The Oregon Transportation Commission has given the I-5 Rose Quarter project a lifeline. The five member, governor-appointed body faced a stark decision at their meeting this morning: proceed with the project, or pause and reassess. They chose to approve funding for a project while warning that there’s no more funding for the project.
Because of a series of significant setbacks around funding, lawsuits, and a staffing exodus in recent weeks, the Oregon Department of Transportation came to the OTC to make sure it was prudent for them to continue. A package of preliminary construction projects estimated to cost $75 million (of which $30 million comes from a federal grant already in the books) known as Phase 1A (see below) has been set to break ground on August 25th. But given the dire funding picture sharpened at the end of June when lawmakers failed to pass funding for the project, it became unclear if that groundbreaking should move forward.
While OTC commissioners expressed grave concerns about the funding picture for this $2 billion megaproject that aims to expand I-5 between I-405 and I-84, build caps over the freeway and invest in surface street safety improvements — they all voted to proceed.
The meeting began with a slew of public commenters that encouraged OTC to pause the project. The mood in the room swung when community and advocacy leaders that represent the Black community came up to the mic — all of whom strongly favored moving forward with the project in the name of economic development for the people who had their homes destroyed when I-5 was initially built.
“We have the opportunity to marry restorative justice wit restorative economics and restorative development. So we would ask that we look at this moment to begin to put shovels into the ground,” said James Posey, the leader of Portland Chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP).
Nate McCoy, executive director of National Association of Minority Contractors added that, “ODOT is in a place to really bring forward some opportunities in gentrified communities in northeast Portland by building I-5… Please, please, please, help us bring this project across the finish line.”
And arguably the most influential voice throughout debates around this project, Albina Vision Trust Director of Government Affairs JT Flowers, said, “I did not come here today to litigate with White environmentalists who have absolutely no connection to our people, our pain, or our collective struggle for progress… the reconnection of a community can and will not happen if we continue kicking the can down the road.” Flowers’ comment came after several advocates spoke in opposition to the project and recommended a pause.
Flowers’ powerful speech illustrated an important element in the debate around the project: The main organized opposition to the project (anti-freeway advocates and environmental justice nonprofit leaders) is almost all White. The most important supporting voice (Albina Vision Trust, racial justice and Albina community leaders, construction company owners, etc.) is almost all Black.
Prior to the vote, OTC Commissioner Lee Beyer asked ODOT Deputy Director of Finance Travis Brouwer what would happen after the OTC approves Phase 1A. ODOT would have $137.5 million in the bank to spend on the project after Phase 1A. Brouwer replied to Beyer that, “We have not gotten to the point where we can tell you what we could do with $137 million in terms of construction, or whether there are viable options for moving forward.”
There would need to be a design and re-scoping process to figure out what parts of the $2 billion project could be built with $137.5 million. At that point in the meeting, ODOT Urban Mobility Office Director Tiffani Penson interjected to clarify that, “$137 million is not enough money to start building the [I-5 freeway] cap… It’s to improve some safety things like ramps and some things like that that need to happen, but we will definitely need more money to start Phase 1.”
Phase 1A is a preliminary package of work that will make stormwater improvements (required by an EPA harbor settlement), and bridge preservation and seismic resiliency work near the I-5 and I-405 interchange, and signage for the highway cover safety and construction. The contractor who won the bid for the Phase 1A work has already hired workers and is ready to go. ODOT listed that contract as one of the risks of not moving forward.
Toward the end of the conversation, Deputy Director of I-5 Rose Quarter Project Monica Blanchard shared a powerful comment about what she feels is at stake with the decision:
“The cost of not [moving forward is that we] will be sued for being out of compliance for our harbor agreement. Will be sued by all the contractors that have incurred $4 million in bonds and hired all these people that could have been working on other jobs, that have been standing by waiting for this to happen because it’s supposed to go to construction in a couple weeks… There’s a cost to trust, and this is a cost that we’re passing on to every future project. So if we reneg on Phase 1A, how much does that really cost us? I don’t think we can even calculate that. So it’s not a it’s not a feasible option.”
Loud claps erupted in the room after Blanchard’s comment.
In the end, the OTC voted 5-0 to continue with the project and they once again chose to the can down the road when it comes to the larger — still unanswered — questions about how or if the project will ever find funding necessary for completion.
“I really feel strongly that we need to to move forward with Phase 1A,” said OTC Chair Julie Brown. “With that said, everyone in this room needs to understand that beyond that, there is no money… We are not saying that we are going to move forward with a complete Rose Quarter.”
Thanks for reading.
BikePortland has served this community with independent community journalism since 2005. We rely on subscriptions from readers like you to survive. Your financial support is vital in keeping this valuable resource alive and well.
Please subscribe today to strengthen and expand our work.
Why are we giving them money if they can’t even articulate what they’ll do with it? Also why would we give them approval to proceed with entering into construction contracts if the money to complete those contracts isn’t secured in the first place?
ODOT did it again they’ve tied the legislature to funding this project this time without even putting shovels in the ground.
I work with many people in my community in NC, not all of them Quakers, who sincerely believe that if you pray hard enough, and your cause is just, that the good lord shall provide, that good things come to those that wait. For most projects they are still waiting.
