91ÊÓƵ

Oregon state Rep. Vicki Berger, R-Salem, vice chair of the House Revenue Committee, thinks there definitely needs to be a new bridge across Interstate 5 connecting Portland and Vancouver.

“The need is not going to go away,” Berger said. “That, we can guarantee.”

But state Sen. Betsy Johnson, D-Scappoose, who co-chairs the powerful Joint Ways and Means Committee as well as its subcommittee on transportation and economic development, isn’t as convinced.

The difference of opinions over whether a new bridge between Portland and Vancouver should be built isn’t limited to Berger and Johnson. Oregon legislators and state officials in general are divided on whether or not to revive the $2.8 billion Columbia River Crossing project.

Meanwhile, little more than a month remains before a deadline that could evaporate state and federal funds entirely for any such project.

Although Oregon legislators were willing to pony up their state’s share of money for the bridge, the project was considered clinically dead when the Washington State Senate failed to approve its state’s $450 million share for construction.

Still, some CRC supporters believe Oregon shouldn’t abandon the project. Reviving it, though, depends on Oregon going it alone with state and federal dollars. Oregon legislators built in a Sept. 30 deadline for obtaining federal funds before their commitment to state funds expires.

That is a tight deadline, said Johnson, and she is not optimistic about reaching it — especially with too many questions about the size, scope and financing of a revived project left unanswered.

“Until basic questions are answered, and the treasurer signs off on the bond, we’re not going to go ahead with an Oregon-only project,” said Johnson.

State Treasurer Ted Wheeler has already expressed his own skepticism, sending a letter to Gov. John Kitzhaber’s CRC adviser, saying “significant financial” questions needed to be answered before he can certify that the project is economically viable.

“Commerce is vital to Oregon’s economic future, and I support the vision of an improved crossing over the Columbia River, but it has to be done right,” wrote Wheeler in an email to the Daily Journal of Commerce.

“Oregon taxpayers expect and deserve a thorough analysis to ensure the math adds up,” he said.

Johnson said that is a big math assignment to complete in a month.

“It appears to me that no one is going to be able to provide that investment-grade analysis,” she said. “I have an enormous number of questions, and Wheeler caught many of them.”

Nonetheless, Berger said the idea of an Oregon-only project is worth discussing. It could have distinct advantages, she said.

“Oregon wouldn’t have to share the cost, but Oregon wouldn’t have to share the tolls,” Berger said. “Still, we’d have to look at the numbers in a serious way. A lot depends on federal funding.”

Millions of dollars have already been spent on the project just to abandon it now, she added.

“We’ve spent the preliminary money,” Berger said. “We know the answers to the basic questions on the cost. If this project is going to go forward, is there a way Oregon can do it without Washington? I think that’s a legitimate question.”

Jonah Cohen, a principal at THA Architecture in Portland, said he shudders at the thought of reviving the CRC as originally drafted.

Cohen first got involved with CRC discussions during his tenure as president of the Architectural Foundation of Oregon.

“We were opposed to the project going forward in the state it was in,” Cohen said.

“We felt that there were a lot of creative development opportunities missed on both sides of the river as well as a missed opportunity to create something symbolically significant for the crossing of the greatest Western river,” he said.

Cohen said the CRC was poorly conceived when it was first proposed in 2005, and it has not improved with age.

Growing up in the shadow of the Brooklyn Bridge, Cohen said he learned something about bridge architecture. Oregon officials could learn a lot from John Augustus Roebling’s 130-year-old bridge, he added.

“The Brooklyn Bridge is both highly functional and highly iconic,” said Cohen. “You don’t have to sacrifice one of those elements. You can have both.”

Berger admits the Columbia River Crossing project that was originally proposed may not be the best solution, but she thinks there at least needs to be some discussion about the matter.

“Is there’s a better, more cogent way to do this than the CRC?” said Berger. “I don’t know. I’m not a bridge expert. I know there are conversations about next steps. I think there should be a conversation about next steps.”