Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Project Prioritization topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Clackamas jurisdictions propose shared project list to improve equity between big corridor projects and smaller local needs
Summary
C4 members discussed compiling a coordinated, countywide project list (small/medium/large) to improve geographic equity and better position smaller cities to win funding rather than being overshadowed by large, long-duration corridor projects.
Elected officials and staff at the C4 meeting urged a coordinated, countywide approach to prioritizing transportation projects to help smaller jurisdictions compete with larger regional corridor proposals.
Multiple members proposed a simple, shared map and a three-priority list from each jurisdiction so the group can visualize needs across Clackamas County and identify opportunities to bundle smaller projects into larger, fundable packages.
"If we all saw the needs and even if it wasn't like on a level of good-poor, that visual would give us a lot of useful information," a council member said, arguing that a shared inventory could highlight inequities and make countywide advocacy more effective.
Speakers cited recent examples to show the stakes: small towns that have not seen paving in 20'25 years, failing intersections and projects that are costly to scope with limited staff capacity. Several suggested the C4 staff and county could help compile each jurisdiction's top one or two priorities, then convert those into a combined list for advocacy to ODOT and state partners.
The group debated trade-offs between chasing large, transformative projects (for example the Sunrise Corridor) and pursuing smaller, quicker-scope safety and pavement projects. Several members said a balance is needed so that long-term corridor work does not crowd out routine maintenance and safety investments that affect day-to-day safety and mobility.
Next steps: members agreed to return to the group with simplified lists of priority projects and to explore staff-supported mapping and bundling strategies that can be used in the CIP and R1 nomination processes.