Or as the verbal pedestrian signal says at Glenwood and West Gate City:
“Wait…”
“Wait…”
“Wait…”
When I was in planning school over 20 years ago, our transportation professor explained that everything in transportation takes a very long time to do, especially anything expensive, and one had to have a 20-30 year horizon and waiting capacity for anything to happen. Generally a $137 million “down payment” on any project will eventually yield most of the money needed, possibly without too much delay, but at a cost of massively delaying some other even more expensive project. And since there’s only one other competing project, ODOT has essentially admitted that the new Columbia Bridge will be delayed at least until Trump leaves office.
You’ve encapsulated well why I lump Progressives together with Evangelicals when it comes to wishful thinking.
If only there were some moderate, middle-of-the-road, measured response we can rely upon for thoughtful and well-informed reflection.
About 54% of progressives identify as democrats. https://news.gallup.com/poll/467888/democrats-identification-liberal-new-high.aspx
About 30% of evangelicals identify as Republicans. https://prri.org/spotlight/prri-2022-american-values-atlas-religious-affiliation-updates-and-trends/
Maybe not down the dotted line of the road, but pretty dang close to the middle.
Judging from his name and pattern of comments, I assume MOTRG identifies as moderate. Is labeling all progressives as “wishful-thinkers” any different from labeling all conservatives as “knuckle draggers”?
The point here is that there is no content behind his broad, empty comments. They are simply a means to identify yourself ideologically (i.e., a dog whistle) without providing any actual substance or effective policy. They are a means to pretend simplistic, intolerant views are moderate, when in reality simplistic, intolerant views are radical, regardless of your political leanings.
Intolerant views, as consistently exemplified by MOTRG, may be more common since authoritarianism is now a common end point to many belief systems in the US. But that doesn’t make his views anywhere close to moderate.
I always thought MOTRG was the sort of driver or cyclist who drives down the middle the center double-yellow lines and residential streets, you know, a total asshole.
Isn’t the general position of progressives that they wish the world was a different way and are willing to move toward that aggressively, and conservatism appreciates a slower more simple pace of change or maintenance of the status quo? Maybe they can be used as pejoratives of stereotypes, but only because they’re actually, at least partially, true.
Regardless, its pretty wild to consider random one liners intolerant radical dog whistles in what sounds like a post suggesting you’d prefer to not have them here, which isn’t particularly tolerant of different viewpoints.
Well you got me there…because I do consider most modern conservatives as intolerant knuckle draggers (as compared to classic conservatives). The point is, neither extreme views itself as extreme. As I am often told by progressives, “tolerance doesn’t mean tolerating extreme views” – I assume that goes both ways.
And please research the concept of “satire” if you are looking for a theme.
“Why are we giving them money if they can’t even articulate what they’ll do with it?”
Because that is what the Governor and senior Democrat politicians want to do with the money. It’s that easy.
For reasons you don’t seem comfortable facing, the party you’ve ardently supported is funneling money to a small group of contractors and doesn’t care about the massive environmental damage it is doing to the area. Sorry, to break this to you, but that is what is happening.
What a weird response. You don’t know anything about who I’m supporting and how ardently I might be doing it. Did you want to try again without making assumptions about me?
Bad attempt at misdirection and blame throwing. I much prefer your fuller response below. Oh, were my assumptions correct? I’m assuming you’ve voted and proudly supported blue for awhile. Nothing wrong with that of course.
I guess but that’s a weird way to describe it since the other party supports this stuff even more.
Do they? Why do you say that? I would think funding for it would have sailed through if that’s true.
I don’t think the R’s support it as they see it as a money give away to the unionized workers who will get the majority of the contracts.
I honestly don’t think this or the IBR have anything at all to do with transportation. It’s all about steering money to one’s political cronies. The R’s don’t want the money going to the unions as it will just come back as donations to the D’s.
I’m sure the R’s want roads built, just outside the metro/I5 corridor so their cronies can get the contracts and funnel donation money to them.
I believe they are generally in favor of increasing freeway capacity anywhere that seems like it needs it. Their political strategy is to oppose anything that Democrats support. But put Republicans back in power, and I do strongly believe they will expand freeways more than Democrats ever would.
“I would think funding for it would have sailed through if that’s true.”
Wrong.
Republicans have a current strategy of obstruction for the sake of obstruction. Make everything worse, make nothing go smoothly or sail through. Because they can’t really get their way on anything they disagree with Democrats on, they don’t want to give them any wins. It’s the same nationally.
“the other party supports this stuff even more.”
Why do you think Republicans support these megaprojects? I’m not sure they actually want to spend a king’s ransom on highways in Portland.
“For reasons you don’t seem comfortable facing,”
You often say things like this, but I think you are attacking a strawman here. I at least, and my impression is many / most commenters here are well aware that the governor and many other Democrats are part of the problem. Kotek needs to go IMO.
The question of course is what is the alternative? Any random Republican would be unquestionably worse by all metrics. We’re as usual, trapped by our two party system. We end up with one or two Democrats on a ballot with nothing special to make them stand out vs some raving Republican lunatic.
