‘We have a plan’: Sound Transit board votes to finalize ST3 ballot measure, with West Seattle light rail in 2030

1:35 PM: Above, you see a live feed (evening update: archived version substituted) from the Sound Transit Board of Directors meeting that just started downtown. During this meeting, the board is expected to finalize the ST3 ballot measure that, among other things, includes a plan for light rail to West Seattle by 2030. See the agenda here. The ST3 resolution, calling for the plan to go to voters on November 8th, is here, with the financial-component resolution here, and the draft of plan details (including who gets what, when) is here. (Other docs are linked from the agenda page.)

2:07 PM: The public-comment period is continuing. The board has heard so far from a variety of speakers, expressing both support – from suburban and Seattle speakers – and opposition, including reps of a newly formed coalition under the banner “No ST3.”

2:32 PM: After about an hour, public comment is over, and the board will hear from the “expert review panel” that took a look at the “methodologies and key assumptions that (have been used to prepare) the plan.” You can read their memo here. From that memo, this might be of interest to those who would like to see a tunnel toward the end of the proposed line to West Seattle, rather than elevated:

For example, several stakeholder groups or jurisdictions have already expressed
interest in supporting construction of a tunnel in alignments where a tunnel is not being
proposed. Staff responded that such a major change in the project scope resulting in increased
costs would likely require additional funding from other public or private sources, beyond what
is available through the ST3 funding package. The Panel suggests that the plan should make it
clear that it is likely “outside” funding would be necessary to support major alignment changes.
This would help set expectations regarding future discussions about alternatives. This suggestion
could be particularly useful in light of the fact that the proposed ST3 plan includes provisional
projects. We assume that additional ST3 funding for a tunnel that is not included in the current
plan would be at the expense of identified provisional projects.

2:58 PM: In case you’re just coming in now – the board is handling other business before getting to ST3 (as with many public meetings, there’s some separation between the public-comment period at the beginning and the actual agenda item about which most spoke).

3:02 PM: And almost as soon as we made note of that – then the board arrived at the ST3 agenda items.

4:03 PM: The board members are making their final round of speeches before the official vote.

4:08 PM: “We have a plan,” declares board chair County Executive Dow Constantine after a unanimous vote in favor of the plan. Next, the vote to send it to the November ballot.

4:20 PM: More from Constantine: “It’s expensive, but it’ll never be cheaper … so we must move forward to November … the hardest work is yet to come” – the work of convincing voters around the region to approve it. A moment later, the final, unanimous, voice vote sending it to the November 8th ballot.

37 Replies to "'We have a plan': Sound Transit board votes to finalize ST3 ballot measure, with West Seattle light rail in 2030"

  • Jeff June 23, 2016 (1:48 pm)

    The reality of things is that by the time light rail is done it will be obsolete!  Autonomous vehicles will be it’s successor among many more technologies that are in the pipe!!! 

    • Rico June 23, 2016 (2:16 pm)

      Yep, main reason I’ll be voting no is the high likelihood of this being a colossal waste of citizens money. A lot is going to change in 14 years.

    • s June 23, 2016 (2:53 pm)

      Would you rather sit on a light rail train as it drives you to work along its dedicated tracks, or sit in gridlock in your autonomous vehicle?

    • K to the F June 23, 2016 (2:57 pm)

      I’m a huge mass transit proponent but have been saying the exact same thing Jeff and Rico. Had they done all this in the 80s and 90s like Portland’s Max no problem. But self-driving tech is coming at us lightning fast and will render car ownership and road usage totally different. Likely a shift as dramatic as going from horses to mechanical vehicles.

    • sam-c June 23, 2016 (4:24 pm)

      I keep hearing people talk about self driving vehicles solving our transportation problems, but haven’t heard how.  how it is supposed to go faster than cars, help people get around without traffic congestion?  I mean, whether I drive my car, or my car drives itself, how will it not get stuck in traffic with the people who are still driving their own cars?   How will a self driving car get from Cap hill to UW as fast as light rail?

      will all self driving cars not work unless they contain 4+ people (thus taking more people off the road?) Are self driving cars going to be narrower than existing cars, and they will all split lanes or something?  

      Will people just be eating, emailing  etc in their autonomous cars while it takes their car 40 minutes to get downtown and so that is supposedly better?

      I mean, it’s not like all traffic is caused by collisions/ driver error.  These autonomous cars will still be stuck in traffic.

      • jon June 23, 2016 (9:34 pm)

        The internet has a lot of resources about the expected impact of autonomous cars.  Driverless cars don’t drive like humans.  They drive better than humans.  Humans cause traffic backups regardless of actual road capacity at any given time.  Car accidents, poor merging skills, bottlenecks, pointless lane changes, DUIs,circling the block to find parking, and many other bad things virtually disappear with autonomous cars.  There are indirect impacts too.  Revenue from traffic tickets will dry up, car repair and body shops will go out of business, fuel sales will shrink, the car insurance industry will shrink too, etc

    • Meyer June 23, 2016 (8:38 pm)

      I really don’t see self driving cars becoming even legal for the average person to own for at least 50 years. There is simply too much red tape and too many hoops to jump through. When they finally do, very few people will get to own them. And even if you do own them, it still doesn’t solve the fact that a large car takes up far more space than a train, per person

  • Manuel W. June 23, 2016 (1:50 pm)

    Will this be archived and viewable later?

