Clark County Today Editor Ken Vance reacts to a revelation provided by Interstate Bridge Replacement Program Administrator Greg Johnson

Ken Vance, editor
Clark County Today

When Interstate Bridge Replacement Program (IBR) Administrator Greg Johnson was placed on the agenda for Tuesday’s C-TRAN Board of Directors meeting, I was immediately interested in what he would have to say. As detailed in Clark County Today reporter Paul Valencia’s news story, Johnson indeed had several nuggets of news and information in his update. However, it was what Johnson said to Valencia after the meeting that I found to be most significant and it is my hope that each of the nine members of the C-TRAN Board are aware of the administrator’s comment.

If you’re reading this column, I’m guessing it is likely that you’ve been following along with Clark County Today’s coverage in recent months of the board members’ discussion about the issue of whether or not the agency will share in the annual operations and maintenance (O&M) expense of the IBR’s proposed 1.83-mile extension of TriMet’s Yellow Line light rail into downtown Vancouver. Previously, the board agreed to have C-TRAN pay a portion of the O&M costs but on January 14th, Clark County Councilor Michelle Belkot, then a member of the C-TRAN Board, proposed that decision be revisited. 

In March, it appeared the Board was ready to vote 5-4 in favor of Belkot’s proposal, but Vancouver Mayor Anne McEnerny-Ogle performed a last-minute political maneuver to get the vote tabled. The next day, Belkot’s fellow county councilors removed her as a representative of the county on the C-TRAN Board and replaced her with Councilor Wil Fuentes, who is expected to vote along with McEnerny-Ogle and County Chair Sue Marshall to maintain C-TRAN’s current position in agreement with the agency paying for light rail O&M. While a pair of lawsuits work their way through the courts, the C-TRAN Board voted to table the vote for three months. If Belkot prevails in her lawsuit and is returned to her seat on the C-TRAN Board, the 5-4 majority would presumably be back in place to prevent C-TRAN from paying for O&M on TriMet’s light rail extension into Vancouver. If Belkot is unsuccessful and Fuentes remains on the C-TRAN Board, then C-TRAN will likely remain on the hook for O&M expenses.

Getting back to Johnson’s appearance at Tuesday’s board meeting, the administrator was professional enough to give Valencia a moment of his time before departing. The Clark County Today reporter asked Johnson if the IBR team could still give the public a new bridge design if C-TRAN does not pay for O&M for light rail. 

“The question is, if C-TRAN fails to support O&M costs, can we pivot away from light rail? My answer is that there are others who are interested in seeing light rail come across that bridge, on the Washington side,’’ Johnson told Valencia. “I think those folks will come together and they will find a solution to the O&M costs if C-TRAN doesn’t have the availability to do it.”

Am I wrong, or did Johnson just give each of the nine C-TRAN Board members political cover to vote to save the agency from being on the hook for those O&M expenses? Why in the world would any of those board members vote to have an agency that can’t financially sustain its own maintenance and operations add on the O&M for TriMet’s light rail extension?

When it comes to shoving the I-5 Bridge replacement project, and the light rail extension, down the throats of Clark County taxpayers, McEnerny-Ogle is obviously driving the bus. Vancouver City Council by-laws require the three Vancouver representatives on the C-TRAN Board to each vote in unison with the council’s position. Which is a shame, because it is believed that Vancouver Councilor Bart Hansen would vote in opposition to C-TRAN paying for TriMet’s light rail extension. He is on the record as saying he had ”sticker shock” when it was revealed in December that TriMet needed C-TRAN to pay $7.2 million of the total $21 million in annual maintenance and operations.

With the three Vancouver votes in hand, McEnerny-Ogle just needs the two votes from the Clark County councilors – Marshall and Fuentes – in order to maintain a majority on the C-TRAN Board that will surpass the four votes from those board members who represent Clark County’s smaller cities. In recent months, it became painfully obvious to all who have followed this nonsense that McEnerny-Ogle has complete control of County Chair Marshall, who carried the water for her in the political maneuver that led to tabling the March vote and then the removal of Belkot from the C-TRAN Board.

McEnerny-Ogle is obviously a proponent of the I-5 Bridge replacement project and the extension of TriMet’s light rail. What I don’t understand is why does she insist C-TRAN being placed on the hook for more than $7 million in annual O&M costs if Johnson readily admits his team would find another way to pay for that portion even if the C-TRAN Board said “No.’’

So, obviously, I asked McEnerny-Ogle that question. Her brief response was only confirmation that “I am advocating that C-TRAN engage in discussions about options for funding new bi-state transit,” McEnerny-Ogle said through a city of Vancouver spokesperson.

I know I will continue to follow this story closely as the two lawsuits move along and a potential vote takes place later this summer. I hope you do the same.