Clark County Today Editor Ken Vance provides an update on the latest discussion surrounding the I-5 Bridge replacement project
Ken Vance, editor
Clark County Today
The narrative surrounding the Interstate 5 Bridge replacement project is getting interesting. In fact, it’s becoming more than just interesting for those of us who have intensely spent so many years following the proposed project. Folks like myself are actually becoming more and more optimistic by the day that common sense will be injected into the discussion very soon.
I have never written in opposition to replacing the I-5 Bridge. I acknowledge it needs to be done at some point. However, I don’t believe there is as much urgency as some others believe there is. I also believe citizens want transportation corridor options, including a third or even a fourth bridge, and I don’t believe the majority of citizens want another transit option (light rail). I am also not in favor of a project that does not reduce congestion, and this one will have no significant impact on our traffic congestion issues.
Prior to the last presidential election, I had started to lose hope that any sanity would ever come to this project, the current price tag is estimated to be between $5 and $7.5 billion. We’ve been waiting for quite some time for that estimate to be updated. Interstate Bridge Replacement Program (IBR) officials have promised an updated estimate later this year. Many opponents of the IBR’s proposal expect that price tag to increase to at least $9-10 billion.
There is no evidence that this project has gotten on the radar of President Donald Trump. Attempts have been made to make sure transportation officials in Washington, DC are aware of the absurdities involved in this project with the hope that someone at the federal level will intervene before it’s too late. It is my hope that the likelihood of that happening will increase once the new price tag is announced later this year.
You might be aware that President Trump recently has brought common sense and fiscal responsibility to other transportation projects. As reported by The Center Square Washington, the Trump administration has terminated approximately $4 billion in unspent federal funding for California’s High-Speed Rail project. The California High Speed Rail Authority is suing the Trump administration over the cancellation of federal funding.
The nearly $2.1 billion in federal funding so far for the I-5 Bridge replacement project comes primarily from two major grant programs: the $600 million Mega Grant Program and the $1.5 billion Bridge Investment Program. The project also received a $30 million Reconnecting Communities grant.
Sam Stites, a member of the IBR Communications Team, told The Center Square Washington earlier this week that the IBR Program is a separate endeavor from the California High-Speed Rail, with its own dedicated funding streams and planning process involving the states of Oregon and Washington and the federal government.
“The grant agreements required to access the $2.1 billion in federal funds already awarded to the Program through the Mega Grant and Bridge Investment Program (BIP) Grant were both fully executed and signed earlier this year by ODOT/WSDOT and the Federal Highway Administration,” Stites emailed The Center Square.
ODOT is the Oregon Department of Transportation, and WSDOT is the Washington State Department of Transportation.
“A portion of the funds from these grants have already been obligated, with future obligations occurring for the remaining funds once we reach the construction phase,” Stites explained. “The IBR Program currently expects to receive an amended record of decision in early 2026 from the Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration, which provides federal approval to move to construction,’’ Stites said.
“The combined $2.1 billion from these grants is critical for the project, and we will continue to work with our federal partners and congressional delegation about our ability to access these funds, and to seek clarity on federal changes as they’re announced,” he said.
However, earlier this year, Vancouver Mayor Anne McEnerny-Ogle appeared to reveal a crack in her confidence for the project in comments made to Oregon Public Broadcasting.
“The contracts haven’t been written, the checks haven’t been signed. So, until that happens, we don’t have a bridge right now. We’re working as if we will, hoping to get a record of decision Sept. 8, 2025 and put a shovel in the dirt the next day,” Mayor McEnerny-Ogle said, referring to early construction preparation. “Until all of those documents are signed, we don’t have a bridge.”
The mayor recently shared that every day the project is delayed, it adds $1 million to the cost. Yet the IBR staff members now admit their timeline for the Record of Decision is delayed until “early 2026.” This adds at least $100 million or more to the cost, due to the project team’s delays. The tolling component has been delayed a year. How many other delays are the responsibility of the project team? How much added costs are actually attributed to the management and oversight of the program?
And, it’s also worth noting that the issue of the height (178 feet) of the proposed bridge replacement is unacceptable to the U.S. Coast Guard. That issue has yet to be resolved and is certainly one of significance.
Also, the C-TRAN Board of Directors continue to wrestle over their decision as to whether or not that agency will agree to participate in funding the maintenance and operations (O&M) of TriMet’s 1.83-mile extension into Vancouver. That light rail extension accounts for about $2 billion of the overall price tag for the project. More importantly, Portland’s TriMet is demanding Clark County taxpayers cover $7 million each year for their light rail O&M costs.
Most recently, because the Oregon legislature refused to bail out TriMet financially with a significant statewide jobs tax increase, TriMet has announced significant cuts in their service. This includes up to 18 percent of MAX light rail service.
