U.S. Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, D-Skamania, hopes the Interstate 5 bridge replacement is built to reflect the people who use the river crossing every day.
The Third Congressional District representative and U.S. Rep. Rick Larsen, D-Everett, held a roundtable at the Interstate Bridge Replacement Program’s (IBR) downtown Vancouver office — with a view of the bridge — to discuss local priorities and the recently released draft supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS). Larsen, the ranking member of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, has been advocating for using federal tax dollars on building infrastructure that lasts, Gluesenkamp Perez said after the roundtable discussion.
The roundtable included roughly three dozen stakeholders that included labor union representatives; bridge users and commuters; representatives of commercial, barge and public transportation; state lawmakers; and city, small business and trades leaders, a press release by Gluesenkamp Perez’s office stated.
“I saw that, as a small business owner, like I would never have been invited to this room as a woman running a six-bay auto shop, but I’m sure as hell impacted by it,” Gluesenkamp Perez said regarding the roundtable. “And that’s my interest here … ensuring that the bridge is built for the people who live here, not to meet any kind of outside influence values.”
Larsen said that the IBR program is the largest project in Washington funded by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
“We are in the third year of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the BIL, and it was signed in November ’21, and we have to reauthorize the roads, bridges, highways, transit, rail bit of that law by Sept. 30 of 2026,” Larsen said. “And understanding that dollars are getting obligated for projects, that those projects are getting started, getting built in some cases, is critical to doing it again. Doing one version of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law is not going to be enough to catch up with the lack of investment the country has subjected itself to.”
Currently, replacement designs for the I-5 bridge call for three travel lanes in each direction. Larsen believes newly designed lanes will increase travel capacity.
Gluesenkamp Perez, on the other hand, would like to see the bridge her constituents use to be built for their needs, not built with outside influence.
“People where I live do not have the option to take light rail, and I think one of the things I really wanted to hear today was how the comments and public input is weighted to reflect the full population of the district and not just reflecting who has time to follow this issue, find the right link and make a comment,” she said, highlighting the importance of public comment.
She said she wants to ensure Congress is accountable for considering and weighing public comment in its final decision “because if you don’t weigh input to reflect the demographics of your community, it is inherently biased.”
Gluesenkamp Perez released a statement on Sept. 20 stating that the bridge design must prioritize increasing vehicular capacity and to make the best use of the significant existing resources secured from federal and state funding. She has helped bring in nearly $2.1 billion to replace the Interstate 5 Bridge.
Despite Gluesenkamp Perez bringing in close to $2.1 billion toward the project, tolling is still being proposed.
“I think it’s important that we are considering how to have equity in tolling, how to reduce tolling, how to eliminate tolling,” she said. “The tolling proposals raise significant concerns for me because whether or not you were informed of the public comment period, you’re going to pay. You’re going to be impacted by this.”
While at a roundtable discussion in Cougar two weekends ago, Gluesenkamp Perez said she spoke to a man who said the tolling for the north span of the bridge built in 1958 was a total of 25 cents, which adjusted for inflation now would be $2.94, she said.
“That got me thinking about it,” she said. “People are really squeezed. My friends are really squeezed right now, and this is why it is so important that we have public [comment]. I think it’s important that the federal government stays in its lane, and I am not a dictator. I’m an advocate to make sure that a representative sample of my community is reflected in the bridge design and proposed funding with tolls.”
Gluesenkamp Perez encouraged her constituents to participate in the 60-day public comment period that began following the release of the SEIS. Public comment will help inform technical analysis and design options. The public comment period ends Nov. 18.
Larsen also encouraged Gluesenkamp Perez to send a letter to program officials calling for an extension to the public comment period.
To provide comments and to learn more about the bridge project, visit interstatebridge.org/updates-folder/supplemental-environmental-impact-statement.
