Liz Pike & Ann Rivers
If there ever was a doubt in your mind that the Columbia River Crossing was not really about replacing the aging, but useable bridges crossing the Columbia River between Oregon and Washington, disgruntled proponents of now comatose project lay that to rest.
All along, through to excessive years of planning, studying, lying, obfuscating and coercing of the public in order to force Portland’s financially struggling light rail a very short distance into Clark County, thereby accessing a fresh revenue source for their folly, opponents in Clark County have voiced support for not only a bridge without light rail, but more crossings to the east and the west of the current crossing.
Anybody with a slight bit of sense realizes that an eight to ten year period of construction of new bridges alongside the existing span is bound to increase traffic congestion. With the movement of construction worker and equipment, it is unavoidable, that is a given.
But, narrow minded, single focus light rail proponents have long ignored that little part, even though one of their claims was they were about ending congestion along the crowded corridor.
Shortly before his long overdue retirement, Lazy C’s bombastic & vitriolic editorial page editor, John Laird penned a screed where he labeled third bridge advocates “cockroaches” along with a reminder from a 1995 editorial, “Oregon has already invested millions (today billions) in a metropolitan light rail system; Clark County hasn’t spent a dime on a third bridge. Like it or not, light rail has the upper hand. That doesn’t mean Clark County must accept light rail. It does mean that without realistic alternatives — and a third bridge isn’t one of them — gridlock will get worse, air quality will decline and quality of life will suffer.”
Left out is that Washington didn’t invest in a third bridge because light rail ruled the project from the start, in spite of the 1995 vote where it was rejected by Clark County voter by a 2 to 1 margin.
In fact, an Oregon Supreme Court ruling exposed that light rail was the driving factor of the Columbia River Crossing, a little fact ignored completely by John Laird and the Lazy C throughout the process.
Fast forward and today we see that legislators from both Washington and Oregon declined to provide further funding to the project, putting it in a comatose state. I say comatose because we know sooner or later, some fool is going to try to once again revive it with another effort to force light rail on Clark County from Portland. It’s just a matter of time.
In the meantime, we still have but two crossings between the states locally with the corridors filled beyond capacity and sensible people still seeking more crossings to relieve the pressure, realizing that Portland apparently once saw the need for additional crossings what with some 9 bridges crossing the Willamette River just in downtown Portland.
To that end, Washington State Senator Ann Rivers (R 18) and Representative Liz Pike (R 18) have called together what Rep. Pike labeled the “Bistate Bridge Crossing Coalition,” reaching out to Oregon and Washington legislators, bruised as they might be, to begin anew a discussion, an honest discussion this time for what is really needed, not just what is wanted by Portland to help pay for their folly and financial mess of light rail on the backs of Clark County commuters and citizens. (My words, not theirs)
Pike adds, “Let’s start at the beginning and have no preconceived notion of what this is going to look like,” with Rivers adding, “The first and most important thing is to understand where the old project went wrong and have the candid discussion to determine: Is this really a needed project? We have a sense the answer will be yes.”
That is exactly what was missed during the 15 years of efforts to ram light rail on a citizenry that clearly and repeatedly said they did not want it. An “honest and candid” conversation never took place as from the beginning, it was all about forcing light rail on us. Hence, the oft repeated “no light rail, no bridge” coming from Oregon and even Washington officials who drop to their knees every time Oregon says “Boo.”
Enter Paul Montague, no doubt still smarting from being fired (according to sources) as head of special interest group Identity Clark County for his inability to “deliver the goods,” forcing light rail on us and increasing profits to some of their members, all at taxpayer expense, mind you.
Mindful of his abject failure, Montague pens a letter to the editor, Rivers not one to take bridge lead, blasting this effort for a real discussion between the states and surmising, “Any credible effort to put together a new replacement for the Interstate 5 bridge should be headed up by someone with the character and integrity to not pull the rug out from under the efforts of everyone involved in creating such a new crossing.”
That Montague even has the audacity to write the words “character and integrity” is an affront to every citizen of Clark County after his underhanded efforts to force light rail off on us, even including misrepresenting a vote denying funding for light rail, claiming it is not representative of the county since voter turnout was relatively low.
I guess it never dawns on him that his line of reasoning would have to apply to the other votes in that same election, including two new Vancouver City Council members and reelection of the Mayor?
Paul Montague is hardly one to discuss “character and integrity.”
On the other hand, Sen. Rivers and Rep. Pike are as they have shown their willingness to listen to and work on behalf of the people of their district, not dictate to them what they will accept “like it or not.”
The formation of this “Bistate Bridge Crossing Coalition” is what should have been done first, long ago, instead of Portland dictating to Clark County Washington what will be.
It is obvious that the real solution is an additional bridge or more before we even discuss replacing the current I-5 spans, if for no other reason than to offer a relief path for traffic.
Light rail must be left out of the discussion, unless Clark County voters give indication they are willing to accept it.
The Location of where additional bridges should be located must be discussed and agreed upon without the negativity displayed by John Laird above.
The benefits from the project must be for all of the citizens, not just profit for a group of special interest businesses and their lackeys in office.
I don’t know if it can actually be done, since we see spiteful opposition coming from proponents like Mayor Tim ‘the Liar’ Leavitt, the Lazy C and Jim ‘Da Taxman’ Moeller (D 49), but this is how a bistate project should be approached.
Montague and others opposing this effort are wrong. Dead wrong!
And I can’t think of two more people with not only “character and integrity,” but honesty and a willingness to actually fulfill their campaign promises of representation over dictating than Ann Rivers and Liz Pike.
Contrary to what disgruntled CRC proponents like Paul Montague think, representing the people over special interests is not “pulling the rug out from under” anybody.
They have not burned any bridges and are in fact, striving to build new bridges, not just across the river but in relations between the two states. But, relations based on mutual respect, not bullying.
Clark County Conservative 