In a recent interview on The Lars Larson Show, John Ley shed light on the controversial Interstate Bridge replacement project. Ley, a candidate for the Washington House of Representatives, District 18, Position Two, criticized the project for its immense financial waste and lack of proper planning. Highlighting the federal government’s $1.5 billion contribution, Ley pointed out that the project still lacks a final design, Coast Guard approval, and an updated cost estimate. He also emphasized the unnecessary push for light rail, which is not favored by the majority of residents in Oregon and Washington. The discussion revealed that the cost of toll collection could consume up to 86% of the funds, making it an inefficient funding method. Ley’s insights underscored the urgent need for a more transparent and fiscally responsible approach to infrastructure projects in the Pacific Northwest.
Transcript
Lars Larson:
Welcome back to the Lars Larson Show. It’s a pleasure to be with you on a Tuesday. Glad to be taking your calls as well. It’s the Radio Northwest network serving the states of Oregon, Washington and Idaho. And while there’s a lot of national news to talk about, I do want to talk about some issues here in the northwest.
And I think few are bigger financially and otherwise than the plan, probably failed by this point, to replace the Interstate Bridge, which is one of the big choke points on Interstate 5, one of our major American interstate freeways that goes all the way from Canada to Mexico along the West coast. And one of its biggest problem spots is that old bridge that crosses the Columbia River.
John Ley is both a reporter, retired airline pilot, candidate for the Washington House of Representatives, District 18, Position Two, and a guy who’s followed this thing and is on this all day long. Hey, John. Welcome back.
John Ley:
Hi, Lars. Thanks so much for the opportunity to chat today. And you’re exactly right. We’re talking about the largest public works project in the Portland history. And it’s an unbelievable waste of taxpayer money.
Lars Larson:
And in fact, I mean, unless you consider Sound Transit in the Puget Sound area, this is one of the biggest public works projects anywhere in the Pacific Northwest, isn’t it?
John Ley:
Exactly right. And, on Friday, they announced the federal government’s giving $1.5 billion to the project, which brings the total up to $2.1 billion. And it’s a project without a final design. It doesn’t have a Coast Guard approval. They don’t have an environmental impact statement, and we don’t even know what the updated cost estimate is. It shows how poorly the federal government uses taxpayer money and oversees projects.
Lars Larson:
They just they’re throwing money around. And John, I want to say this just to get it on the record. My personal theory is the only reason they’re pushing this project right now. Well two reasons. One, they’re a bunch of people who want light rail, not the citizens of Washington and not the citizens of Oregon. But there are people in positions of power that want light rail.
But the second reason is this, John and you correct me if I’m wrong. They spent almost $200 million on the last failed attempt to replace that bridge. And part of the rules from the feds were, if you take that money and if you spend it and you don’t build the bridge unless you get the project going again by a certain time, which I think was September of last year, you have to pay that money back and no more money will be coming.
Am I correct in that?
John Ley:
You are correct. And there’s an asterisk in that every project that’s submitted to the federal government has a no build option. And you can simply choose the no build option and therefore avoid paying back the money. But now these people, these bureaucrats who special interest petitions want a light rail project. And that is the whole mathematical aspect of keeping Trimet alive and funneling money to keep them going.
And now if you look at the reality of this, they spent over $200 million a decade ago. They’ve already spent over $100 million now. And one estimate shows they have obligated up to another 200 million. If you’re looking at $300 to $400 million that would have paid for the bridge itself. Yep. This is an unbelievable waste of the people’s money.
Lars Larson:
And and by the way, they don’t know where they’re going to get the rest of the money. Even the people who, you know, the members of Congress who said, well, we’re going to get in Perez and Widen, you know, Perez from Washington, member of Congress, Widen. Senator from New York City. But he pretends to represent Oregon. They’ve said, we want to get this federal money and not have tolling because they know how very unpopular tolling is.
