become a permanent dictator, just as they misinterpreted his statement about immigrants being "animals."

Robert De Niro's comment about Trump becoming a dictator is concerning, but under the Constitution, it's not feasible. The 20th Amendment ensures the president's term ends at noon on January 20th. If a president refused to leave, enforcement agencies, including the Secret Service, would ensure a peaceful transition of power. Additionally, our Constitution makes establishing a dictatorship nearly impossible. Martial law, an extreme measure, could only be declared under severe national emergencies and is heavily regulated with checks and balances to prevent abuse of power.

Unfortunately, people suffering from severe Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) might actually believe this rhetoric.

In my opinion, whether you like Donald Trump or Joe Biden is your choice. Just be smart, review each candidate, and don't blindly vote for your party.