Doesn't Sam have proof readers?
I would think that a letter he sends to the Governor would not have misspellings and grammatical errors.
Good grief!

ya know what they say about assume.

Kitzhaber could redeem himself in my eyes with a simple response:

"Hey A**hole, if you want a pretty bridge, pay for it yourself. And no, this doesn't mean diverting more money from other basic services to paint the thing purple."

Everay action of Adams on this issue is posturing--because ultimately, he has no authority in the matter. Don't be fooled by the meetings and "input"--the ultimate decisions and choices are made at the state and Federal level. The same went for Bragdon, too, and anybody at Metro.

But the saddest part is that all Adams is really doing is mewling about the "design" and "how many lanes". The details that could be done a dozen different ways and still have about the same impact. The elephant in the room is that the bridge isn't actually needed. Powers-that-be (including Adams, ultimately) are looking for ways to justify its existence. You can be sure that "jobs" will be used frequently and with great passion.

Creepy sent that to the governor because his once conjoined twin Lynn Peterson is now the Governor's chief advisor on transportation.

I'll wager that Peterson even consulted on the letter before it was sent.

Especially on the ginned up claims of consensus and cost effectiveness.

"the issue of architectural design is not in conflict with building an on time,
cost-effective project. In fact, I believe that a bridge type with deeper public consensus will actually be the quickest, most cost-effective bridge to build."

"I believe" ?

I can't think of two more untrustworthy people than Sam Adams and Lynn Peterson when it comes to statements regarding "I believe", "consensus" or "cost-effectiveness".

They would both go out of their way to cook up such a declaration of "belief" while knowing it not to be true.

The idea that Adams, Peterson or any of the JPACT partners would be concerned about "cost-effectiveness" is beyond insulting.

Their wholesale disregard for the "cost- effectiveness" with Milwaukie Light Rail and the CRC planning process has demonstrated to the Nth degree they have NO fiscal or due diligence integrity at all.

Adams finished with this
"CC: Stakeholders"

Members Only

"The cable-stayed option may offer a bridge that offers more seismic stability and may result in fewer
in-water fish impacts."

Where the hell else are the fish going to be besides in the water?

Let's see, six "I"'s in the first paragraph, probably the only part of the letter actually written by your illustrious mayor. Man, you guys got a doozy.

"The cable-stayed option may offer a bridge that offers more seismic stability

That's a lot of offering for such a short sentence. Did Sam go straight from middle-school into city politics?

Not only a creepy mayor, but a cry-baby, self-centered power tripper.

Max:..Did Sam go straight from middle-school into city politics?

There is a missing link somewhere along the way. Seems he has his brain fired up on gifting perks to whomever, so he can stay in position! Too many years under Katz?

It is all about Sam and what can most likely keep Sam in office. Our city cannot afford this.

...and how many does he have on staff and where are their resumes listing education and experience?

What a pity the conversation is about "which" and not about "whether".

"Best looking." A very Portland concern.

...and how much have they spent already just on the plans and conversation?

Municipalities going bankrupt?
Time to spend, spend and spend?

Retrieving every dime they can, however they can, to keep their game going at our expense!

What next, to pay a toll to get out of driveways and onto the street to go anywhere? Go by streetcar!

Bicyclists, you may be next, Sam may have this in mind after you vote for him - tolls on the bike lanes.

A letter written by committee. If there were no other reason why it was important to elect someone other than John Kitzhaber last November, a hard response to this letter would be enough. The phrase "pound sand" comes to mind.

Mr. Adams, Mayor of Portland,

We would like to thank you for your suggestion with regards to the Columbia River Crossing project.

Currently, the State of Oregon has limited funds for major projects, and as a result we must look for the lowest cost solution. Our engineers and consultants have unanimously agreed that the deck truss bridge is a proven design that is low-cost to build, low-cost to maintain, and has a long life. This represents the best value for our constituents, and is also replicated many times with major highway and railway projects throughout Europe and Asia as a sleek, modern design.

However, I would like to extend an olive branch.

The State of Oregon, as I have already mentioned, has few financial resources. The City of Portland, however, has a large surplus. May I suggest a sale of all state-owned infrastructure within City Limits, including (but certainly not limited to) Interstates 5, 84, 205, and 405, U.S. Highways 26, 30, and 30 Bypass, and Oregon Highways 10, 43, 99E, 99W, and 213 (and several other, non-routed state highways), two bridges across the Columbia River (Interstate and Glenn Jackson), five bridges across the Willamette River (St. Johns, Fremont, Marquam, and Ross Island; plus the lease of the upper deck of the Steel Bridge); numerous creek and stream crossings and freeway overpasses and underpasses, and state buildings (including Portland State University, OHSU, and the Portland campuses of OSU and U of O). The City would gain full control of these assets while the State would gain considerable dollars to help fund projects throughout the rest of the state - many of those projects would benefit Portland area businesses.

Please contact me at your earliest convenience to discuss this proposal. I look forward to making a deal.

Sincerely,

Governor Kitzhaber.