I don’t know how to fix it. Maybe we need to be more proactive with the recall efforts.
You’re the first one to say that Kotek needs to go and I agree with you. As to what to do about who comes next I agree that I don’t know how to fix it either. An initiative to ban donations over a certain amount? Unions and corporations can’t donate, only people? It’s a big problem and it’s taken decades to get where it is now.
I just think acknowledging the problem is an important step since the problem can’t be fixed if people are unwilling to see that it is a problem.
I’m not attacking a straw man, I’m attacking the unwillingness to see things as they are which most people here refuse to do.
As we’ve talked about before, one of the solutions is for the DSA to form its own party and offer an alternative. They don’t represent my political beliefs, but they have a strong base and the two party system has to end as it only gives us bad (and as you said perhaps no actual choice) choices.
Recalls are another good idea and take awhile, but they could help keep the more unfortunate choices from the R side sidelined while still imposing some fear in the D’s to do more of the right thing.
It takes a long time to scope out $137 million in AEC (architecture, engineering, and construction). If that money is set aside for e.g., safety improvements, they need to figure out what portion of those tasks they extract from the $2 billion scope in a way that maximizes the impact.
When the funding of a large project like this changes, it’s perfectly normal to take time and rescope to the new budget. It comes up in my day job a several times a year.
Yep.
Not that it is surprising, but it is hilariously reflective on the state of politics in Portland when someone such as Flowers can say such a racist statement and then be followed with a unanimous decision in his favor. Discounting opponents because of their skin color. Someone remind me what year it is? They must have such a strong case for why the state should commit money that it does not have that their strongest arguments are that you are racist if you oppose the project or that it is going to be more expensive to not build the project than to build a multibillion dollar freeway expansion.
What an incredibly disappointing comment – as though standing up for the environment and standing up for people of color are mutually exclusive.
They are trying to shut down all honest debate on a very disruptive wasteful cash grab project and should be called out for it.
great comment, Grant S! I disagree with JM’s assertion that Flower’s speech was powerful- it was just manipulative. Earlier in the project their was an advisory committee of people representing Portland’s Black communities. They were all fired and replaced with people who stand to get paid if the project proceeds. I think Flowers is creating or at least emphasizing racial division to silence critics and make sure he continues to get paid
Earlier events well reported here and here. It’s certainly easier to advance your interests if you purge any dissent.
Flowers also erased/ characterized non-white people and organizations who testified in favor of pausing the project as white with this statement. Pretty disgusting behavior on his part.
ODOT has perfected the art of holding a gun to their heads. The state legislature, Kotek’s OTC, and Metro gladly fall for it every time.
ODOT does what it’s told, just like the Governor’s Transportation Committee does what the Governor wants. I don’t understand why this is such a hard concept. ODOT is not a rogue agency. If you don’t like that, I get it and I agree with you that the Committee made a horrible and destructive decision. However, at least blame the right people.
ODOT leadership clearly have their own interests. Many of those interests are aligned with the state’s interests, some of them are not. ODOT, like any agency dependent on federal or state revenue has to master the ability to manipulate their funders. If you re-read my comment, you may notice that it is making the case that the blame lies with both sides of this dysfunctional relationship.
Am I reading it right that, concerned about being sued over $4 million, they approved spending $75 million on a project they have no real path to completing?
The cost to trust? Seriously?
You already burned all those bridges when you claimed this $2+ billion project would cost $500 million.
If you want to build trust, be honest about costs. Make hard decisions. Don’t blow tens of millions more dollars on a project that you have no path to completing.
Moving forward is just laying the groundwork for larger broken promises in the future.
Oh, well we have a tirfecta of “restoratives”! How can this go wrong since it’s so well-intentioned?
How much will that ‘trust cost’ be worth when the freeway gets widened but no caps are ever built?
I came here to say the same thing. This project is going lurch back and forth for the next 20 years, and those caps will never be built. ODOT may get their freeway widening, but that’s it – surrounding street improvements and all other sweeteners will be cut.
I fear this is the most likely outcome, but all the people making the impassioned arguments in favor of going forward will already have been paid off, so there’s no downside in their view.
Well, I see where the tolerance for racist drivel comes from if this is the kind of thing people are used to listening to…
“I did not come here today to litigate with White environmentalists who have absolutely no connection to our people, our pain, or our collective struggle for progress… the reconnection of a community can and will not happen if we continue kicking the can down the road.”
There is no way that the caps are going on over I5 and therefore there is nothing to geographically reconnect or restore. They don’t even care to disguise the money transfer/giveaway to the higher ups in the Albina movement as anything altruistic anymore.
At this point it would probably be wiser and much less environmentally destructive to just pay off the 4 million in costs the contractors have incurred and call it a day, but the Governor won’t.
It is ridiculous that the Governor and Democratic Supermajority legislature (because they want this, it’s their call and ODOT is doing their bidding) are going to cause so much environmental havoc now and in decades to come with the widening project (it’s pretty apparent now that it is going to happen regardless of where or when the money comes from).
I would sarcastically say “Thanks for voting local blue blindly and assisting to bring this about”, but it is too horrible for sarcasm. This is corruption and pay offs on full display and from the comments I’ve seen so far blaming ODOT alone I’m guessing there isn’t going to be much introspection.
