Part 2: No Oregonians on Columbia River Task Force

Carla Axtman

A few days ago I blogged about the fact that the Governor had appointed no Oregonians to the Columbia River Crossing Task Force, which seemed inexplicable at the time. After a few elapsed days since that post, I wish I could say the skies have cleared and it all makes sense.

This even after spending time talking it over with Kulongoski spokesperson Anna Richter-Taylor, who did her best to make me see their side. "This is a panel brought in for a review of the work to date," Richter-Taylor said. "It's not about decision making yet to be done." She went on to say that the Task Force will be looking in to concerns raised having to do with the modeling used for the project as well as transparency. She said that 300 names were pulled together before whittling down to the eight who will do the job--and if folks take time to look at their bios and expertise, they'll understand why they were chosen. Further, all meetings will be public and will solicit information and input from Oregonians and Washingtonians.

At least one reporter has already taken Richter-Taylor's suggestion to dig into the Task Force members. Sarah Mirk at the Portland Mercury discovered some unsettling information on the chair, Tom Warne.

Blogtown:

For the past nine years, Warne has traveled around the country chairing expert review panels like this one but for projects like the San Francisco Oakland Bay Bridge, the Hood Canal Floating Bridge and Seattle's 520 Floating Bridge.

But before that, at the Utah Department or Transportation, he got the ball rolling on two big freeway projects: the I-15 and the Legacy Freeway. Warne brags on his website that as chief in Utah, he was "responsible for the $1.59 billion I-15 Reconstruction Project which has become the benchmark for >large highway construction projects."

In some Oregonians' opinions, that project was the benchmark for how NOT to plan a freeway. In a case called Davis v. Mineta, the I-15 freeway project wound up getting slapped by a judge for having a flawed environmental assessment: the freeway planners had not looked at enough alternatives to their freeway plan, said the judge. That's exactly the criticism local officials have of the CRC. Freeway planners were set on building the big bridge and refused to seriously evaluate smaller, more sustainable alternatives.

While I understand that the task force isn't going to make decisions, it's disconcerting that someone involved in such a sloppy project is now going to be the chair of the group scrutinizing ours.

This is a project that should reflect the values of Oregonians. A giant cement slab that appears to have enriched the pockets of a bunch of consultants seems far from those values. The CRC Task Force is in a quandry, too. If it rubber stamps the bridge and process as is with no substantive objections, skeptics won't take it seriously without at least one reputable Oregonian and the Governor will have wasted $750k (the budget for the Task Force) trying to convince us everything is hunky dory. If they find problems, then what? All these folks bug out and none of them actually has to live with the consequences.

By Carla Axtman April 17, 2010