The CRC: I've Got a Highway Expansion to Sell You

Evan Manvel

Wednesday’s Willamette Week has an article debunking several myths spread by proponents of the CRC highway mega-project. The article explains the project won’t solve congestion, it will be a huge financial risk because I-5 traffic levels have flat-lined, there are scads of higher safety priorities, and we have no clear plan to pay for the boondoggle.

Reporter Nigel Jaquiss leads the article by noting the determined opposition to the mega-project from Katie Eyre Brewer, a freshman Republican legislator from Hillsboro:

If anyone should love the idea, it’s… Eyre Brewer, a former leader of the local chamber of commerce… She won her House seat with big campaign checks from lobbying groups such as Associated Oregon Industries, the Oregon Business Association and Associated General Contractors.

Eyre Brewer, 45, is also a CPA for Harsch Investment Properties—the Schnitzer family real estate empire—and has plenty of experience analyzing complex financial deals.

Eyre Brewer is standing up to the project’s backers for a simple reason: She thinks the arguments for the Columbia River Crossing are flimsy, ill conceived and often untrue.

You should read the article. The punchline? "The state’s own records show [the mega-project] relies on faulty assumptions and won’t fix the traffic problem."

We know ODOT has a poor record of predicting costs, as its last three big projects are coming in at over twice their original cost estimates. And as I’ve previously written, mega-projects like the CRC almost always go significantly over budget (if the CRC is average, expect about a billion dollar overrun).

What’s perhaps more disturbing is Jaquiss' documentation of the pattern of falsehoods repeated by ODOT representatives. We’re paying the head of one Oregon’s largest agencies over $165,000 a year, and he's falling down on the job. Part of his work is to brief our state legislators, who rely on his information to decide whether to fund the most expensive project in the region’s history.

The statements from project backers aren’t complex facts that one could argue are true. They’re simply, pardon my language, bullshit. Anyone spending some research time can debunk them, such as the idea the area has the worst congestion in the I-5 corridor, or that this project is motivated by safety or seismic priorities. They’re often statements that are disproved by ODOT’s own databases and documents. And a quick internet search turns up a list of worse congestion on I-5 (plus, have you ever driven in Los Angeles or Seattle?).

The facts are clear: the CRC is a costly, risky, highway expansion mega-project, which happens to include a bridge. ODOT and their high-priced contractors have been peddling it as a bridge (which is less than half of the cost), and telling simple falsehoods about it to our representatives.

Hopefully our elected officials from Congress to the Governor’s office will start demanding a higher standard, just as Representative Eyre Brewer has. Because $4+ billion ain’t chicken feed, and our decisions today will have huge repercussions for generations to come.

Some other tidbits for those following the CRC:

• The Metro Council looks likely to sign off on the project next Thursday, June 9, even though the project cut out local neighborhood improvement funds, chose a sub-par pedestrian/cyclist facility design, and hasn’t resolved its financial plans, items Metro claimed were important sideboards when signaling initial approval.

• Economist Joe Cortright has found the project includes $60 million for three Vancouver parking garages. Reminder: the Sellwood Bridge funding shortfall? $22 million.

• Finally, a report released this week finds deferred road repair is “a financial time bomb.” It notes Oregon has been spending far less on repair and maintenance than most states (as a percentage of the state’s road budget), which means Oregon will not keep up with its road maintenance. Every $1 spent on maintenance saves $6 to $14 needed later to rebuild roads that have deteriorated, yet Oregon has been spending more money on road expansion than maintenance.

UPDATE: A Bicycle Transportation Alliance blog post explains how to send testimony to the Metro Council (or go to the hearing).

By Evan Manvel June 03, 2011