Thanks for the info! Now maybe I can do like "real politicos", press the flesh, and have a chance to get a face to face with their parks guy after 6 months of his ignoring my letters. When you have a wealthy donor that wants to develop park zoned land for parks...well, who has the time for that!

Hi Dave,

1. Rex outlined some of his thoughts on the bridge here. We need light rail and better bike crossing to Vancouver, and the project would have to have a tolling component to be viable. Rex did not vote for, nor does he support, the 12-lane approach developed by the two state DOTs. Rex believes that "we’ve got to build this bridge in line with our region’s goals of sustainability and responsible growth."

2. Take a look at the Climate Prosperity Project that Rex is helping to spearhead with an eye for what this means for China. I don't know specifically about Rex's thoughts on Mandarin, but part of the goal for this project is to make Oregon a leader in the export of goods and services related to our climate crisis. China, with its surging economy and energy needs, plays an obvious role in this for the reasons you've mentioned.

That's nice. Mandarin is an OK question, but "why is your organization unresponsive" is a troll's question. Classic.

Having worked with Rex at the Johnson Creek Watershed Council and now at the Forest Park Conservancy, I want to echo and underscore Charlie's comment: "Rex has the background and heart of an activist, combined with an understanding of how our regional government works and an ability to work collaboratively to solve our shared problems." Whether it was willingly and delightedly coming out for the Watershed Wide Event (JCWC) or the Days of Stewardship, a bi-annual (September & March) event we created 2 years ago for Forest Park, or thoughtfully contributing to some of the more far-reaching transportation, bond measure and land use policy discussions of the last decade, Rex is always willing, able and thoughtful. He deeply understands the transportation, natural resource, climate change and land use issues facing our region and is an individual equipped with the vision and collaborative leadership skills that will be required to help us all advance mindfully through challenging times ahead.

I've known Rex for a long time and I support him because he is honest, straightforward, and wants to make things happen not just stand on a soapbox. He has the environmental values we want to inform the critical decisions for our region.

Rex is trying to rewrite history - he's been a cheerleader on the bridge, and continues to push it forward, despite not having adequately studied alternatives. When you're spending thousands of dollars per resident, it makes sense to think it through.

From the City Club debate about the Megabridge: If you had $4 billion to spend on any transportation project you want, Cortright asked Burkholder, is this what you'd spend it on?

Burkholder never answered that question.

From that same debate A new bridge could relieve congestion that hampers the region's economy and improve safety, Burkholder said. "It's the right thing to do at the right time. It's been studied well."

For those who've followed the debate extensively, the suggestion that Rex never supported the 12 lane CRC doesn't pass the straight face test. I personally head him do so, and so have countless others.

If not for Rex's cheerleading for the CRC and giving it political cover, the CRC planning would have been sent back to the drawing board a year ago or more to come up with a sustainable alternative.

Millions of wasted tax dollars later, Rex is trying to rewrite history and go back to his enviro base to win an election. What's shocking to me is how so many enviros are letting him get away with it.

(4) spending $ billions seems too much just to improve bike transportation.

For comparison purposes, how much would a bike only bridge + seismic upgrades cost? How about a bike ferry?

Sorry Charlie. Your contention that Rex did not support the 12 lane CRC does not pass the laugh test - and the fact that Rex is trying to rewrite history is an indication that Rex must be worried about his prospects. He should be - and even more so, now that you are trying to throw this screwball to the faithful.

Which part of this article from W. Week 5/21/08 do you or Rex want to scrub from the public record?

<hr/>

On May 2, the 39-member bi-state CRC task force published a document describing the five options for reducing congestion on the six-lane Interstate 5 bridge between Portland and Vancouver, Wash. Leading the charge for the Cadillac-cost option, which includes a new 12-lane bridge: none other than Burkholder.

“In terms of congestion, safety and obsolescence, the existing bridge is broken,” he tells WW. Burkholder believes incremental fixes would cost nearly as much as a new bridge and would be far less effective.

“Instead of patching a leaky roof, it’s better to build a whole new house,” he says.

Burkholder is Metro’s representative on the CRC task force. Although Metro is but one of eight government entities that must approve the project, the agency’s vote next month on which option to pick is crucial because Metro is the conduit for federal transportation dollars.

Yet the gigantic project wasn’t much of an issue in the races for Metro—Burkholder was unopposed for re-election Tuesday to his third term on the Metro Council—and two of his colleagues faced only nominal opposition. And even in hotly contested primary races for mayor, City Council or even U.S. Senate, candidates (other than City Council hopeful Chris Smith, a critic) rarely mentioned the issue.

Despite his decades of work to end the primacy of the single-passenger auto on local roads, Burkholder is now advocating a mega-project to make it easier to commute between Clark County and Portland.

The $4.2 billion he wants to spend could buy a $21,000 Toyota Prius hybrid and a year’s worth of gas, four new $1,000 bikes, and an annual $1,260 C-Tran pass to Portland for each of Clark County’s 150,000 households.

Burkholder acknowledges his views have changed during three years on the CRC task force. Hearing Washingtonians’ pain led him to the epiphany that Clark County suburbs aren’t structured like Portland’s Irvington neighborhood where he leads a mostly carless existence.

