Donnelly: No need to apologize for bridge project’s demise

Clark County — such as Battle Ground, Ridgefield, La Center, Camas — gathers a citizenry who came here to pursue a self-directed lifestyle. The majority are skeptical of massive government projects. They choose to drive for their own good reasons and will do so no matter what — 94 percent according to a recent survey. In their eyes, there were valid reasons for the demise of the Columbia River Crossing project.

Yet, Vancouver Mayor Anne McEnerny-Ogle is currently conducting meetings in Oregon likened by The Oregonian cover story on Sept. 9 to an “apology tour.” The mayor is reportedly wooing Oregon planners with the proverbial heaping spoonful of sugar: “Bless their hearts. I absolutely understand we screwed them over big time with what happened.”

With the best of intentions, the mayor is misdirecting blame.

Lack of understanding

The Columbia River Crossing project and its advocates failed to understand the Clark County market. They expected the influential commuter community to obediently back light rail, which they represented — inaccurately, as it turns out — as required to get federal funding. But in 2012, in the vote on a sales tax increase to pay for light rail, 57 percent of voters in Clark County voted no.

Why? As a “No” voter, and commuter on I-5 for many years, I make no apologies for my concerns.

First, cost. Based upon the poor controls on the nearly $200 million in planning funds spent, as well as countless examples of cost overruns in other locations in recent years, I was confident that the project would substantially exceed its budget estimate. If so, with federal funds a fixed contribution, commuters and taxpayers would pay for the overruns in unaffordable tolls. Jobs in Portland might not pencil out, increasing unemployment and even homelessness in Clark County.

Second, after the ceremonial groundbreaking of light rail construction, there would be no turning back, no alternative to completing the project.

Third, during the multiyear construction period, businesses in downtown Vancouver would suffer, perhaps fatally.

Fourth, I concluded that light rail was the “tail wagging the dog” of the bridge project, intended to secure the federal funds, while other cost-effective transportation alternatives were ignored. I doubted that light rail was a requirement, though both states’ governors said “no light rail, no bridge.”

This year, if anyone should apologize, it is those Oregon planners proposing the misnamed “Value Pricing” plan, which would impose freeway tolls without increasing capacity. Mayor McEnerny-Ogle, Eileen Quiring, Vicki Kraft, and other elected officials have rightly criticized it.

The Portland Metro Joint Policy Advisory plan for 2040 includes $3.1 billion for a new bridge across the Columbia River, and $850 million for some form of “mass transit.” With this new effort, let’s hope JPACT learns from experience: understand your market. No apologies are needed.