Adams being in favor of an aesthetic bridge doesn't make it a bad idea. For the price of an aerial tram, we could have an icon on the Columbia instead of a ribbon of concrete. We're lucky that the builders of the Golden Gate Bridge, and the St. John's Bridge, to pick just a couple, weren't such small and parsimonious thinkers.

Portland politics are hopeless. Metro president Hughes has for example just unshelved the many-decade-old government convention center hotel idea yet once more. Throwing more money after bad money. Can't seem to understand the Convention Center itself is a flop, even with light rail stopping right at its door step. There is absolutely no hope of ever getting a city hall in my lifetime that concentrates only on such basic items as keeping water and sewer rates stable.

Given a choice between going to an event in downtown Portland versus going to one in a nearby suburb like Beaverton or Tualitin, I choose going to the burbs. Downtown is a nightmare to negotiate anymore with all the criss crossing streetcars. Riding the bus or parking, its much more expensive to go down town than the surrounding burbs. And I don't recommend to any out of town visitors I care about that they ride the max at night.

Allan L.
Golden Gate Bridge and St. John's Bridge - nice!

The message may then be to wait until we have funds to build such an icon. Now we don't have the money.

Why the hurry to build anything now?

Jobs? For the Children?

Rational communities would not have spent millions thus far for??

"I am grateful that we have in you a smart and
well-intentioned leader."

Beware the flatterer, he feeds you with an empty spoon.

The Bridge itself is a small part of the 3.4 billion they estimate. A great deal of the project/cost is in Wash. , and we on this side of the river are in for an equal amount somehow. If Gov. Kitz were to say , 'we split the bridge cost [only] 50/50 , and then each state pay for anything on their land' , we would be able to build an Iconic Bridge , like say this one!

http://www.portlandtribune.com/sustainable/story.php?story_id=127810849697704800

Sam "wrote":

I, too, often ride herd on controversial and complex
transportation projects.

Ahem! Commenting about Sam's assertion of "I...often ride herd on controversial...projects" is just too much of an opportunity.

Sam also "wrote":

So upfront, I want you to know that I will help move forward the bridge
type option you ultimately chose.

First of all, I have trouble believing that Sam would "help" with any decision that doesn't align with his (and his "stakeholders'") opinions.
Secondly, he should have bought an extra vowel and spelled the word choose.

"I, too, often ride herd on controversial and complex transportation projects."

I don't know if I'd use that as a reference if I was Sam "the ridiculously over-priced Tram" Adams.

"Vancouver zoning restrictions do not present an insurmountable obstacle"

That oughta score points with Washington.

Just when I think he is the biggest Bozo Randy Leonard has had the chance to pull the strings of, it turns out there is room for one more Sam Adams in the circus clown car.

Bill - "The cable-stayed option may . . .result in fewer
in-water fish impacts."

This refers to how much concrete gets poured into the river for footings, and how many of them there are. I understand that the cable option has several fewer columns in the river. There are certain times of the year when, due to migration and spawning of salmon, perhaps other fish as well, the contractors will not be able to work in the water directly. (No comment about how many wrenches land in the river!) Just to clarify.

Wow Sam, just when I think you can't get any more ridiculous, you manage to surpass your previous lunacy. Maybe Charlie Sheen can play him in the movie version of "Portlandia"

Allan,
Adams is a complete fool and his participation in this is adding far more than the price of a Tram to the CRC.

If he or anyone else wants an icon bridge the light rail portion should be removed.

It alone is adding $2 billion to the cost of the bridge and the many interchanges needing to be altered to accomodate Light Rail.

Besides, what's so great about having a symbolic icon bridge when essential services and countless other needs are neglected and not funded?

It's the small lunatics Adams is among.

Ben, nothing you said is at odds with what I said, except for your posing a false choice between a monument on the one hand and milk for babies on the other. If we must have a bridge (a question that still doesn't have a satisfactory answer at the $4 Billion level) then let's use tolls to pay for it and not short change ourselves on other needs.

I try to imagine what people in Salem must think when they hear self-important Adams or Leonard or someone bleeting about things beyond their city limits and purview.

I picture Sam arriving in Salem all puffed up from having everyone in the city kiss his a** all day,and listen to all his nonsense, only to find that no one has to or wants to kiss it beyond the city line.

I don't think we need a bridge so bad that we have to let the lunatics make it cost 3 times what it should while forcing more light rail and TODs upon the citizenry who does not want it.

Under this current lunatic plan it will cost $10 billion according to Joe Cortright.

...He ran out and hired a high-end outside lawyer to help him argue that building the cheaper version is going to cause all kinds of legal problems.

Who do you think is paying for said high-end lawyer? Sam? Don't make me laugh.

Eric H.
If you see this, you know a lot about transportation, what about water ferries?

Bottom line - do we need that bridge now?

Maybe Sam will read his letter to Ray LaHood at Wu's birthday party.

Since they'll all be there, odds Sam will try to pull a Vera and do a end-around?

I'm half-tempted to pay the $100 to see that, its gotta be cheaper than any circus on a $/clown basis.

do a end-around?

Hey. This is a family blog.

Make it sexy Sam.