Last spring, legislators were highly skeptical of funding the then-$4.2 billion project. The transportation committee nixed $30 million in Columbia River Crossing (CRC) planning funds from the state budget. After coming under fire from local, state and national politicians over the project’s cost and environmental impact, the CRC staff this month announced a simpler plan: the slimmed-down project proposes a 10 lane rather than 12 lane bridge and makes other cuts that reduce the project budget by $650 million.

So now the bridge is back. Today’s hearing on the CRC was not open to public testimony, which means only invited speakers testified about where the project is at. All of those invited speakers were supporters of the project, namely Washington State Department of Transportation Secretary Paula Hammond, Oregon Department of Transportation’s Matt Garrett and Richard Branman and NE Portland Representative Tina Kotek.

And what’s the sales pitch? Same as it ever was: jobs.

“The question I get asked when we talk about this is, ‘When are we going to start building?’ Kotek told the transportation committee, describing the project as a “win-sin situation” that would create 20,000 jobs in the region.

Garrett and Branman stressed that the current congested bridge disadvantages Oregon business and keeps new business from locating here. “Here is a project, where if we make the investment, brings up to 20,000 jobs,” said Garrett. “It will be a gift that keeps on giving."

On my way out of the meeting, a union representative snagged me and hit home the same message. "Do you know what the unemployment rate is right now in construction? Thirty-five percent!" said Joe Esmonde of IBEW 48, adding that they also supported the Oregon League of Conversation Voters. "We're not redneck sons of bitches, you know."

Members of the committee were wary of looking critical of the controversial project. When asking basic questions about the refined project, Representatives Bentz, Berger and Kahl prefaced their remarks with, “I’m a supporter of the project…” Representative Mike Schaufler went further, launching into a fiery oration about the need to break ground on the $2.6-3.6 billion project ASAP. “It is criminal to delay, obstruct, deny and prohibit this project from going forward. Every day we wait is one more day that workers aren’t out there working,” said Schaufler. “I’m done. I don’t need another public meeting”

Representative Kahl, who has been an outspoken critic of the bridge project in the last year, seemed swayed by the $650 million in cuts. “I’m becoming increasingly satisfied with the design of the bridge,” said Kahl, noting that he is still concerned about the lack of solid support for light rail in Vancouver or any discussion of land use policy in the discussion about a bridge that critics say will lead to sprawl.

In critics’ opinions, pitching an obscenely-high, impossible-to-fund budget and then reducing it to a slightly-less obscene figure does not represent progress. “My overall first impression take is it’s pretty similar to the original project, essentially repackaging the same thing. It’s still a megabridge,” says Mara Gross of Coalition for a Livable Future, one of five groups that called for the project to pay for a $4 million independent analysis of what to do about the corridor rather than rolling forward with the state highway departments’ plan.

Environment Oregon’s Brock Howell listened in to the meeting and pointed to the $72 million the project has so far spent on planning and outreach. “WSDOT and ODOT have done a fantastic job of organizing this, they clearly have a lot more financial resources than the public interest,” says Howell.

• Environment Oregon's Brock Howell is in a coalition pushing to restart the CRC process, but the project is rolling forward.

Well, according to the transit drivers union, that's apparently an actual problem. Amid the list of job complaints spelled out in the pdf on the union website I stumbled across today is this gripe:

"Many runs are scheduled so that the operator must make the daily choice of making their passengers late or not going to the restroom. In one year alone, 225 TriMet operators had to run for the bushes because they couldn't hold it any longer while another 254 report that they simply do not drink any fluids for the entirety of their 8-10 hour work day. Holding it and not drinking fluids over a long period of time is extremely detrimental to health. Having to 'hold it' is a serious distraction from safe driving."

Indeed! How many TriMet crashes are the result of drivers furiously focusing on their bladder? Anyway, be extra nice to your next TriMet operator. They may be contemplating a run for the bushes.

“What has been designed so far is sort of the optimal project, and we can’t afford that,” DeFazio says of the planned 12-lane, $4.2 billion version of the proposed replacement Interstate 5 bridge between Portland and Vancouver, Wash.

