The Clark County Council has expressed its support for proposed state legislation that would authorize up to $1.6 billion in bonds to fund the construction of a new Interstate 5 bridge.
During a council meeting on Wednesday, Feb. 26, Jordan Boege, a senior policy analyst for Clark County, presented information on Senate Bill 5734 and House Bill 1958. These bills would authorize the issuance of bonds to finance the bridge’s design, right-of-way acquisition and construction.
The legislation permits the sale of $1.6 billion in general obligation bonds, a long-anticipated funding source for the bridge replacement. The bonds would be repaid through toll proceeds, gas taxes and vehicle fees. As a last resort, Washington’s general fund could be used as a financial backstop.
Councilor Matt Little highlighted the bipartisan nature of the effort.
“I think it’s impressive that it’s being supported or sponsored by folks on both sides of the aisle,” he stated.
Councilor Glen Yung acknowledged the financial challenge but emphasized the necessity of securing funding.
“We gotta pay for it somehow,” he remarked.
The I-5 Bridge Replacement Program, launched in 2019, aims to modernize the aging bridge connecting Vancouver and Portland. The northbound span is more than a century old, while the southbound span has been in service for over 65 years. The project is designed to improve traffic flow, reduce accidents, enhance earthquake resilience and expand public transit options.
With construction anticipated to begin in 2026, the project’s estimated cost ranges from $5 billion to $7.5 billion. Thus far, $4.3 billion has been secured through state and federal grants, leaving an estimated $1.2 billion to $1.6 billion to be covered by toll revenue.
Council debates C-Tran’s role in light rail Ffunding
While the council voiced support for the bridge funding bills, discussions shifted to C-Tran’s potential financial role in light rail funding.
The debate originates from a November 2024 decision in which the C-Tran board voted to revise its official stance on light rail funding. Previously, C-Tran had prohibited the use of its funding for light rail operation and maintenance. However, in November, the board amended its policy, replacing “won’t” with “may,” among other policy alterations, signaling the possibility of financial contributions toward light rail expenses.
Concerns arose following a Dec. 10 presentation that detailed the anticipated costs of operating light rail as part of the Interstate Bridge Replacement (IBR) Project. According to estimates, light rail operations and maintenance costs in fiscal year 2023 dollars, factoring in an average inflation rate of 4.5%, would be roughly $21.8 million annually. Operations and maintenance would cost $20,238,570 alone.
Michelle Belkot, Clark County’s representative on the C-Tran Board of Directors, votes according to the county’s stance. With newly elected councilors Wil Fuentes and Matt Little joining the council, Council Chair Sue Marshall sought consensus regarding the revised language.
Vancouver Mayor Anne McEnerny-Ogle, who was present at the meeting, provided background on the issue. She noted that while the funding plan remains uncertain, she expects C-Tran to share the over $20 million cost with Oregon transit agencies. Additionally, if C-Tran were to pursue a tax increase, voter approval from Clark County residents would be required. She emphasized that this is only one of several funding options under consideration and that additional state funding sources are being explored.
“The wording right now, ‘may,’ does not mean ‘will,’” McEnerny-Ogle clarified.
Amid the discussion, confusion arose over whether the language change had already been approved or was still under consideration. Belkot believed it was still being debated, while McEnerny-Ogle clarified that the C-Tran board had officially adopted the change in November. However, she noted that due to new financial concerns, the board decided in January to revisit the decision, with a discussion set for March 11.
Councilors voiced concerns about the financial burden light rail could impose on taxpayers and future C-Tran services. Glen Yung underscored the financial strain that could arise.
“The alarm bells went off,” Yung said. “My biggest concern (is that) light rail is very expensive … We’re talking $20 million for just three stations. If I remember correctly, the entire C-Tran budget is around $90 million, so that would take up about a quarter of their entire budget.”
Additionally, he questioned whether C-Tran’s involvement in light rail funding discussions might limit its ability to expand transit services elsewhere in Clark County.
Council Chair Sue Marshall echoed Yung’s concerns, emphasizing that as North Clark County continues to grow, expanded C-Tran services will be essential to meet increasing demand. Ultimately, the council signaled support for maintaining the current permissive language regarding C-Tran’s role but expressed concerns about the long-term financial implications for the agency and Clark County taxpayers. Further deliberation is expected at the March 11 meeting.
Regardless of the potential for tax funding, C-Tran’s engagement in the IBR Project is expected to continue. McEnerny-Ogle emphasized that without C-Tran’s expertise, a new transit consultant would need to be hired to guide discussions. She stressed that C-Tran’s participation is crucial to ensuring Clark County’s interests are represented and that transit knowledge is effectively applied.
“It is absolutely essential that C-Tran participate, be at the table and work,” McEnerny-Ogle said.
