It would seem our contributors don’t always agree :-)
Last week, Scott Bricker had an op-ed piece in the Oregonian questioning whether the benefits suggested in the “Cost of Congestion” study were worth the cost.
Yesterday brought another op-ed in the O, this one from another contributor, Metro Councilor Rex Burkholder.
Rex counters that while the project list in the study is only a straw man, the impact on our economic prospects is very real and we need to have a conversation about what level of investment IS appropriate to help fuel our economy.
Personally, I keep asking what kind of investments will selectively move goods and services without subsidizing discretionary SOV trips? I’m still waiting for an answer…