“When we started, I said, ‘This [building a new bridge] is not my issue,’” Burkholder says. “But it’s been death by 1,000 cuts.”

The tectonic shift in Burkholder’s approach—from highway hater to bridge booster—is evidence of just how difficult it is for even the most committed environmentalists to choose between the way Americans live now and the wrenching sacrifices needed to combat global warming.

SHUT UP about the CRC! Of course he looked at the 12 lane option. He wouldn't be a good candidate if he didn't look at all the options. He is, however, in no way supporting that. The bridge does need to be rebuilt, and Rex will support a pragmatic, progressive solution. Bob Stacy doesn't even want to look at light rail! That being said, the CRC IS NOT EVEN A METRO ISSUE! It is decided by a coalition, and what you should really care about in a metro president is their experience in metro and the changes they will make here in the metro area.

CRC was,is, and will be a Metro issue. Rex played a significant role in the CRC process. His very public role in that process influenced the outcome. Rex's role in the CRC provides an insight into the type of Metro President he will be. I am not sure why these facts evoke such an emotional response.

Sure, the CRC is a issue relevant to Metro -- that's why Metro was asked to be part of the "Task Force" assembled to make recommendations to the two transportation agencies whose project this is. But that's also why the City of Portland, Multnomah County, the Overlook Neighborhood Association, and 34 other agencies or orgs were asked to participate -- the issue was relevant to them, too. I'll bet that Rex had plenty to say in the Task Force deliberations, but it's hard to believe big personalities like Sam Adams, Fred Hansen, and Royce Pollard (among many others on the Task Force) sat cowering in the corner, speaking only when spoken to.

It's a key distinction muddied by Willamette Week in the editorial partially quoted above: there's the "Task Force" that made recommendations about the CRC project; and then there's "the CRC," which is the bridge project run by Oregon and Washington's transporation agencies. They're not the same thing.

Rex, along with reps from 39 other agencies and organizations, was part of a "Task Force" whose recommendations were commissioned by ODOT and WSDOT. Once the Task Force delivered those recommendations, their work was done: ODOT and WSDOT took over and developed the CRC plan we all know and, uh, love today. Rex doesn't work for or represent ODOT and WSDOT (and therefore the CRC) any more than Sam and Multnomah County's Jeff Cogen (also members of the Task Force) do.

The whole 12-lane issue is perhaps the clearest indication that Task Force and CRC were/are two different things -- it's nowhere in the Task Force reccs (check them out here), but plays a starring role in ODOT/WSDOT's plan. What the Task Force did recommend lane-wise were 3 through lanes in each direction, and "auxiliary lanes, necessary for safety and functionality in the project area, and consistent with minimizing impacts." That ODOT and WSDOT took that leeway and larded on six "auxiliary" lanes was certainly an overreach -- but they own that, not the Task Force.

So while it's true that Rex "cheer-led" the reccs of the Task Force as the "killer apps" in the project (world-class bike and pedestrian facilities, light rail, and tolling to manage demand), he never cheered for 12 lanes -- that was wholly ODOT/WSDOT's pompom.

Now, if only I could never type "Task Force" again ...

Hmmmmmm. Why, exactly, did Rex lobby to keep "induced growth" effects out of the analysis? Why could that be? Is that the type of leadership we want in our major land use planning jurisdiction?

<hr/>

Oregonian 6/22/08

They did so, according to Metro's chief traffic forecaster, to be free of the complex forces driving growth as they designed the five bridge scenarios.

"Essentially that was a simplifying assumption to assess what the difference might be between the infrastructure changes," said Richard Walker, travel forecasting manager for Metro.

Metro Councilor Rex Burkholder, who represents North and Northeast Portland, defended the approach, saying it would allow a better comparison among the bridge alternatives.

"If you let land use change as part of that, then you're not going to be able to compare those alternatives on a fair basis," Burkholder said.

But simplifying assumptions are "exactly what modeling is not supposed to do," said Todd Litman, of the Victoria Transport Policy Institute in Canada, also cited in Columbia River Crossing's own environmental impact statement. "Modeling allows you to do more detailed, case-appropriate analysis."

Other experts agreed.

Not taking growth into account is "flat out wrong," said Reid Ewing, a research professor at the National Center for Smart Growth at the University of Maryland, also a recent guest speaker and adviser to Metro on global warming issues.

I voted for Rex to be my Metro Councilor, and now he seems to think he is entitled to be Metro Council President. He hasn't shown me that he has the skills for that job.

I get the impression that he is a "people person" not someone capable of making hard intellectual choices based on a combination of values and facts. That was probably fine back at BTA. It hasn't worked too well at Metro. Rex can spout off ideas like eliminating right turn on red, that don't stand a chance in the near term, thinking that will get bicyclists to come back to him, but his "Stockholm Syndrome" act on the Columbia River Crossing demonstrated that he can't be given a higher level of responsibility.

I have yet to see one area where Rex has more experience or a better, more environmental or more progressive position than his opponent. I have no problem with Rex's friends sticking with him, but I hope they clearly understand his opponents positions before claiming that Rex is better on the issues. I applaud Charlie for sticking with the facts in his endorsement. Some of the commenters haven't done so well regarding Rex's sad performance on the CRC.

Sounds like a solid candidate to like into, and "jim" only reinforces that perception!

<hr/>