By now, the opposition surely has been heard in Oregon; multiple entities in Southwest Washington have raised pointed questions and valid concerns about plans for tolls along Interstate 5 and Interstate 205.
The Portland Metro Area Value Pricing Advisory Committee would be wise to heed those concerns rather than promulgating an unnecessary political battle between the states. Instead of trying to reach into the pockets of Southwest Washington residents to pay for highway projects in Portland, Oregon officials should focus upon mutually beneficial projects.
Last year, the Oregon Legislature passed a bill calling for a committee to consider tolls along I-5 and I-205 in an effort to alleviate congestion. The committee’s final meeting is scheduled for June 25, with recommendations to follow. Tolls along the interstates will require approval from the federal government.
Undoubtedly, relief is needed. Portland congestion has reached a level that is unsustainable and is harmful to the economy, slowing commutes and commerce while creating frustrated motorists. The problem, as we have stated previously, is that tolls up to the state line will unfairly target Washington drivers. An estimated 70,000 Clark County residents work in Oregon, meaning that a majority of drivers who cross the interstate bridges live in Washington.
If tolls are directed toward a replacement for the I-5 Bridge or a third bridge across the Columbia River, Washington drivers will reap clear benefits. Similarly, improvements to Interstate 5 through the Rose Quarter area would benefit local residents who travel to Portland. But if tolls are used for projects south of the city’s core, Clark County residents would receive few gains in exchange for their money.
We hope that any tolls are designed to benefit the people who are paying them, yet we remain skeptical. If Oregon lawmakers truly were concerned about reducing congestion in the metro area, they would have called for tolls along U.S. Route 26 and Oregon Route 217 to the west of Portland. Instead, they have focused upon freeways frequented by drivers from Washington — many of whom already pay income taxes and gas taxes in Oregon yet have no representation in the Legislature.
At a recent meeting, advisory committee co-chair Sean O’Hollaren said the committee has the power to consider tolls upon other highways, adding, “it’s something that we may need to do.” Indeed. If the final proposal targets only areas frequented by Washington residents and not the west side of Portland, Clark County residents will have their suspicions confirmed.
Those residents have noticed the discrepancy in Oregon’s approach to tolls. Congresswoman Jaime Herrera Beutler, R-Battle Ground, has been an outspoken critic of the plan, while the Southwest Washington Regional Transportation Council and the Vancouver City Council have raised questions about it. Most recently, C-Tran officials expressed concerns about how tolls would be applied to buses running between Vancouver and Portland.
Many questions remain about Oregon’s plans to toll Interstate 5 and Interstate 205, and we are willing to keep an open mind until a plan is finalized. Until then, we reiterate the need for the states to work together on improving transportation across the Columbia.
Washington’s rejection of the Columbia River Crossing proposal in 2013 created unnecessary enmity between the states. We understand that. But we hope that Oregon does not add to the discord with an inequitable tolling plan.