On the plus side, it highlights how white progressives are viewed by many in the BIPOC community. Out of touch and high on the fumes of white savior syndrome.
But we’re 50 years after the fact at this point. That community is not going to be “rebuilt”.
I was with you til your last paragraph. “Voting blue blindly” is our only choice in Oregon until the Repub party gets its act together and throws out the loony birds.
I agree that Dem leaders have disappointed their voters repeatedly, but can you imagine how much worse it would be if Trumpers were in charge? Probably you can’t but look to DC and you’ll get some idea.
I’m not trying to get you to vote for the Repubs. Im saying this is what the majority here have voted for. It’s time to own up to what you have been voting for and quit acting surprised when the Governor/legislature does whatever it wants which has been getting increasingly removed from what their propaganda says they will do.
Do you really think the Governor was at ODOT making them lie to the legislature in 2017 about the cost of the project and effectiveness of the caps? Was the Governor there a couple years later when they said whoopsie we forgot about inflation and found all these additional hurdles so it’s going to cost twice as much? Did the legislature tell them to hide their plans to make it wider than it needs to be? How about when ODOT said it’ll reduce congestion on their website but then go to say at hearings that it will only increase throughput? What about when they said the extra wide unnecessary shoulders could be used as bus lanes without discussing it with Trimet or CTRAN?
The idea that ODOT is completely exempt from these terrible decisions and is just following orders is absolutely absurd. This project started under a different governor and ODOT employees have plenty of incentive to push this project through regardless of who’s in elected office. Fact of the matter is ODOT has misrepresented this project to the legislature numerous times. Now I will say I blame the Governor and legislature for not holding them to account for those lies but the idea that we should have just voted in another party and we’d get better results is absurd. The GOP is a joke and would make this debacle even worse… somehow.
Gosh, if ODOT is so sneaky and been caught so many times at lying, I’m sure you’d be able to cite all the Directors and project managers that have been fired. Or has there been?
How long has Kotek been in power in Oregon? Longer than her time in the Governor’s desk.
How did the first bridge/freeway expansion under Kulongaski end up? Shuttered due to corruption and conflict of interest?
Not really sure why people keep dragging the R’s into this. This is Blue money politics all the way.
It’s like you didn’t even bother reading what I wrote. I already said I blame them for not holding ODOT responsible for their lies. I love how you double down on this idea that Kotek is some kind of mastermind behind the scenes at ODOT for almost a decade forcing them to do all these negligent things. I have no idea why you think ODOT should get some sort of pass here but I know from experience that it’s in the interest of professional engineers to complete these types of projects so they have every incentive in the world to make sure they get funding.
As far as dragging the R’s in is concerned it’s because that’s the alternative to the Blue money. You think this situation would be any better if the GOP had a super majority and Drazan was the governor? That’s delusional. Corruption under democrats doesn’t make the alternatives any better.
I just don’t think you’re thinking it through all the way, but you’re close.
“I already said I blame them for not holding ODOT responsible for their lies.“
The lies have a purpose that senior blue leadership supports. If they didn’t support the lies they would have gotten rid of the liars. These are the people that made it illegal to have more than 10 (I think) unexcused absences from the legislature. If they wanted to punish ODOT for lying or perfidy I have no doubt they have the will. That that haven’t done anything speaks volumes.
“double down on this idea that Kotek is some kind of mastermind behind the scenes at ODOT for almost a decade forcing them to do all these negligent things.“
If not Kotek than other senior Dems. The actual person is t important and I doubt it’s just one person. She is just the most obvious one now. Are the Dems incompetent in allowing ODOT to be so rogue for so many decades or supportive of them? It’s really one or the other.
“Corruption under democrats doesn’t make the alternatives any better.“
At least you’re using the “c” word. How does anyone actually know how an alternative would be? All that anyone knows is the rampant, unrepentant corruption.
“I love how you double down on this idea that Kotek is some kind of mastermind”
She’s no mastermind, but she and the Democratic establishment seem to support this project, and have done so from the beginning.
If you can’t stomach what the Democrats do, but will never vote for an alternative, then you are truly stuck.
What realistic alternative are you proposing to voting primarily Democrat? Outside of lobbying our current lawmakers, supporting a movement towards a parliamentary system, supporting campaign finance reform (and the appeal of citizens united), I don’t see a functional alternative.
Like the game of Prisoner’s Dilemma (or any other iterative strategy game), there are different strategies for different time horizons. If you are concerned only with the next election/round, you’ll always defect/vote Democrat. If you are playing multiple rounds, you might adopt a different strategy to optimize your long term results.
Maybe we need an election where the democrats lose some power in order to shake things up and get a more responsive government in the future.
I’m not sure what the optimal strategy is, but I am quite sure that always supporting the same party no matter what they do is not it. The trick is to act in concert (i.e. politically) with enough others and with enough publicity that it has the desired impact. If you go it alone, quietly, it doesn’t much matter what you do. One vote rarely changes anything.
Note that the Republicans don’t need to take power for this strategy to work — all that’s need is a credible threat that the Democrats will take seriously.
