Toll hikes must first be approved by WA lawmakers, including for CRC
OLYMPIA, Wash. (AP) — Thanks to the passage of anti-tax Initiative 1185 in November, Washington state lawmakers must approve any road or bridge toll hike — a task it had previously delegated to the state's Transportation Commission.
The change was confirmed in a letter sent Friday by Office of Financial Management Director for Legal Affairs Julie Murray.
The letter's recipient was Republican Sen. Pam Roach of Auburn. Roach said it means that lawmakers must approve any toll increases before they can take effect.
In the letter, Murray wrote that lawmakers would need to approve fees for the Columbia River Crossing project, a controversial bridge plan that, if built, would replace the current Interstate 5 bridge between Portland and Vancouver.
A January letter sent to Roach by the state Attorney General's office, however, notes that such approval needn't be "legislation specifying a particular dollar amount."
In her proposed 2013-2015 transportation budget, outgoing Gov. Chris Gregoire proposed granting the Transportation Commission the authority to raise ferry fares as needed for the budget.
On Tuesday, Oregon’s Gov. John Kitzhaber signed into law a bill authorizing the state’s $450 million share for building the bridge.
The money will only be spent if Washington state comes up with its own $450 million share, the federal government puts up more than $1 billion and the U.S. Coast Guard issues a permit.
Kitzhaber says this project is a priority for the state and he's hopeful Washington will pass similar legislation this year.
Copyright 2013 The Associated Press.
KATU.com Staff contributed to this report.
What a waste just to extend the light rail crime train to a state that has already stated that they don't want it! We can only hope that Washington refuses to pay for, or agree to this boondoggle!
The CRC committee has already blown about 200 million on who knows what and won't answer questions on where it went.  Crooks don't like to answer questions that may incriminate them.  The only people who should pay for this boondoggle are the commuters from Washington who are foolish enough to live and work on opposite sides of the river.  They moved to the Vancouver area trying to cut a fat hog.  Lower taxes, no gridlock, less crime,  and "sales tax" free Oregon is just a short drive away.  Now they want all of us to  pay for their lack of foresight and for their greed. Â
The bridge in place now is good enough, and will still be good enough further down the road. The only reason they want a new one is for the crime train (which no one wants) and those pesky pedestrians. The new design still has 3 NB and 3 SB lanes, but with an even lower lift span to accommodate the crime train and make it even more difficult than it is now for shipping traffic to pass under.
If the powers that be have such a raging blue veiner for a train, then perhaps they should look into using the rail line down stream from the bridge.Â
@theobserver Let us not forget that we are  over-due for a 9.0 earthquake, and the existing bridge will not survive it.  We might not need the CRC (welcome to LA) but the existing bridge is NOT good enough.
How hard is it to raise taxes on gasoline in both states and remove it when it's paid for? Â You think traffic is bad now? Â Wait until someone has to stop and pull out their credit card to pay some toll booth operator. Â This will cause massive traffic jams AND higher pollution due to idling vehicles.
It's not difficult people. Â Bridges are VERY expensive and we all need to chip in to pay for it. Â However, politicians have had a major problem with revoking sources of revenue once things were paid for. Â Put it within a piece of legislation that once the bridge is paid for, the taxes automatically get revoked, and let's move forward with a bridge that will allow us to move higher volumes of traffic and goods between our states.
I can't be the only one that can come up with a simple, easy plan within a few minutes. Â Tell me I'm not the only one with a brain in my head.
Sincerely,
A "Vantuckyian" :)
Washington says we need tollsÂ
This Washingtonian says no to tolls.
This ought to be interesting. As will the response by the citizens of Wa.
@Rob C 503Â Â Â Yeah, the only people that REALLY care about a bridge are the tax evaders living in Vantucky and the majority of people that live in Portland like that majority of people that live in Seattle couldn't give a ratz azz for a new bridge for Vantuckians.
So put the toll on the Oregon side of the river.  It seems kinda odd to replace the I-5 bridge rather than simply building another bridge...unless, of course, the whole plan isn't intended to increase the number of crossings possible but rather to simply justify a toll for crossing the river.