House Bill 2143 would repeal the provision allowing WSDOT to withhold funding when board membership is not allocated strictly by population
Rep. John Ley has introduced legislation aimed at resolving an ongoing dispute between the city of Vancouver and smaller Clark County cities over representation on the C-TRAN Board of Directors.
The conflict stems from a state requirement that transit agency boards be allocated proportionally by population, or risk having funding withheld by the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). State law also prohibits any single city from holding more than half of a board’s seats to prevent one jurisdiction from dominating decision-making.
“For most of C-TRAN’s history, the Board’s power was evenly divided, with three seats each for the small cities, Clark County, and the City of Vancouver,” said Ley, R-Vancouver. “That structure ensured smaller cities had an equal voice at the table.”
“However, recent changes to this balance have disrupted the community. That could force residents of smaller cities to help fund a light rail extension tied to the Interstate Bridge Replacement Program, which would primarily benefit a small number of people in downtown Vancouver.”
House Bill 2143 would repeal the provision allowing WSDOT to withhold funding when board membership is not allocated strictly by population. The bill would also cap representation for Clark County and the City of Vancouver at three seats each, preserving seats for smaller cities rather than assigning them solely by population.
“The elected leaders of our small cities have taken a firm stand on this issue at the C-TRAN Board level,” noted Ley. “My bill would protect their voice, ensuring those small communities are heard, and their influence remains at a level that has served the community well for nearly 40 years.”
The 2026 legislative session begins on Monday, Jan. 12.
Information provided by the Washington State House Republicans, houserepublicans.wa.gov
Also read:
- Opinion: IBR promotes ‘giving away’ historic interstate bridges while withholding cost estimate for replacement
Neighbors for a Better Crossing argues the IBR program is promoting demolition of the historic Interstate Bridges without releasing updated cost estimates or current seismic data to justify replacement. - Opinion: Bikes in crosswalks
Doug Dahl explains how Washington law treats bicycles as both vehicles and pedestrians, depending on where and how they are being ridden. - Opinion: The unpreferred and unaffordable Interstate Bridge replacement proposal
Rep. John Ley argues that the Interstate Bridge Replacement proposal is unpreferred, unaffordable, and failing to address congestion, cost transparency, and community concerns. - Opinion: IBR still holding and lying about coming billions in cost overruns
Joe Cortright argues that Interstate Bridge Replacement officials are deliberately delaying the release of an updated cost estimate that he says could push the project toward $10 billion. - Letter: A call for competent Interstate Bridge project management
Rick Vermeers argues that unchecked scope, rising costs, and missed timelines threaten the survival of the Interstate Bridge Replacement project unless light rail is removed.
wpDiscuz