If you don’t deem voting differently as “realistic”, then there’s probably nothing else you can do. Stop worrying about it and enjoy the summer.
(All of this presupposes that Democratic voters want fundamental transportation change, an assumption that I think is very questionable. If voters are generally ok with the status quo, then you may be out of luck building the political support needed for change.)
(And yes, if you can somehow make Oregon state government more like a parliament, and you think that would change the fundamental politics of Salem, then you could do that instead.)
“I don’t see a functional alternative.”
It’s clear you are not the only one who is stuck. The impunity in which your elected officials act is only going to get worse as the power structure continues to tip even more blue as a protest against the National power structure in the upcoming years.
As far as transportation around Portland goes, the Ds are demonstratably worse than the R’s. Once you accept that you might find a way forward.
We get it! As you have pointed out ad nauseum, People in Portland (and most BP commenters) are just stupid mindless morons and you know better which you never tire of letting us know.
Of course we should get in line with the MAGA fascists for own good but are just too stubborn and dumb to do that.
Your point is taken!
Because, of course, the only option is voting for a well-vetted blue team apparatchik or “MAGA”. There are no primaries and no one ever runs on a different party ticker (including multi-party tickets). And anyone who disagrees with those two options is a maoist, communist, anarchist, extremist who hates ‘murrica.
People will invent all kinds of reasons to vote for and then vocally support the same status quo that they will then complain about.
The ones who are best at it come to actually believe their internal fiction.
Why they need to this with the myriad political options Oregon has as you mention is beyond me.
How? It’s such a bizarre, nonsensical, ideologically-driven argument I’ve heard from you countless times. Give me solid examples of how Republican transportation policy is better given the proposal they offered removing any funding for:
It’s really easy to spend hours criticizing the “dems.” It’s exponentially more difficult to offer workable solutions. What are the workable solutions Republicans are offering?
They have none.
It is amazing how MAGA people get offended when their nonsense is pointed out.
Who do you think wants the widening project or IBR interchange enhancement? Some rogue project manager at ODOT or the Governor and party in power? How do you defend those huge, polluting projects?
What is your infatuation with “MAGA people”? Your personal insults would be more entertaining if you mixed them up a bit.
Or maybe just make your point without restoring to attacking other posters.
Will do Watts, We all missed your lectures. The reason I mention MAGA is because Jake continues to say the word Republican which no longer exists in 2025.
Fair enough. Yeah, just trying be technically correct, but it’s not looking good out there, is it?
Because Jake uses the word “Republican” he’s MAGA? Just suggesting your personal digs could be more clever.
It’s simple.
I look at results. Others here debate policy. Policy can be lied about or ignored. Results are what they are.
I have no idea what the R policy might end up as because they are ignored. Who knows what they would arrive at if the Ds would actually bargain. I know what their starting position was and in the binary system that currently exists differences are hashed out and a compromise is reached. However, the Ds spent all their time behind closed doors. I’m not really a fan of either party, but I’m absolutely against the cronyism that runs rampant in an unchecked one party system that Oregon has now.
Again, what are the workable solutions Republicans are offering?
You know what they proposed. Those are their policies. What are the transportation solutions (results) Republicans have achieved?
You’re not providing any evidence, just more criticism of the Ds.
“just more criticism of the Ds.“
Who in the world do you think is in power in Oregon??
Of course I’m going to criticize people trying to pave over what’s left of paradise.
The Rs might want to do bad things via Transportation, but the Ds are actually doing bad things via Transportation.
This is the difference I’m discussing.
The question really is why do you support it so much?
Why do you want the Ds to build out the Rise Quarter freeway and the IBR (what is it? 10 extra miles of freeway, I can’t remember)
You’re the one supporting the politicians doing that and then getting upset that people are noticing it’s the Ds who are in charge and you’re mentally stuck and can’t or won’t do anything about it or even acknowledge it’s happening.
I think I’m done with this one, it’s been a long week so have fun (especially if you’re going on the Naked Bike Ride).
The democrats brought several republican lawmakers into transporation bill negotiations. They wasted months trying to seek compromise. In the end, republicans publicly released a package that stripped everything out of the translation bill except for freeway widening and maintenance, with no plan for how to pay for it. The republicans signaled zero interest in compromise. I’m no fan of the Oregon democratic party, but to suggest that their failing was not spending enough time placating republicans is just laughable.
“suggest that their failing was not spending enough time placating republicans is just laughable.“
I agree with you that it is laughable especially because that is not at all what I’m saying. The Oregon Dems failure is pushing for the Rose quarter widening and the IBR interchange enhancement even back to Kulongoski’s time.
Could the Ds have bargained with the Rs better? I think so. Did they waste a lot of time in closed door meetings? Absolutely.
Do they want to pollute the Portland area with the concrete mega-projects? Oh yes they do.
How is objecting to that and the politicians who vote and push for it maga?
In my day being an environmentalist was seen as blue or green, not maga.
“Give me solid examples of how Republican transportation policy is better given the proposal they offered removing any funding”
It’s not an uncommon negotiation strategy to stake out a maximalist position to try to anchor expectations or to present a stark contrast to your opponent. I wouldn’t regard the initial Republican position as anything more than a negotiation ploy, and/or strutting in front of their voters.