This coming-out supports what mayoral transportation director Catherine Ciarlo said in an article I wrote a couple weeks ago when Mayor Adams rescinded support for the bridge:

A delegation from Adams' office went to Washington, DC, in April to ask about getting $400 million in federal funding to support the cost of the bridge. "But the message we've gotten is that the project is far too expensive," says Catherine Ciarlo.

In response to today's news about DeFazio, Adams says: "He's a decision maker on this issue, so when he talks, the CRC staff had better listen." DeFazio lends national weight to the group of local politicians who are pressing for a less expensive CRC project, including Metro President David Bragdon, both candidates running to replace Bragdon as Metro President and state reps Nick Kahl and Jefferson Smith. Hell, even The Oregonian reported that cutting the size of the bridge is pretty much an inevitability.

It's been nearly eight years since Richard Reid tried to blow up a plane with explosive footwear, and I haven't heard a thing about any attempted shoe-related assaults on commercial aviation since. I emailed the Transportation Security Administration about what kind of threats had been uncovered in the deep, dark recesses of people's soles, but they sent back a vague response about the policy's history.

"By requiring all passengers to remove shoes for x-ray screening, we increase both security and efficiency at the checkpoint," the good people at the TSA wrote. Thanks. Super informative.

So today I got on the phone with TSA spokesman Duane Baird, who told me that the TSA has discovered "banned items" in passengers' shoes, but didn't say what banned items, or how many. He said that information could help people try to smuggle contraband onboard in the future. He was happy to say the shoe removal policy was effective. Just not how effective.

“We are not going to release what we find and how we find it,” Baird said.

Here's to you, TSA:

After the article came out, a couple people (nerds) asked if I could get them a copy of Moses' 89-page, spiral bound plan to look through at their leisure. But I didn't even have an actual copy of the plan—I was lucky enough to page through the copy of Moses' plan that local amateur historian/know-it-all Dan Haneckow acquired via miracle at Powell's. But now, by the grace of God and the city transportation planner Bob Cortright, you can download you very own copy of Roberts Moses' 66-year-old vision for Portland.

Revel in his numerous graphs and beautiful paintings of Portland freeways!

You're welcome.

But in 1943, the powerful man came to Portland and holed up for two months with his urban planning team in the hotel downtown that is now the Embassy Suites. They wrote up an 86-page plan (plus fold-out diagrams) for the city titled "Portland Improvement," which I am now holding in my hands thanks to local blogger and amateur historian Dan Haneckow.

While a lot of Moses' plan for the shape of future Portland is terrifying for modern progressive transit advocates—he envisioned two rings of freeways encircling the city—his long-winded introduction to the report rings surprisingly relevant today (in these dark times etc etc):

Every citizen of Portland has a right to be proud of the fact that this community is prepared, while there is still time, to face the future with unclouded vision and with a determination to meet the challenge, whatever it may prove to be. The community which meets the problem early, squarely, and with no ducking, dodging and buck-passing and, on the other hand, none of the false pride which scorns state and federal aid, will somehow find the answer.

• via Cafe Unknown
• Moses Wanted $2 Million in "Improvements" to Harbor Drive, Bringing this Postcard-Perfect Vision of our former Waterfront up to Date.

He hits the nail on the head when discussing long-term controversy over urban growth:

There are still honest, conservative, by no means reactionary leaders in the community who are not anxious that it shall grow rapidly or become a great metropolis... It is impossible not to sympathize with those who with that Portland shall keep as long as possible the flavor of a transplanted New England. There are others in Portland who believe that the future of the entire region is so promising that not only all war workers but many more outsiders can and should be invited into the community to make and share the prosperity which is already on the horizon.

Okay, so the "prosperity on the horizon" is looking pretty grim these days, actually, but those outsiders are the majority in Oregon now, with Beaver State natives making up only 44 percent on the population (a factoid learned in our last Brewhaha).

The kicker is that Moses raised the hot issue of the current Vancouver mayor's race: tolling on the proposed I-5 bridge before the I-5 even existed and 60 years before the massive Columbia River Crossing project starting rolling!

