The board rescinded its initial approval of the consent agenda to reconsider Item C, which allocates $50 million in the 2026-2029 Transportation Improvement Program for the I-5 Columbia River Bridge replacement transit design. A proposed amendment sought to explicitly direct these funds toward designing a light rail extension to Library Square, but it faced opposition over concerns that altering the document could delay the project and jeopardize critical federal grant funding. Ultimately, the amendment failed, and the board approved the consent agenda item as originally written.
Cross_cutting
Regional Transportation Council · Jun 02, 2026 · 1:17:56–1:18:12 · Watch on CVTV ↗
Keywords: consent agenda
What was said
1:16:53 to Evergreen. I firmly believe that. As the Director from the Port of Vancouver mentioned though, I do know what's going on in the transportation piece of this and the programming piece and what's required. And that is an absolute no in this because I need to get this tip amendment approved in order to get the federal funds that otherwise would go away. I want to be able to move forward with as much of the project as I can. And if there's opportunities to do more, I'm certainly open to that. And I certainly would support that. And I am going to be the first one to raise my hand and say, let's go get more funding and do more. I'm happy to join in that. But voting to not program this as is written is a very big risk. Thank you, Bill. Yeah, I really like what the mayor is saying, but unfortunately I think it does risk the funding. And so I think it's something to look back and go back to the original motion
1:17:51 at this point in time. Understood. However, the motion on the floor is the amendment of the consent agenda item C. So yes, Mr. Paulson. Thank you, Chair. Interim Administrator Francis, I get that right? Yes. Thank you. When you last appeared before the Vancouver City Council, one of your strong talking points was, which I agree with, was that we need to build what we can build with the funds that we have available. I think that's the cornerstone that I think we all can agree to. What you're hearing, not just now from the city of Vancouver, but from broader constituencies is that while we share that objective, we also have strong preferences
1:18:49 and high priorities around some of the things that unfortunately have fallen out of scope the way that this has been scoped. And so I would just echo Chair Marshall's comments. Whatever assurances that you can give, be it in writing or otherwise, to the city of
Evidence (1 match)
cross_cutting keyword 1:17:56–1:18:12 consent agenda
e what the mayor is saying, but unfortunately I think it does risk the funding. And so I think it's something to look back and go back to the original motion at this point in time. Understood. However, the motion on the floor is the amendment of the consent agenda item C. So yes, Mr. Paulson. Thank you, Chair. Interim Administrator Francis, I get that right? Yes. Thank you. When you last appeared before the Vancouver City Council, one of your strong talking points was, which I agree with, was th