So while it is likely you wouldn’t like a Republican plan any better than you like the Democratic one, we don’t really know what it would be, nor do we know what a negotiated bipartisan plan would look like our how it compares to the one Democrats (didn’t) manage to pass on their own.
TL;DR: Don’t confuse the first offer with the final offer, and Democrats didn’t do very well going it alone.
Quite the self-own to admit that you think moar freeway lanes everywhere, eviscerating electrification (or anything with a faint whiff of sustainability), shutting down public transit, and defunding/eliminating ped/bike infrastructure is “better”.
.
Thank you for making it obvious to everyone here who and what you actually support.
PS: I screenshotted this post for posterity!
1. Who do you think is building out the Rose quarter widening project?
2. Which political party signed off on that? Who keeps trying to build up miles and miles of interchanges and freeway along with a bridge?
3. Which Governor said there will be no tolling to pay for it.
Go ahead, tell me! I know the answers, but it seems like you and a lot of people here don’t. Actions speak louder than words and these actions are demonstrably worse than what the R’s have done.
Come to think of it, what is the worse thing the Rs have actually done against the environment or transportation in Oregon lately?
Haha, this is what I thought you were implying, but couldn’t believe it because of how silly that argument is. Like, that’s bottom of the barrel thinking.
You’re saying Republicans aren’t as bad because they haven’t done anything at all and Democrats have done things we don’t like. Correct me if I’m wrong, because this is so ridiculous I don’t want to misrepresent you.
It’s like, I’ve never been bitten by a rattlesnake, so bee stings are demonstrably worse than rattlesnake bites. Because tell me, what is the worst thing a rattlesnake has done to me? I’ve been stung plenty of times by bees.
“Democrats have done things we don’t like“
I appreciate the acknowledgment. Most everyone else claims otherwise.
As for your analogy with bees and snakes, I don’t think it’s accurate to the power dynamic in Salem. I don’t think anyone really knows what Rs would do (including them) if they were actually in charge or had more power as it’s been so long.
We know what they rant on about and their victimization complaints, but is it just venting, the first stages in negotiations or what they really would do if given the chance?
My reply to your analogy then would be to say yes, a rattler bite is worse than a bee sting (unless one is allergic of course). The problem arises if we don’t know if it’s a rattler or a non venomous snake with the Rs in which case the bee sting that you know is worse than a snake bite that may or may not be venomous.
However, if you are personally sure through some hidden info that they would make the mega projects into even bigger maga projects, install a huge tax on bicycles and tear out all the bike lanes out of spite then there is no point continuing this discussion as you would be correct. I don’t think you actually have that knowledge though, but kudos if you do.
Is my response to this from this morning stuck in spam?
Oh god help me. I’m caught in a watts-off. Cue specious threads ad nauseum.
The governor is, of course, just a symbolic figurehead with absolutely no power to appoint ODOT senior leadership or OTC members, right?
.
The dem leadership also have no right to legislate — all is pre-decided by the omnipotent and mysterious highway mafia cabal, right?
.
Right???!?
I love that last word! Please don’t edit it – it describes the OTC perfectly.
“re-asses”
hilarious and apropos! They keep making asses of themselves over and over!
I’m glad the upland pollution source control efforts are moving forward (described in this article as stormwater improvements). Those are objectively a good thing.
They are selling it as “Restorative development” but there is talk that ODOT might have to cut or scale back the lids portion of the expansion. Given the funding, it is clear that this is just going to be a wasteful and disruptive freeway expansion project for the Albina community, full stop. ODOT is just stringing along key community supporters along long enough to push through to ground breaking.
Jay Cee, I agree with everything you wrote, but I don’t think they are stringing them along, I think they have set up a system were they have identified “key community supporters” as a group of black business owners who have been given contracts and will make millions form this. They are not speaking for the black community, they are going to get paid. What remains of the black community is going to suffer the increased pollution, increased heat, and increased traffic violence as well as the reduction of adjacent land values from the future widened freeway.
Excellent points! Don’t forget that some of that money will go back into Democrat election funds as donations. It’s a win-win for the elected officials and business owners.
Gotta hand it to ODOT. They’ve done a wonderful job of reframing this highway expansion boondongle into some sort of community restoration. So now they’ve successfully pitted the Black community against Environmental and Safety advocates.
The community that was destroyed by the installation of I-5 deserve restoration. A couple of jobs to a few contractors and some extra wide bridges that they’re labeling “caps” aren’t it (in the mind of this admittedly white environmentalist at least).
As an aside for the folks framing Flowers’ comments as “racist.” I beg of you, please read a book about racism. Please. Flowers’ comments are certainly frustrating, and I feel like they’re misleading, but racism requires a historical power differential which does not exist in the direction you’re inferring.
No, racism just requires someone to make gross assumptions about someone, or a group solely based on their skin color. It doesn’t have to have anything “historical” about it. People in the present can be and are racist and Flowers is a racist based on the comment they made at the time. I can’t say if Flowers has expressed such racist views at other times, however.