And yet, is there any other way to raise the as much as $9 billion that this thing is going to cost?
John Ley:
Absolutely not. Oregon’s broke transportation funding wise in Washington has so many other obligations and needs for their money, coupled with the reality that they’re about to lose at the ballot box. There are $2 billion worth of the Climate Commitment Act funding. And so the only place they logically can go is tolling in order to raise additional money. And of course, as you and I have talked about many times, over 80% of Portland area residents absolutely object to tolling, and there’s no need to do it.
If you eliminated the $2 billion light rail project, you’d cut the project cost down to around $4 billion, which is still way too much. But then you wouldn’t need tolling on it. You could use the $4.1 billion that’s already been allocated and build a project. And of course, what’s really needed is something simpler. You and I also talked about the fact that both states are building a bridge in Hood River for $520 million or billion dollars, not $520 million.
And that shows the huge waste of money on this. We don’t need to spend 15 times that much on a bridge that adds no capacity and provides no congestion relief.
Lars Larson:
Okay, you’ve nailed this down and I want you to back me up on this. So just follow me along, John, because you can find John’s reporting on Clark County Today. But if I want to collect a dollar in gasoline taxes, what is the cost of collecting that dollar?
John Ley:
About $0.01.
Lars Larson:
About one penny. Now, if I want to collect a dollar of tolling money, is the cost of collecting that dollar as much as $0.70, just to put it in the in the project.
John Ley:
Exactly right. It’s outrageous. And even in ODOT, the Oregon Department of Transportation, for their initial tolling study on I-205, they were saying 83 to 86% cost of collection.
Lars Larson:
So it me to get $0.14 in the budget for the bridge, you have to spend $0.86 to collect the $0.14 that actually goes into the bridge.
John Ley:
Yeah. And of course, that’s an anomaly. Generally speaking, you’re looking at a low of 20% cost of collection, up to a high of 68% in Washington state to collect those tolls. But you and I know no private business would use a credit card to charge them 20 to 68% in order to pay for anything.
Lars Larson:
So it’s.
John Ley:
Ridiculous.
Lars Larson:
You do you think do you think the end of the day kind of figure is probably right between 20 and 70, or is it toward one end or the other?
John Ley:
We truly don’t know. my guess is if you shot in the middle and said 35 to 40%, that’s probably where the bureaucrats will try to get this. But we don’t know. Oregon has zero experience collecting tolls. And WSDOT record is very spotty at best. You and I also talked about the fact that for five different occasions, the Washington legislature has had to bail out the Tacoma Narrows Bridge tolling project because people are in an outrage over the cost of the tolling there.
And so the Washington legislature has spent, $130 million instead of relying on tolling, all of which paints a picture of tolling, a very unreliable source of funding.
Lars Larson:
Well, and and not only that, John, but I’m a big believer. When Tina and I used to own a boat, we had a sailboat and we had a powerboat. At one point when we paid our boat fees, they all went to boating, you know, activities like boat ramps and pump outs and bathrooms and things like that. I mean, if you want to use a snow park permit in either state, you want those parking lots cleared in the wintertime.
The people who use them pay for it. And I think the people who use the bridge, which would include me, should pay for it. Can you imagine going to the state legislature and saying, we’d like people in Spokane and Republic Washington, and we’d like people in, in Ashland, and we’d like people in Klamath Falls to pay for a bridge that they literally never drive across.
John Ley:
Yeah, it’s ridiculous on so many areas and a different aspect of this whole project. You and I talked about a few weeks ago was that 54% of the bridge space is dedicated to transit, pedestrians and bikes. Only 46% goes to cars and our freight haulers and they want the cars and the freight haulers to pay for all that free space that the transit, pedestrians and bikes are going to use.
And that means increased tolling so that bikes, pedestrians and transit can cross for free. That’s an absolute outrage.
Lars Larson:
Unbelievable. That’s Jon Ley. You can find his reporting at Clark County Today. Coming up …