A toll could not be imposed on the new bridge unless a similar toll were imposed a the existing crossing, and the two bridges would have to operate together under an interstate agreement... Assuming that traffic over both bridges would not call below 6,000,000 a ten cent toll for passenger cars and a graduated toll for trucks and buses would support a self-liquidating structure if there were a federal subsidy of 30 percent. There are, however, complications in dealing with people in two states, restoring tolls where they have been eliminated, and other questions of local approval as to which we have little judgment.

So that officially makes Robert Moses more forward-thinking than the current anti-toll forerunner in the Vancouver mayoral election.

Some of you said things like, "Greeat, pat yourselves on your back and eat your Foie Gras while the rest of us stand waiting for a packed bus for 30 minutes." And, "Making your customers suffer because they made a huge, impossibly stupid, bet on fuel prices and toasting to it on the day the cuts kicked in pretty much sums up everything you need to know about their management's attitude."

Some of you obviously lack SPIRIT and as we all learned in high school pep rallies SPIRIT is crucial to being a successful COMMUNITY MEMBER. For those of you who will be receiving an F in SPIRIT, I recommend this re-educational video of the Green Line dance crew spliced with TriMet-lovin' bigwig speeches, all of which took place at the celebratory Green Line kickoff last Saturday (where you would have been eating Green Line CUPCAKES if you had SPIRIT! Even Jasun Wurster has more SPIRIT than you!).

After the dancers wrapped up and all the cupcakes were eaten on Saturday, I took my first real ride on the Green Line with the MAX's arch nemesis: president of "free-market environmentalist" think tank the Cascade Policy Institute, John Charles. This self-proclaimed train lover and MAX commuter has testified before the state senate against increasing TriMet's funding and penned editorials against the new MAX line. He, too, was unimpressed with the city's recent Green Line love fest. As we passed the green balloons hung in Pioneer Square and shared the train platform with an large-mustached man brimming with excitement about riding to Clackamas for free, Charles brought up some of the points you spiritless commenters have raised.

"It's the same as all the other light rail lines. It creeps through downtown at an exceedingly slow five miles per hour. There's a bunch of tourists on it. All it has done is replace very inexpensive bus service with very expensive rail service," said Charles, who harshly criticizes TriMet for cutting bus lines while funding big rail projects. Bringing up the cuts to free bus service downtown, Charles added, "It is completely predictable that bus riders got the short end of the stick. TriMet discriminates against bus riders to give the kid glove treatment for rail ridership."

There will be more on BUS-ting the Green Line party with Charles in this week's print edition. In the meantime, discuss.

Why is that weird? Because ODOT's budget is almost exclusively devoted to cars! Seventy-three percent of ODOT's $4.3 billion bi-annual budget goes straight into building and maintaining highways (for cars! Your doe-eyed child's worst enemy!). Only a measly one percent goes bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, like sidewalks and bike lanes, despite overwhelming evidence showing that the more people bike and walk, the safer and healthier everyone is.

So is this ad a sign that ODOT is sad about financing the enemy? Do they want the legislature to rewrite their budget the next time around instead of giving nearly $840 million to car projects over the objections of bicycle, pedestrian and environmental advocates? Or is it just an ad saying, "We'll keep building roads wider, so you can drive farther and faster! But then we'll all feel bad about the inevitable results..."

In an absurd, Orwellian turn of events, the CRC received another feather in its $4.2 billion cap today: an environmental excellence award! The National Association of Environmental Professionals crowned the 12-lane bridge a "A Model for Collaboration and Environmental Stewardship" for its greenhouse gas and climate change evaluation.

Oh, you mean the greenhouse gas and climate change evaluation that the Environmental Protection Agency found "failed to adequately examine the potential for a bridge to induce sprawl, increase pollution and contaminate an aquifer that supplies Vancouver and Clark County's drinking water." The one that green advocacy group Coalition for a Livable Future tears apart, arguing that CRC planners' analysis that the bridge will decrease greenhouse gases is wrong?

Local consultant and economist Joe Cortright explains (at more length here) that the CRC's greenhouse gas and climate change analysis relies on a faulty baseline. "They made this assumption that there will be tens of thousands of more people in Clark County whether they build the bridge or not, and that all those people will get in their cars and drive across the bridge." But really, says Cortright, the bridge itself will help create more sprawl and lead to more people commuting over the river in cars. "The effect of the bridge will be more people driving longer distances," he concludes.

