“We did not pull these numbers out of the sky” IBR Administrator Greg Johnson told legislators in 2022

Rep. John Ley 
for Clark County Today

Two recent major events have caused citizens to question the future of the Interstate Bridge Replacement Program (IBR). It was learned Friday that IBR Administrator Greg Johnson is leaving at the end of the year. The program cut transit ridership projections by 84 percent to comply with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) requirements. The new (lower) numbers remain overly optimistic.

Was it a bait-and-switch from the beginning? That’s the question some people are asking about the transit ridership projections given to the community by the IBR team. The FTA created the Simplified Trips-on-Project Software (STOPS) a decade ago to stop overly optimistic ridership projections when communities were seeking federal funds, yet Johnson’s team didn’t use it until this year.

At the October C-TRAN Board meeting, Johnson and his IBR project team shared updated projected ridership numbers as well as costs for Operations and Maintenance (O&M) for the light rail and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) portion of the project. They were unable to answer specific questions from Board members about where the new projected riders would come from, other than a generic “the Vine BRT feed.’’

Over three years ago, the IBR team told a disbelieving community that there would be up to 33,000 daily transit boardings on the I-5 corridor in 2045. They proposed extending the MAX light rail Yellow Line with nine departures every hour, plus BRT in a dedicated lane with departures every three minutes. At the time, Sen. Lynda Wilson, Rep. Brandon Vick and others expressed disbelief at the huge projected increase in transit ridership compared to the present C-TRAN ridership across the river.

“With our modeling efforts showing high capacity transit crossing the bridge, both numbers now jump up to 26,000 to 33,000 average weekday trips projected on high capacity transit,” Johnson told the Executive Steering Group. “That is substantial; 10 times more folks using transit than (are) using it currently.”  He further elaborated “we did not pull these numbers out of the sky.”

The IBR stuck with the huge increase to justify TriMet’s demand for 19 new light rail vehicles and an upgrade to both the Gresham Ruby Junction maintenance facility and the Expo station. C-TRAN was promised an upgrade to its Vancouver operations and maintenance facility as well as a number of new hydrogen-powered double decker buses. The full transit component would supposedly cost up to $2 billion for the 1.83-mile TriMet light rail extension and the C-TRAN Bus on Shoulder (BOS) into Portland.

A constituent recently shared that the 105 express bus from their home in Salmon Creek to the airport would take an unreasonable 2 hours and 20 minutes. While they like light rail, the MAX Yellow Line travels just 14 mph. Nobody wants to travel that slow.

Last December, the C-TRAN Board was shocked to learn that the projected cost to operate the transit component would be nearly $22 million per year, most of that attributable to the MAX light rail extension. Sticker shock caused immediate pushback and regrets among Board members who had voted the previous month to remove their opposition statement to paying for light rail. Vancouver Mayor Anne McEnerny Ogle and Washougal’s Molly Coston acting as Board chair, pushed the change through in November.

In June, Johnson revealed that his team had not used the federally required STOPS program to evaluate the transit component. He indicated transit ridership numbers would be going down from earlier projections.

The new IBR numbers were revealed two weeks ago – 4,600 to 5,400 daily transit riders; an 84 percent reduction from the 26,000 – 33,000 boardings used in the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (DSEIS). Citizens relied on these numbers when providing “public comments” to the 13,000-page document. Johnson’s team has yet to provide required responses and answers to those citizen comments.

A rough calculation shows the original IBR calculation was about 4,000 seats per hour for transit ridership on the I-5 corridor. Now they project that number for an entire day. The current reality on the entire I-5 corridor is about 1,000 – 1,500 boardings per day. 

Express bus ridership to downtown Portland has remained flat at about 525 daily boardings. C-TRAN had seven separate express bus lines over the Columbia River in 2019. Today it has three, indicating there is no demand for any “high capacity’’ transit into Portland.

One would think the federal government will require a new DSEIS and a new public comment period in order to comply with the required application for federal approval of the project. Is DOT Secretary Sean Duffy’s staff paying attention to these details? Let’s hope so.