    Ho-lee cow — there are some interesting characters giving impassioned speeches.

    • WSB June 23, 2016 (2:00 pm)

      I believe ST archives its video, which is served via Livestream, as is (as of a recent change) the city of Seattle’s meeting video. Looks like past meetings are here. http://livestream.com/accounts/11627253/STBoardMeetings

      I don’t know how long the turnaround time will be but once this is over and the archived version is available, we’ll substitute that here. – TR

  • Ray June 23, 2016 (2:38 pm)

    Yeah, voting no on this one.  West Seattle once again being underserved. 

    Will not matter. This city will pass this by a wide margin. 

    • East Coast Cynic June 23, 2016 (9:09 pm)

      If West Seattle is getting light rail on the ballot, how are we being underserved by the measure?

  • badwolf June 23, 2016 (3:46 pm)

    PLEASE TAKE ALL OF MY MONEY…OH AND WHILE YOU ARE AT IT TAX ME 70% HURRAY!

  • Les June 23, 2016 (4:18 pm)

     If housing, health  care and  the many other tax increases  continue  at their current pace I will  not be able to remain a resident of  Seattle .

    I will be voting no on ST3 ,even Sound Transit admits this this project will do almost nothing to reduce congestion on our roads.

     

  • WSguy June 23, 2016 (4:39 pm)

    Looking forward to voting yes in November! 

  • GARY June 23, 2016 (6:07 pm)

    I’m voting no on this. It’s a huge dollar number! Taxing everybody,including the poor,and people on fixed incomes. They should seek a smaller amount now ,and come back for more in separate ballot measures. I.E. Give a kid $100.00 ,they would probably spend it quite freely. Give them a $20.00 bill, they’d probably spend it with more thought. To get he most out of their bucks.

     By giving the money ,perhaps in millions as opposed to fifty four billion, they would be more fiscally responsible. Taxpayers would be able to breathe between requests for more money. I know when they do these huge proposals, they do analysis of costs into the future. Can you project your income for the next fifteen years? Also can you project your expenses for the next fifteen years?

    vote no. Don’t give them a blank check!

  • Diane June 23, 2016 (6:13 pm)

    did ANYONE really think there would be anything but a yes vote by this board?  I expect it was a done deal long time ago,  and just went through formalities 

  • wetone June 23, 2016 (7:34 pm)

    So Sound Transit wants me to give them roughly $1000.  per year for the next 25yrs.  Which will be about the average cost to home owner having a home valued at450 k.  This is going to make Seattle a very expensive place to live along with a very one sided population “Rich” . I’m voting no because I believe it’s a poorly designed plan, to  costly and ST’s past track record.

    • Meyer June 23, 2016 (8:43 pm)

      I’m curious where you got the $1000 a year figure? Sound Transit estimates it will cost the average adult $17/month.

      See their FAQ and other news sources

      Under collection of the full authorized revenues the estimated cost to a typical adult living in the Sound
      Transit District would be approximately $200 more annually, or about $17 more per month. 

  • trevor June 23, 2016 (8:16 pm)

    We should build a bridge to Vashon  2050? Let’s get on this.

    Thank you Seattle

    • homeowner23 June 24, 2016 (8:35 pm)

      That doesn’t really make sense when you consider that we will have self driving water Übers by then.  You should do your homework before you propose such things.

  • Meyer June 23, 2016 (8:47 pm)

    To everyone talking about the exorbitant costs, please stop spreading misinformation.

    ST3 will not cost you $1,000 a year or tax you at 70% or push you out of Seattle. Their own FAQ as well as numerous news sources have stated it will cost the average adult $17/month. 

    From ST’s

    Under collection of the full authorized revenues the estimated cost to a typical adult living in the Sound Transit District would be approximately $200 more annually, or about $17 more per month. 

    • Mark schletty June 23, 2016 (9:28 pm)

      The tax numbers put out by Sound Transit are way low.  Just the increase in the car tab fee (tax) will cost me more than $17 a month, not even counting the property tax and sales tax increases. 

      • Chemist June 23, 2016 (9:50 pm)

        Yeah, adding 0.8% MVET (to the 0.3% already assessed) and the depreciation schedule hasn’t been announced (the monorail MVET was a lot higher than any real KBB for my car) will mean there’s an additional $80 per $10,000 vehicle.

      • Mark schletty June 23, 2016 (9:52 pm)

        Forgot to mention that the stated $53 billion costs are for capital, operating and maintenence plus inflation. Not included is the cost of financing the project, the costs of the loans and bonds etc.. It was when theses same costs were finally disclosed about the monorail project that the true cost became so high it was voted down. This project is going to cost us all a lot more than we are being told.