A primary election shows incumbent Vancouver mayor Royce Pollard is only 1.1 percent ahead of his challenger in the upcoming election. The underdog, City Council member Tim Leavitt, "has banged and banged on the toll issue and wants to place the blame entirely on me," Pollard told the Oregonian. That's scary news because Leavitt sits on the CRC Project Sponsor's Council, a group including Pollard and other regional bigwigs that is the key adviser to Oregon and Washington's governments on all CRC design details.

During public hearings about tolls in July, Pollard was worried about voters' negative perception of tolls. "I hate tolls, but without tolls, we will not get this project done," said Pollard at the time. All cost estimates for the bridge so far have relied on tolls from $1-$8 and tolls also cut back on the number of people driving along across the bridge—which is essential to keep traffic and greenhouse gases in check.

• Zack Soto

In an editorial last week, the Oregonian came up with a similarly bad idea for saving money on the big bridge: cut its bike and pedestrian lanes. The $100 million pricetag for the lanes that analysts estimate 3,000 people will use a day deserves a "hard look," says the O:

Uh, cars, trucks and light rail ARE at the center of the project and in little danger of losing that position. Policymakers chose the maximum number of lanes possible for the bridge, bumping the cost up to $4.2 billion to accommodate 12 lanes of cars, trucks and light rail. The numbers show it all. As Jonathan Maus at BikePortland points out, the $100 bike/ped lanes are only two percent of the overall cost of the bridge.

Worse, the editorial contradicts advice the O foisted on bike advocates from its own pages months ago. In an editorial last March, the O took the Bicycle Transportation Alliance to task for speaking out against the size of the bridge. The editorial ended with: "Instead of working to destroy the bridge, the BTA should be putting its muscle toward the far more difficult task of completing a bridge that is a source of pride, economic strength and swifter transportation for all."

Five months later, "swifter transportation for all" should still include people who don't drive cars.

If all goes according to plan, by December 2010 East Burnside between 3rd and 14th will be a three-lane one-way street running east (with a striped bike lane running from MLK to 13th). Couch will become the major two-lane, one-way street running west. The city will also install traffic signals at every (!) intersection along Burnside and widen sidewalks. All this, planners hope, will make the area more pedestrian-friendly and fix the dangerous "nightmare spaghetti" intersection at NE 12th, where Sandy and Burnside meld into one another. Altogether, this makeover also opens the door to raising the Burnside Bridgehead project from the dead.

"Welcome to Portland's hot new neighborhood!" said Adams, as cars rushed past on NE 8th and Burnside. "Depending on how long you've worked to tame these streets, this change is 15-20 years in the making. We are intent on humanizing Burnside and this project begins to implement this vision."

• Adams: "This will take care of the nightmare spaghetti!"

The couplet project was held up for a long time by lack of funds—the $17.8 million pricetag was finally filled out this year thanks to $5.2 million in federal stimulus funds and $5.3 million in urban renewal money from the Central Eastside Area. The more controversial coupling of West Burnside and Couch is still stalled due to lack of funds (and the political will needed to obtain them). Neighbors and transportation activists generally agree that the coupling is a good project, especially since it will clean up the ridiculous Sandy intersection. Jonathan Maus, editor of BikePortland.org, laments that the city is missing the opportunity to extend the bike lane on Couch all the way up to NE 12th but agrees that the project is a "net positive" overall.

After some speech-making, everyone at the groundbreaking was treated to popsicles! And a marching band! Huzzah!

• Last Regiment of Syncopated Drummers

New York may be kicking our ass with aggressive transit reforms, but Portland is still probably the only city in America where a punk marching graces the groundbreaking of a new one-way street.

“When Fareless Square was started some 34 years ago, it was a bus-only system. We now have four MAX lines that will serve this area once mall service begins,” says Mary Fetsch, TriMet’s spokesperson.

While eliminating free bus service from downtown saves only $800,000, TriMet expects to see improvements in bus efficiency and a reduction in bus fare-related evasion. TriMet is counting on this projected savings to help close its $3.5 million budget gap.