We are 50 years past when it happened. That community doesn’t exist anymore, so suggesting it’s going to be “rebuilt” is silly. It’s been a topic of discussion on BikePortland for at least 15 years, and look at how far it has progressed – still having the same discussions.
Additionally, the Black Community has willfully worked against Environmental and Safety advocates in the past – just look at the Tubman school re-opening. The environmental issues were well-known prior to the re-opening, but the community pushed for it anyway.
Ever think the Black community has more than one view and voice on the subject? Perhaps the community Flowers’ actually represents are the contractors who stand to make a lot of money polluting Portland now and for years after and can’t wait to get the money flowing so they can start?
Do you have any books about racism you’d suggest? From your viewpoint on what racism is I’m very curious of your source material as a book is a good outside look into life if one hasn’t lived anywhere multicultural.
Nah, its a simple test. If someone of the opposite or other race said the same thing, would there be consequences (i.e. lost job, apology, etc.)? If the answer is yes, it is a racist comment and there is no need for a historical power dynamic analysis or assigned reading from the Kendi x D’Angelo book club.
Additionally, if you really don’t think the power dynamic has changed, just look at the project from 30,000 feet. A majority of residents are being asked to fund a project that will result in the creation of the most expensive “land” in the entire city, with the sole objective being to reconnect a neighborhood that hasn’t existed in five decades, and is intended to benefit a very small minority population in the city. Flowers use of language indicates he understands this dynamic is in his favor and he’s willing to use it brazenly to attempt to get what he wants.
Karstan, IMO, Flowers is race-baiting. It is is distinct from being a racist. He is using cynically using race to shut down debate and advocate for a position he stands to profit from. I would not say he is racist, but I would say is cynical and selfish.
Genuine question: is there someone who isn’t white in the No More Freeways camp that Mr. Flowers would be willing to listen to?
It seems telling that in the 10 or so years they’ve been tilting at windmills, Aaron, Joe and Chris have not seen this as a problem and addressed it?
The comments by Flowers weren’t really about race. He was playing the race card in a game that is mostly about money. If he didn’t have that card, he’d play another one.
This is absurd. The “no more freeways” environmentalists don’t oppose the freeway cap or reconnecting the community; they oppose overbuilding the freeway. The “reconnection of a community” requires a freeway cap, not a wider freeway underneath. (Or course, if the freeway had been blocked in the first place, decades ago, the community would never have been divided.)
There is absolutely NO reason why there should be any dispute between environmentalists and community advocates in this case; neither of them has any cause to oppose what the other wants. They could be strong allies in pushing to save money that would be wasted on overbuilding the freeway, which would free up funds to build a freeway cap. That would simply require Albina Vision leadership reject the devil’s bargain ODOT is offering (overbuilt freeway for a cap that probably will never be built) and instead advocate for a freeway cap with a smaller freeway underneath.
“There is absolutely NO reason why there should be any dispute between environmentalists and community advocates in this case; neither of them has any cause to oppose what the other wants.“
Unless of course the community advocates are fully supportive of ODOT’s I5 widening plan because they will make a lot of money in contract work for many years.
I totally agree. The Rose Quarter is a bad project because it adds freeway capacity no matter how much if it capped.
Re Black Contractors vs White Environmentalists:
Both sides have great points. The Black contractors have been promised this version of restitution and wealth building. It makes sense that they want this project to go forward as planned and quickly. The white environmentalists want ODOT to look at other options for relieving congestion/improving roadway safety that doesn’t involve expanding this freeway through the heart of Portland.
Both sides fighting each other in the public forum does nothing for either group. This is a perfect example of horizontal oppression. Both groups are oppressed by the group in power. And in a fight to have their voice heard by those in power, they are both trying to shove the other from the spotlight. By fighting each other instead of helping each other, both are weakening their overall position relative to the group in power.
The group in power is ODOT. The group in power is the car-brained approach to highway engineering that tore apart the Albina community in the 1950s and 60s. These groups WANT the black contractors and white environmentalists to fight with each other while they slowly march their project toward the finish line (which is the groundbreaking in this case. It’s always harder to stop or scale down a mega-project once things are in construction).
This point may be obvious to some, but it felt important to state.
And, FWIW, ODOT is not controlled by the Dems in the legislature. It is a rogue agency that is actively protecting its powerful position. It is threatening disaster if it doesn’t get more money (for maintenance and for the RQ project). It is unaccountable, overspends, and underdelivers routinely. And it is not challenged, period. (Sounds like another group we all bicker about a lot on this site). Doesn’t matter if Rs or Ds are in power or who the Governor is, ODOT holds the reigns of power for transportation in our State until the legislature (pressured by the people) completely reframe its mission.
How do you explain the Governor’s hand picked transportation committee agreeing to continue with the project? If ODOT was rogue, surely the committee could easily vote to stop the project?
ODOT may be rogue and I agree with your assessment about being eager to break ground and entrench this project, but the buck stops with the governor. She could have held them accountable at many, many different occasions and she has chosen to support them everytime. Kotek is culpable for this.
Meanwhile, TriMet is cutting service.
