But the 12-land mega-bridge was part of Adams grand plan to make Portland the "greenest city in the world." How can he do that if sensible people like Jules Bailey point out Adams' utter hypocrisy and the insanity of subsidizing unsustainable growth in Clark County? What a POS we have for a Mayor.

So I'm unclear. Are folks like Bragdon, Bailey etc for the new bridge but only 10 lanes or are they in the "leave it as it is" camp?

I also fear that if they start cutting things to reduce the costs the first thing that goes is the Light Rail line.

You don't "feed the growth machine," you choose to accommodate growth.
Or take these peoples' advice and ignore it.

Whatever, its not really the exact number of lanes that is at stake. Replacing a bridge that is not rated as "Structurally Deficient" is absurd (especially when there are multiple bridges that are rated as "Poor".

Dont believe me? Check
http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/BRIDGE/
Look for this link on the right column: "2009 Bridge Condition Report (New!)"

It is infuriating that this pathetic idea is still being funded. I applaud Reps Clem, Bailey and Bentz for making a stand.

There are a dozen cheaper fixes that wont make it necessary to toll $5 to cross the Columbia.

How they've gotten this far and spent as much money as they've spent without being realistic about the revenues is beyond me."

The money line.

I'm in the leave it as it is camp. Throw some tolls up, and build a light rail bridge. All for about 1/3 of the cost. Clark Co commuters will adjust.

and it's not so much that they'll adjust; it's that an army of new Clark County commuters WON'T be created.

A city has only two choices - grow or die. A city that doesn't grow is a dead city.

But then what else would we expect from a state that uses pubolic money to pay for assisted suicide.

As for me, I'm fine with growth.

growth = jobs.

It's just that simple.

Grow or die.

As for your insane tolls, well you can shove those.

Anonymous123, we can't get something for nothing.

If we a brand new bridge, we'll have to either pay tolls or pay taxes.

We should spend the money on maintaining our existing infrastructure instead. That's still jobs.

Anon123 - grow or die sounds like Vancouver's problem not Portland or Oregon's.

It is possible for the city to grow without a new bridge, you know. There are other directions to build houses in. And (even better) lots of space within current city limits that could easily accommodate more people. Portland's population density has gone down over the last fifty years. The growth => bridge argument is ridiculous.

"Grow or die" is a false choice. But it's a catchy phrase, and a particular favorite of money-grubbing developers.

Growth is, by its nature, unsustainable. We live in a finite world.

Another name for uncontrolled growth, in the biological realm, is cancer.