At last month’s Board of Directors' hearing, nearly 20 people showed up to voice their opinions on TriMet’s Fareless Square proposal. “This vote demonstrates that the TriMet board is not interested in public opinion,” says JL Dunn, a rider's union member. “This is why we support having a democratically elected board.”

• Riders union members protesting Fareless Square cuts in July.

We're waiting for a call back from Lynn Lehrbach, a teamsters rep and the one dissenting vote on the TriMet board, but the WW blog quotes him explaining: “I expected this outcome, we talked about it, but I feel it is important to keep Fareless Square intact. We can afford to have a Fareless Square.”

At the root of this change is the big problem with how TriMet is funded—a significant portion of their budget comes via payroll tax. That means while millions of dollars are still pouring into sexy transportation projects (like the streetcar), TriMet has to slash budgets when unemployment soars.

I asked East Portland Representative and transportation committee co-chair Nick Kahl if he thinks there is a better way to fund TriMet. Probably not on a state level, he explained, because putting more transportation dollars into public transit would mean changing the way the Highway Trust Fund spends its money. "It’s very unlikely that a wholesale revision of the highway trust," says Kahl. "Voters of Oregon have had a half dozen opportunities to bust the trust fund and use the dollars there to pay for other things and they haven’t. Oregonians seem to feel pretty strongly that their gas tax dollars should go to fixing roads and that’s it."

Other transit experts are ambivalent about the change. Chris Smith, of Portland Transport, thinks the issue of eliminating free bus service has been blown out of proportion. “What we want to look at is mobility in the central city,” he says. “The change is relatively small.”

Get your free rides in now—the fareless bus service ends as of January 2010.

— Post co-written with Rachael Marcus.

Specifically, Evans pitched the idea of funneling seven percent of the toll on the new CRC bridge into a low-income healthcare fund. "As more trucks and vehicles move through our neighborhood, they should be responsible for the toxins they leave behind," said Evans.

North Portland State Rep Tina Kotek, who attended the meeting, seemed intrigued at the idea. "I will be looking into that idea and asking questions. I think that's totally appropriate," said Kotek. "We want to build dense housing along both sides of the I-5, so what should we do to make that livable?"

Putting aside my jealousy that I can't score a $4000 check from the government because I choose not to own a car in the first place, it seems like, objectively, the program is just a greenwashed way to help flailing auto companies.

It's great that the government is looking to incentivize improving cars' gas mileage, but the MPG of the new cars people are buying under cash for clunkers is not a significant step forward. The average gas mileage of cars bought under the cash for clunkers program was 28.3 MPG, with subsidized SUVs averaging 21.9 MPG and trucks only 16.3 MPG. Meanwhile, cars in Europe average 36 MPG. If we're going to get serious about climate change and oil consumption, we need to set our bar much higher.

Also, for all the environmental hubbub over the program, analysts are skeptical that the rebates will actually cut oil use. The NY Times "Wheels" blog writes:

According to a survey of car dealerships and 2,200 consumers by CNW Research, the average fuel economy of vehicles traded in last week was 16.3 miles per than the 18 m.p.g. needed to qualify for a government rebate of $3,500.

The relatively small differential suggests that consumers have not been turning in the oldest, dirtiest and least fuel-efficient cars, but instead have been getting rid of their second and third cars, according to Art Spinella, who ran the survey...

The vehicles turned in were driven about 6,000 miles a year, he said. If the new vehicles are driven about 12,000 miles a year, the rough annual average, then consumers will actually use more fuel, not less

Today Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid promised that the Senate will put $2 billion more into the program, but over at Worldchanging they point out that even that massive new car subsidy will result in only "microscopic" impact on U.S. oil consumption — a .05 percent decline.

On the other hand, Oregon Representative Earl Blumenauer has been pushing to strengthen a bill that pays Americans for choosing real green transportation: the Bicycle Commuter Tax Provision pays workers $20 a month to ride their bikes to work. It costs only $1 million a year.