    • skeptic June 24, 2016 (9:37 am)

      They are the ones spreading misinformation.  Sound Transit said the University District line was built on time and under budget.  It took 10 years longer than initially promised, only reached university district instead of its promised Northgate destination, and cost twice as much as originally promised.  And now you are telling me I should trust these numbers?

      • metrognome June 24, 2016 (6:16 pm)

         you might want to double-check your facts before you accuse others of spreading misinformation; I didn’t find a reason why the UW section was so late, but as I recall, the dot-com bust as well as I-695 decimated the projected revenue streams — sales tax collections dropped significantly and the extra portions of the MVET disappeared.  If they can’t collect the money, they can’t spend it, no matter what was in the original plan, just as you can’t build that addition to your house if your salary is cut by 20%.  The financial documents are on the ST website if anyone wants to do historical research. 

        ‘In 1996, voters approved Sound Move, the first phase toward realizing the long-term vision of a regional high capacity transit system. This vote authorized the creation of Sound Transit, tax collections for funding, and the first set of regional transit projects. These included: 

        • -Light rail service between Sea-Tac Airport and the University of Washington, with a northward extension to Northgate dependent upon additional funding [emphasis added]
        • -Peak period commuter rail from Lakewood and Everett to Seattle
        • -ST Express bus routes linking the region’s population and employment centers
        • -Capital investments in transit facilities (transit centers, park-and-ride lots, etc.) plus HOV direct access ramps that improve bus speed and reliability’

        http://www.soundtransit.org/Projects-and-Plans/Developing-Regional-Transit/History-what-voters-approved  [‘Sound Move’ tab includes link to planning documents]

    • metrognome June 24, 2016 (6:35 pm)

      I think there are a couple of things missing from this conversation.  First, the entire $53B is not from taxes; there are a variety of revenue sources including federal grants.  Second, there is more involved than Link light rail.  Lastly, the $1000 figure may be referring to what ST would be collecting from an individual or household in total, as we are still paying for Sound Move (aka ST1) and ST2, although that figure sounds high even for that.  I couldn’t find an analysis that reflected the average of SM, ST2 and ST3 per year and when each is paid off; hopefully, ST or a pro-ST3 group will provide such an analysis in the lead up to the election.  There are adopted financial policies that discuss what happens as each project comes to an end.

       http://soundtransit3.org/document-library [Appendix B]

       BTW — ST is NOT the Monorail Project.  here is the info on the ST MVET:

        http://www.soundtransit.org/About-Sound-Transit/Taxing-district/Car-tab-tax

  • flimflam June 23, 2016 (8:53 pm)

    I wish I could vote no twice.

  • Lagartija Nick June 23, 2016 (11:14 pm)

    Boy, I’m sure glad that all of you no votes and naysayers are not actually the majority of the voters of this city. You do realize that your attitudes are exactly why we didn’t get a system in the 70s, 80s, and 90s. And that is why we’re all sitting in the 8th worst traffic in the nation now. 

  • Norma June 23, 2016 (11:32 pm)

    I will vote no for this package which spends more money on something I can’t use.  What we really need is good neighborhood service like we used to have but nobody’s listening are they?

  • JeffK June 24, 2016 (6:31 am)

    I cannot believe how many Seattlites like shooting themselves in the foot over and over and over.

    • WSB June 24, 2016 (6:59 am)

      Please note, in reference to this and a few other comments, this is not a Seattle-only measure. Sound Transit is a regional transit authority whose jurisdiction is in King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties. – TR

      • metrognome June 24, 2016 (5:34 pm)

        not quite accurate; the ST taxing/voting area

        ‘. . . includes the most populated areas of King, Pierce and Snohomish counties. It is sometimes called the RTA (regional taxing district). The RTA generally follows the urban growth boundaries created by each county in accordance with the state Growth Management Act and electoral precincts as established in 1996.’

        http://www.soundtransit.org/rta

        • WSB June 24, 2016 (6:01 pm)

          I was very careful not to say the entirety of the three counties.

  • Fred Johnson June 24, 2016 (9:28 am)

    At $870,000,000 per mile of installed track, this seems a bit steep.

  • TunnelMan June 27, 2016 (4:13 pm)

    An elevated line is absurd. I cannot imagine the ghastly sight of light rail going down the middle of California Ave or wherever. This simply has to be a tunnel. There is no way around it.

    Citizens — particularly people in middle age, like me — really need to think beyond themselves on this issue. We need to think about the legacy we’re leaving for our kids. Seattle needs credible mass transit.

    Autonomous vehicles are a fantasy for now. For all these magical benefits people in this forum are talking about, nearly every car on the road has be autonomous, which could be a couple generations or never. I would much rather invest heavily in something real that we know will benefit our community. Autonomous vehicles are an excuse to do nothing for decades — which is admittedly something Seattle excels at.  

Sorry, comment time is over.