Clark County residents would be wise to avoid financial entanglements with a financially ailing TriMet. Citizens have spoken loud and clear at multiple C-TRAN Board meetings they do not want to pay for light rail.
Also read:
- Opinion: Transit agencies need accountability not increased state subsidy
Charles Prestrud argues that Washington transit agencies face rising costs and declining ridership due to governance structures that lack public accountability. - Opinion: Does tailgating cause speeding?
Target Zero Manager Doug Dahl examines whether tailgating contributes to speeding and explains why following too closely increases crash risk with little benefit. - Free fares on New Year’s Eve is a big hit with C-TRAN riders
C-TRAN’s New Year’s Eve free-fare program provided extended late-night service and a safe transportation option for riders across Clark County just after midnight. - Four Western WA counties granted $6.6M in federal funds for road safety programs
Four Western Washington counties will receive $6.6 million in federal funding for road safety projects, including an EMS pilot program in Clark County. - VIDEO: WA and OR lawmakers irked as update on I-5 Bridge costs still missing
Washington and Oregon lawmakers expressed frustration after planners failed to provide updated cost estimates for the I-5 Bridge replacement during a recent legislative oversight meeting.
Ken Vance’s piece reads less like analysis and more like Clark County’s favorite pastime: wishcasting with broken math. The $1 million-a-day claim is fiction, the $2 billion light rail scare number is inflated, and no president can rip up signed federal contracts without detonating the entire funding stream. We have already pushed this bridge out once, and here is the truth no one in the CCT echo chamber will say: it is never going to get cheaper.
Every delay fattens the same wallets. Consultants bill endless ‘updated’ studies. Freight lobbyists get another year of toll-free hauling. Politicians on both sides milk the outrage machine for donations. And land speculators near alternate corridors watch their property values climb with every stalled meeting.
Meanwhile, Clark County drivers sit in gridlock on a bridge built before Pearl Harbor, and the cost ticks up hundreds of millions a year without a yard of concrete poured. If you want common sense, follow the money, and you will see exactly why some folks want this project stalled forever, and none of those reasons are about serving the people who cross that bridge every day.
Jason —
You fail to address the #1 problem Ken Vance mentions – the IBR $7.5 Billion proposal fails to reduce traffic congestion. In fact their own numbers say it will get worse, with HALF of rush hour traffic travelling zero to 20 mph.
The number of vehicles travelling at freeway speeds will drop from 46% today to just 27% in 2045. What a huge waste of taxpayer money.
Of course the cost of the project can get cheaper. Eliminate the $2 Billion transit component! The saves the outrageous cost of the 90 feet above the ground Vancouver Waterfront light rail station.
A brand new bridge should cost between $1 billion and $1.5 billion. The IBR originally said the bridge component was $500 million. Today they say it’s $1 billion.
Just the facts.
I don’t get your point. If Ken is “wishcasting” then what are you saying? It seems you are of the opinion that this grossly cost-inflated, inefficient, never-ending-money-pit called IBR should be built now, not later, because the boondoggle will cost even more later on. Really? That’s the best reason you can come up with?
The current IBR plans will be the greatest mistake the State of Wash, and Clark County, and Vancouver City will ever make in recorded history if allowed to proceed. It does nothing to eliminate congestion. It does nothing to improve on the current mode of public transportation that is now available (flexible C-Tran bus service). It will be a financial “mill stone around our necks” that will never go away… never ever.
We better pray to God that Trump, the Federal Dept. of Transportation, or the U.S. Coast Guard puts a stop to the current plans. Maybe then, in another 10 yrs. when yet another bridge effort is started, the planners will listen to what the citizens really want: less congestion via a 3rd bridge without the choo-choo train on it.
I do not have the expertise nor the supporting knowledge to debate the the millions and billions of dollars it will take to build the I-5 bridge; but I do have basic common sense attached to this project, along with the majority of Clark County residents.
Years and money have been spent asking tax paying residents what they want to see in a new bridge. Always the same response…No light rail, No tolls, More lane’s to reduce traffic congestion. Simple common sense answers, yet a few people have decided that we, the taxpayers, are stupid and unqualified to have a say, that we’re only good for the money…. “The few people” do not respect us, the taxpayers, and show us by deciding to ignore what we want and include everything we don’t want into their plans for the bridge. “A few people” decided to build a bridge that cuts down on traffic lanes and costs billions more for light rail, and now would cost hundreds more dollars to get to and from work! How do you like that?, they say.
We, the taxpayers, who they think are stupid and unqualified, have the power to make changes to an unjust, unfair, and corrupt system. Start by voting the Vancouver mayor out of office… her power is temporary and in your hands, do a bit of research and get names of the bridge committee members, contact them. We cannot settle for anything less than common sense.