But the best contrast came in the form of a road sign outside Clayton, NY:

For this reason, Portland Bureau of Transportation’s Sharon White has been assigned the duty of “pedestrian decoy.” Her duty as decoy is to walk back and forth across the street and not get hit. For every close call, there’s a police officer waiting nearby to “handle the situation,” which often includes a nearly $300 ticket or the opportunity to take a safe driver class to have the ticket dropped.

I’m not going to lie, this sounded like a crack version of a speeding trap to me. Hide a police car, seek out cars not following the law, give ‘em a huge ticket. Repeat several dozen times for a few hours. But as I watched for a few minutes this afternoon, I quickly realized this wasn’t the case. There were four yellow signs with the pedestrian icon (one for each lane in each direction), the pedestrian median marked with white paint, and orange cones with sandwich boards a block in each direction warning of “pedestrian crosswalk enforcement” ahead…not to mention the seven police cars and motorcycles visibly stopped just off the main street. Everything about this intersection screamed, “Open your goddamn eyes, people are crossing the street!”

Yet, 45 minutes into the hour-and-a-half “action,” about 14 cars had already been stopped. Sergeant Matt Stimmel said stopped drivers usually make one of two arguments:

1. “I didn’t know what she was going to do!”
To that I say: Did you think she was going to stop in the middle of the street and have a picnic?

2. “I didn’t see the signs!”
I repeat: four yellow signs, orange cones and sandwich boards, pedestrian median, and seven police vehicles.

So kids, there are only two things to remember: if a pedestrian has even a foot in the intersection, cars must stop. And second, every corner is an intersection, marked or unmarked. And as PBOT likes to say, “in collisions with cars, pedestrians are always the losers.” Got that? Losers!

Aside from the very sad people who got big tickets, the other loser I saw today was the little hatchback who did stop for the pedestrian decoy but got rear-ended by the slightly bigger hatchback who didn’t. Que triste.

-Rachael Marcus

The Washington Independent noted Bragdon's remarks on a highway bill which so far does little to encourage public transit use and address climate change.

David Bragdon, president of the Portland Metro Council, cautioned that building new transit infrastructure would be futile without land-use management plans to accompany it. Efforts to prevent sprawl, for example, and to concentrate populations around both public transportation and commercial facilities go a long way to keep people out of cars, he said.

“We can’t simply reform the supply of transportation, we have to reduce demand,” Bragdon testified, “and the way our communities are laid out is a major determinant of demand.”

Tolls were the hot topic at the CRC booth set up for Sunday Parkways last weekend... just feet away from the booth for the anti-12 lane CRC group. Naturally, some unsubtle protest arose.

While CRC staffers explained to park-goers that tolls will reduce traffic and greenhouse gas emissions on the $4.2 billion bridge project, opposition group Smarterbridge.org took the opportunity to hand out its new flier:

"It's going to make it harder for working class people to get to their jobs," said protester Jordan McIntyre, outside the meeting held Monday evening at the Portland Building. "They should look into what the leadership of TriMet makes every year." TriMet Executive Director Fred Hansen is paid $250,365 a year and TriMet is currently cutting its budget to bridge a $31 million shortfall.

The loose riders' union formed back in February when TriMet held public forums on its plan to cut five bus lines. "The public forum was a bunch of TriMet suits telling people that cuts were inevitable. We decided what we need is a grassroots group that will defend riders' interests," explained another union member, Tim Koch. One of the big changes recommended by the union is that TriMet board members should be elected, not appointed by the governor. Only one board member, Richard Van Beveren, showed up to Monday's open forum. Koch says that shows a lack of accountability to the public.

Staff wages have already taken a hit to cover the budget cuts, says TriMet spokeswoman Mary Fetsch. TriMet froze staff salaries for this year and forced all top executives to take a two-week unpaid furlough. Those cuts, combined with federal stimulus funds TriMet snagged to cover infrastructure repairs, mean that service cuts will only have to plug $13.5 million of the budget hole. But still, since TriMet had the highest number of trips ever in its history this past fiscal year (101.9 million trips, according to Fetsch), this would be the ideal time for the state and city to invest in expanding public transit service rather than reducing it.

If ODOT made tolls a reality by 2011, they could help raise some of the $4.2 billion needed to build the new 12-lane megabridge without having to dip too heavily into the state's General Fund. As I reported on this week, tolling is one of the touchiest subjects for the Columbia River Crossing (CRC) project, since commuters aren't happy about the idea of ponying up between two and eight dollars to drive across the river.