A decade ago, C-TRAN received federal and state funding to build its first BRT line. The Vine was created promising to increase bus ridership from two existing routes (#4 & #44). “With the opening of the Vine, bus ridership in the corridor is expected to increase to 5,800 average weekday trips,” said the FTA in a 2015 press release. Projected future growth was between 8,000 and 9,000 daily riders.

The promised growth never happened. Yet two more BRT lines have been approved, with a 4^th in the planning stages. The Mill Plain BRT was created projecting 3,100 daily boardings. The price tag for the three BRT lines – around $50 million each.

This is relevant because it shows the IBR’s proposed 4,600 to 5,400 daily boardings could be easily served with a simple and affordable BRT line. TriMet’s FX BRT line carries more than that presently. Yet a single express bus line (#105) more than adequately serves current demand. “While Local routes within Clark County have bounced back and continue to see strong growth, Express routes haven’t seen the same recovery,” C-TRAN reports.

No new taxes are needed for this very flexible transit option that presently serves multiple parts of Clark County.  There is no need for Washington taxpayers to contribute up to $500 million in MAX light rail capital costs. There is no need for Clark County taxpayers to pay over $7 million in annual operating costs for the IBR transit component.

Harsh realities

Against this backdrop, there are some new harsh realities. Our Regional Transportation Council (RTC) Board was told well over a year ago that there was a permanent change in people’s transportation uses, following the pandemic lockdowns. More people are working from home, more use of private cars, and significantly reduced transit ridership. It is a national trend, not just in Portland and Seattle.

This year has been harsh on TriMet as well. Unable to get a 400 percent increase in a statewide jobs “head tax,” it now begins a multi-year cost cutting effort to save $300 million in operating costs. These service cuts will include both light rail and bus service, with light rail cuts up to 18 percent according to news reports.

TriMet just signed a contract with the Portland Police for added security. No costs were mentioned, but this cost increase will require additional service and TriMet staffing cuts to achieve the targeted $300 million annual savings.

Presently, passenger fares only cover about 8 percent of TriMet’s operations and maintenance costs. C-TRAN passengers pay about 5 percent. Taxpayers pick up the balance, in addition to paying all the capital costs for new buses and light rail vehicles.

From a historical perspective, C-TRAN ridership peaked in 1999 at 7.75 million annual boardings. Today it has “recovered” from a pandemic low of just above 3 million to nearly 5 million. TriMet ridership peaked in 2012 at the end of the great recession. Growing populations and adding two new MAX routes have not increased ridership.

TriMet has a long history of failing to generate new ridership with light rail. The Cascade Policy Institute laid out the numbers on failed promises six years ago relative to the Yellow MAX line, and again last December.  C-TRAN’s low ridership over the river has been well documented, including this column by citizen Doug Tweet.

The number one priority for citizens on both sides of the river is saving time and reducing traffic congestion. Johnson and his team are proposing a $2 billion transit component that is over one quarter the total project cost. They allocate 54 percent of the bridge surface to transit, bikes and pedestrians.

Their proposal makes things worse, as morning travel times double from 29 minutes today to at least 60 minutes in 2045. The percentage of vehicles traveling freeway speeds on I-5 will decrease from 46 percent today to just 27 percent. Furthermore, Johnson predicts half of rush hour traffic will travel between zero and 20 miles per hour in twenty years, proving the waste of $7.5 billion in reducing congestion and saving time.

As of the end of June, $235 million has been spent by Johnson delivering these bad ridership projections, failing to meet federal requirements for three years. The Clark County community feedback from the beginning has been saying “no light rail” and “no tolls” for the project.

It’s time to remove the transit component. It’s also time to replace all the leadership teams that have misled the people and failed to fix the one problem they want resolved – saving travel time and reducing traffic congestion. When Johnson can’t answer simple questions regarding where the 4,600 to 5,400 daily transit riders will come from, it’s time to clean house.