Good question

The City of Vancouver gets around to questioning C-Tran's board composition:

The local transit agency currently is managed by a nine-person board consisting of the three Clark County commissioners, three Vancouver City Council members and three representatives from the county's smaller cities.

A memo written by Ted Gathe, Vancouver city attorney, says almost 60 percent of the agency's sales tax revenue and 40 percent of its population come from within the Vancouver city limits.

So they get 33% of the representation for 60% of the revenue, that sounds pretty unfair. But Tom Mielke believes that it's all about "representing people":

Mielke said he was "amazed" to hear talk about how much a city has in terms of population and what that means for board representation.

"We are supposed to be representing people," he said. "We are not here to jury-rig an area or jury-rig a board."

Riiiiighhhhhtttt. In Mielke's world, taxation with proportionate representation is just "jury-rigging".

I've pointed out before the incredible imbalance in overall political mojo between Tri-Met and C-Tran:

The core of the problem with C-Tran appears to be it's governance. Tri-Met is a State of Oregon chartered corporation with board members appointed by the governor. C-Tran is this itty bitty county level entity with the Board of County Commissions and the mayors of Clark County as board members. It's several orders of magnitude lower on the totem pole, and it shows. How the BoCC is able to wear both hats and devote the time necessary to real transit infrastructure planning is beyond me.

It's an imbalance that disserves Clark County in the CRC negotiations especially. And having Mielke on board to add his special level of inanity worsens the prospects for a viable bridge design. When C-Tran gets to the negotiating table, the crazy uncle gets to come along too.