The governor explained in his veto statement (pdf) why he vetoed the bill, SB 580 (pdf):

I am pleased by our progress on the Columbia River Crossing, working in partnership with the State of Washington on this bi-state project. SB 580 imposes an artificial deadline that is not helpful and ultimately could be detrimental to the progress we've made. ... In fact, I don't believe that the project can happen without some tolling. However, mandating the date that toll rates must be set usurps the work of the PSC [Project Sponsors Council].

The bill was controversial in the legislature, where 22 House Reps voted against it—some who don't support the 12-lane CRC and some who do but think the idea of the legislature directing ODOT's tolling structure is out of line.

"Whether you’re for the bridge or against the bridge, tolling is going to be part of the funding solution for what to do with the bridge," says SE Portland Rep Jules Kopel Bailey. "It’s pretty surprising that the governor vetoed the bill because it’s a pretty simple bill that doesn’t put any handcuffs on. We could actually compel ODOT to come up with a tolling plan to reduce traffic on the current bridge. In the groundwork for doing that, they could develop the paper trail to show we don’t need to build such a gigantic bridge."

Since the bill is now dead in the water, it will be up to the Oregon and Washington departments of transportation to hash out a tolling plan if they want to toll the bridge during or before the new CRC construction. Project sponsor's council member David Bragdon says that idea is still totally on the table. "All rational people know that tolling will have to be part of this project," he says.

That's $450,000 more per car than the cost estimate presented to Portlanders during the widely-attended Streetcar System Plan Open Houses back in May.

Comments on the issue—which ranged from thoughtful responses to outright anger—showed up in droves on Jonathan Maus' editorial at BikePortland.org, where he wrote, “The problem is that the question has (yet again) been posed in a discriminatory and unbalanced way.”

Ad firm Webtrends, who commissioned the sky-blue ad, says its primary goal was to create, quantify, and organize a community response. They certainly got the level of feedback they wanted, but some of it in a different tone than expected. Justin Kistner, Senior Manager of Social Media Marketing at Webtrends, didn't expect the corrosive replies. “We picked a topic that we care about," Kistner said. "The majority of people don't arrive here by car. What we did want was a lively, informative debate, which we got.”

More locally made fireworks after the jump!

Back in April, the governor strong-armed Oregon legislators into keeping $30 million for the CRC in the state budget, but two funding sources for the bridge are two words everyone hates to hear: taxes and tolls.

This week the CRC project sponsors council convened two public listening sessions on tolling the bridge, one in Vancouver and one at the Jantzen Beach. I don't think it was intended this way, but what a hilarious practical joke to stage a meeting about traffic congestion and smart transit planning at the Jantzen Beach mall at 6PM on a workday. According to a quick show of hands, only eight Oregonians showed up to the far-flung meeting and I personally had plenty of time to contemplate the benefits of light rail while stuck in hot traffic for 40 minutes. Outside the meeting room, an obese woman in blue Crocs kept pumping quarters into one of the mall's massage chairs.

But anyway, here's the deal on tolling - the bridge needs to be tolled to help cover its insane construction costs as well as to control traffic and incentivize taking transit. The lowest possible scenario the CRC bigwigs are thinking about (the one studied in the draft Environmental Impact Statement on the bridge) would vary from $1 during the slowest times to $2 during peak hours. But the plan that would make the most money ($6.1 billion) and reduce traffic the most, projections show, is way higher — $3 tolls in the middle of the night and $6 during peak hours. At the listening session, which was dominated by anti-toll, anti-light rail types, several people said tolls were an infringement on personal liberty. “Tolling the 1-5 bridge would effectively crush the liberty of highway users,” said one person to loud applause.

And on top of the tolling hurdle, get this: while the federal government is covering the cost of constructing Vancouver's section of light rail, Vancouver will need to pay for operations and repair of the light rail with an increased sales tax. That Vancouver voters will need to approve next year. They might as well call it the "snowball in hell" vote.