This is hundreds of millions of dollars into planning a freeway expansion that may not happen at all or as advertised even if it does. Shrewd policy from OTC, not white liberal guilt.
Worth mentioning that on top of being NAACP chapter president, my neighbor Mr. Posey is a road construction contractor and has other ties some people might care about.
This comment makes a very important point. ODOT has made clumsy attempts to curate black representation for this project from the beginning and burned a lot of people along the way. When AVT successfully got funding and salvaged the project, many things changed. One of them being AVT’s criticism of ODOT evaporated and the infiltration of stakeholders that will be paid from the project moving forward whether it results in caps or not.
Historically underserved or marginalized communities are highly susceptible to grifters in part because “community leaders” can easily take the microphone and claim to represent the entire community, and no one challenges them. Journalists and city agencies err on the side of treating the community as a homogenous with a single position. They are not critical of the community leaders’ conflicts of interest or biases. This is especially the case in Portland compared to other cities where racially diverse communities are greater in number and representation.
The very unfortunate part of this is when the community is harmed to benefit the a few people while electeds and media play along instead of doing due diligence.
Very insightful and I was agreeing wholeheartedly until here…“This is especially the case in Portland compared to other cities where racially diverse communities are greater in number and representation.“
What other cities are you thinking of where Portland is more diverse than they are? Do you think Portland is multicultural? I have a lot of positive views of Portland, but its melting pot aspect is not one of them.
It could also be that I misunderstand that part of your point in which case I apologize.
“compared to other cities where racially diverse communities are greater in number and representation.”
The other cities have more racially diverse communities and representation.
Oh, thank you! I did misunderstand that part. I appreciate the calm correction.
White guilt is super expensive sometimes.
Obviously it is quite important to make restitution for the long history of racism against black people here, but I wish that it was possible for this to happen while simultaneously avoiding objective stupid transportation decisions. This one, to me, seems like a pretty big no-brainer in the sense that:
Super stoked to watch us quite predictably go into the hole on this project to end up with no freeway caps, worse air pollution, and every bicycle crossing of the freeway interchange in this project area to be more dangerous.
Beware the camels nose
Both the legislature’s ODOT funding debacle and the ongoing Rose Quarter debacle are like black holes of reputation-destruction: no one comes out looking good.
– Dems have a high degree of control in the legislature yet can’t fund ODOT
– The GOP can’t supply a few votes or policy ideas to moderate the legislature’s bills
– The Governor didn’t ride herd on the legislature
– ODOT spends money it doesn’t have on a freeway widening project that few voters know about or care about
– ODOT frames a highway widening project as redress for historic racism
– Local nonprofit leader tries to smear environmentalists to defend the project
The chicken shortage must be ending, because there seems to be plenty of egg to go around.
I know that public policy is complicated, and that nuances in funding, public process, and transportation planning leave lots of openings for reasonable disagreement… but this whole thing makes our state look like shit.
“The cost of not [moving forward is that we] will be sued for being out of compliance for our harbor agreement. Will be sued by all the contractors that have incurred $4 million in bonds and hired all these people that could have been working on other jobs, that have been standing by waiting for this to happen because it’s supposed to go to construction in a couple weeks…”
If Blanchard’s statement is accurate, then the OTC must prohibit ODOT from hiring more contractors and risking being sued for projects they don’t have the money to build. Essentially, the responsible choice from OTC would be to complete parts of Phase IA and then kill the project or commit to caps only.
Just as a heads up, Albina Vision’s “Leadership Council” is made up of people from the construction industry.
It’s almost like they are using past injustices to justify the State spending a ton of money on a project they stand to benefit from.
Can anyone explain to me how this will “reconnect” the Black community when the Black community largely doesn’t live near the Rose Quarter?
https://www.prcprojects.us/civic
Is the idea that the housing built will only be sold to Black people in order to entice them to move next to a freeway?
“The mood in the room swung when community and advocacy leaders that represent the Black community came up to the mic — all of whom strongly favored moving forward with the project in the name of economic development for the people who had their homes destroyed when I-5 was initially built.”
It’s a bummer to see this framing repeated uncritically without mentioning the obvious financial motivations of proponents for the project. It gives the impression that the black community is organically out there demanding a highway expansion in their back yard, when it appears that, for the most part, it is a handful of people who stand to benefit financially from the project.
To be fair, maybe I don’t appreciate Mr. Flowers struggle. It could be awkward to work on the same ODOT project as his mom who runs a consulting and real estate development business.
Black or White, this seems to be stuck forever in the same place as the i5 bridge, with lots of planning done, but never the amount needed to get a project done. The truth is that most car-centric projects cost in the billions and with PBOT and ODOT typical budget shortfalls, there’s just no way to pay for it without taxing the public more, quite the unpopular move.
$137 million dollars on the other hand are an adequate amount to pay for some nice bike infrastructure project and finish it in a few years too, not ten, fifteen years from now.
The FX2 project cost $175 million and delivered tons in the way of sidewalks, bike infrastructure, replacing, crosswalks, and signal upgrades. It is also a great bus line. Tons of FX2-alike projects could be built around the metro area for what they’re trying to spend just on the rose quarter.
Or how much they’d waste on an inflexible Max line.