The tax increase would only be a one-tenth or two-tenths of one percent sales tax increase and Vancouver Mayor Royce Pollard is more optimistic than I am about his constituents' willingness to pony up a few cents in the name of progress. "Obviously, it will be a very close vote. It's not the best of times to be talking about even a two-tenths or one-tenth increase," says Pollard. "But we are essentially getting this light rail system for pennies." As for tolls, Pollard notes that "people are not going to be happy" when the scenarios go above $1.50. He suggests Oregon and Washington's legislature give commuters tax write-offs for part of their toll payments.

If you want more info, check out the CRC's new tolling info website - which is also where you can comment on tolls if you couldn't make it out to the two absurdly inconvenient meetings.

Yes, indeed, Secretary LaHood along with a host of other politicians, including Governor Kulongoski, Congressman Pete DeFazio and Congressman Earl Blumeneaur (who graced his second transit-unveiling press conference in two days), were very very proud to release the first American-made streetcar since the auto industry killed streetcars 60 years ago.

"This is a great, great accomplishment, I believe this is the dawn of a new era for transportation in the USA, a new opportunity to claim 'Made in America,'" gushed LaHood, gesturing to the red, white and blue streetcar which was built at a cost of $2.9 million (with 90 new jobs created) right in state at Oregon Iron Works.

There was political high-fiving all around. "Thank you to the legislature for passing my Jobs and Transportation Act, the largest and greenest long-term investment in Oregon's transportation history," said Gov. Kulongoski, hilariously glazing over environmentalist's complaints that the act included only a tiny sliver of funding for bikes, ped and public transit.

The only person not engaging in the jobs-green transit-love fest was sulky Jonathan Maus, of BikePortland.org, who shook his head in disdain at the photo opp. For less than the $77 million cost of the first 3.3 mile streetcar extension, Portland could build the nation's best bikeway network, with hundreds of miles of bike lanes. "Streetcars are great, but at what cost? Where's the similar dedication to bikeways that cost nothing in comparison?" said Maus. "In politics, things that are cheap and easy don't always win - there's no money behind them."

The shiny new train rolled up to the still unfinished station at NW 6th and Davis yesterday morning only 14 minutes behind schedule, interrupting Representative Brent Barton and Bicycle Transportation Alliance Director Scott Bricker's conversation about what sort of Bianchi Barton should buy now that the legislative session is over and he has time to breathe. They boarded the elite first car of the new train but there was no room for my bike up with the VIPS so I wound up in the second car, packed in with a full load of TriMet staff.

I learned a thing or two riding the light rail all the way out to Clackamas shoulder to shoulder with the people who designed and built the tracks. Here are six things to expect from the city's newest light rail line when it opens for public use in September.

1. Train envy. The old MAX trains look boxy and retro compared to the slope-nosed, sleek Green Line trains. Not only do the new trains (built in Sacramento, FYI) have more seats and more standing room, they have huge windows and a horseshoe of seats at the front that provide a sort of panoramic view. Their seriously market-tested yellow and blue color scheme is one that, according to TriMet marketing director Carolyn Young, riders chose as the most "warm, friendly and modern."

2. Backslapping all around. "Having a new MAX line open is something everyone dreams of in this town," said U.S. Congressman Earl Blumenauer after the train pulled into its last station at Clackamas Town Center. "This is such a significant accomplishment that you need to celebrate it several times." Then everyone munched on strawberries and a confetti cannon explosion erupted from the roof of a parking garage! The Green Line's $575 million pricetag came out of a lot of pockets — 60 percent from federal sources and the 40 percent from the City of Portland, Clackamas County, the Oregon Department of Transportation and a slew of other local partners. Perhaps most important negotiators were local politicians back in the 70s who insisted that construction of the I-205 include a lane set aside for mass transit. Only thirty long years later and the land ODOT set aside is actually being put to its full use!

3. More commuters, fewer cars. The Green Line has eight new stops across Southeast Portland and more than 2,300 new parking spaces meant to suck suburban commuters who usually drive into downtown Portland onto light rail instead. Blumenauer noted that the new line will hopefully decrease car miles traveled in the region, though he says Portland families already save an average of $2,000 a year because they are “trapped in their cars less frequently.”