Sound Transit says it’s not just the West Seattle cost that’s grown in a big way

By Tracy Record
West Seattle Blog editor

After Sound Transit discovered West Seattle light rail’s potential price tag had swollen to $7+ billion, the agency examined the rest of the ST3 plan … and now reveals another big number: The overall cost of building out the system could be up to $30 billion more than last year’s Long-Range Plan estimate.

That was the biggest news from the Enterprise Initiative briefing at this afternoon’s Sound Transit Board meeting (which also noted cost-projection jumps in other aspects of the transit system, such as the cost of providing service, and a drop in expected revenue). No new project-specific estimates yet – for West Seattle or any other ST3 project – but staffers promised they’re coming and will be provided to board members as soon as next month.

One of the Seattle reps on the board, City Councilmember Dan Strauss, asked how the estimates could jump that much in a year.

Deputy CEO Terri Mestas said the agency had been using a different methodology and hadn’t really taken a “bottom-up” look at the cost projections until after the West Seattle revision.

Before getting the new numbers, the board first voted on guiding principles for the Enterprise Initiative, after a spirited discussion over an amendment provided by the board’s other City of Seattle rep, Mayor Bruce Harrell. He wanted to be sure that decisions took into account the need to serve centers of growth and employment; some board members suggested that was a thinly disguised way to focus on Seattle, a perennial sore spot for non-King County board members, since ST is funded by and serves people in Snohomish and Pierce Counties too. After more reminders about the need to finish the system’s “spine,” the amendment passed 8-6, and the main motion with the principles passed too. (Harrell circulated this statement after the meeting.)

After that, CEO Dow Constantine began the update on the Enterprise Initiative, what it’s uncovering, and where it’s going. Most of what he said is in this memo. Here’s the excerpt related to capital projects including West Seattle light rail:

Capital Program: We are projecting $14–20 billion in added costs (2025 dollars), or $22–30 billion in year-of-expenditure dollars, for ST3 light rail projects. These increases are primarily driven by extraordinary COVID-era construction inflation, right-of-way cost escalation, and the added complexity of project design and delivery. The affected projects include:

o The West Seattle, Ballard, Tacoma Dome, Everett, Tacoma Community College, and South Kirkland–Issaquah Link extensions.

o Infill stations at Graham Street and Boeing Access Road

Constantine stressed that he believes they have plenty of time to “make a course correction,” but they’ll have to, because if they don’t, “we will eventually see our program become unaffordable.” He insisted that ST “is n strong financial shape right now.” And deputy CEO Victoria Baecher Wassmer added that “there is still significant financial capacity to deliver ST3.”

But in what form? That’s the multi-billion-dollar question, presumably to be determined next year. Deputy CEO Mestas elaborated that they obviously have more latitude over “pre-baselined projects” (of which West Seattle is one). Thoughg this wasn’t meant to be a meeting where cost-cutting ideas were proposed, one did emerge toward the start of the meeting: Board member Claudia Balducci, King County Councilmember from Bellevue, said ST should look at whether a second downtown tunnel is really necessary.

Meantime, deputy CEO Mestas went on to further elaborate about what ST says has pumped up the overall costs, including tariffs – though board chair Dave Somers, Snohomish County Executive, suggested it might be a bit too early to blame those – labor shortages, supply-chain disruptions, and the cost of acquiring right-of-way, and offered what amounted to a four-point plan on ways costs could be reduced:

It should also be noted that in addition to higher costs, today’s presentation also featured projections of lower revenue and financing:

Next month, board committees will bite into aspects of all this:

The big-picture decisionmaking is expected to be along the timeline on the lower half of this slide:

See the full slide deck here. Archived video of the meeting will eventually appear here.

58 Replies to "Sound Transit says it's not just the West Seattle cost that's grown in a big way"

  • onion August 28, 2025 (8:58 pm)

    It will be interesting to see how far the ‘build at any cost’ faction is willing to commit. I’ve been a light rail supporter so far, even though I will probably be too old to use it by the time it is up and running.  But at what point do West Seattle and Seattle residents decide that the current mass transit plan solves yesterday’s transit needs, but that a better, more cost effective strategy would do a better job of meeting transit needs in 10, 20, and 30 years in the future.

    • Charles Burlingame August 28, 2025 (9:17 pm)

      At what point do the state’s highway boosters do the same thing? They haven’t yet even as costs on the State Route 509 and 167 extensions have grown just as quickly, or on I-405 or the North Spokane Corridor.

    • At any cost August 29, 2025 (7:38 pm)

      At any cost.  What do you mean by that?  What cost?  Are you talking about what it would cost you, personally, per annum, or some unarticulated abstract notion of cost?  I am curious–if it is some esoteric cost that you wouldn’t directly pay, in what ways are you concerned about the cost?  If it is a cost that is levied upon you, what was the past cost, and what is the projected cost, and where would you personally draw the line?  I’d love a conversation here.

  • K August 28, 2025 (9:03 pm)

    Still don’t care.  Still cheaper than car ownership.  Less talking, more building please.

    • Question Authority August 29, 2025 (8:32 am)

      $7+ Billion just for a short dead end West Seattle line is a fools errand.  To overcome the topography for the limited gain is not worth any cost, and your willingness to endlessly pay is on you alone.  

      • Platypus August 29, 2025 (10:28 am)

        @Question Authority, as everyone points out every time, the West Seattle Line is no more of a dead end than the West Seattle Bridge connecting to I-5, its just a transition to a larger more system. There will be many spurs of the spine, and West Seattle is a necessary one.

        • Question Authority August 29, 2025 (12:13 pm)

          These spurs are just a dream, there’s no unlimited amount of money to fund them and WS is a prime example of that waste.  ST can’t even maintain what they have and there’s a finite limit to what people are willing to pay for continuous mismanagement and unrealistic endeavors.  

          • Platypus August 29, 2025 (2:18 pm)

            Well the “dream” will have a spur connecting to line 2 out to the east side in the spring. Quite the dream!

          • Question Authority August 29, 2025 (4:22 pm)

            Speaking of so called spurs, I recommend looking at the ST map of both current and proposed lines and you’ll quickly realize that short WS line serves the least amount of potential riders geographically and makes little sense. The route to the Eastside actually goes places with greater rider growth potential.

      • Alki resident August 29, 2025 (10:32 am)

        QA…Well said 

      • DC August 29, 2025 (12:34 pm)

        Anyone who thinks a transfer is a dead end knows absolutely nothing about transit and their opinion on such matters should be disregarded completely. 

        • A Transfer is a Dead End. August 29, 2025 (2:11 pm)

          A transfer is a dead end, said every transit rider forced to make one and missing it because of delays.  A transfer is a dead end, says everyone who ever tried to catch a 21 at Westwood Village after riding the last 560 back from the airport.  A transfer is a dead end, said anyone who is shown a two transfer trip taking 90 minutes to cover ground that would take 35 minutes by car.  Transfers make sense to system designers but not to system users.  Anyone who says that you have improved service when you have taken a single seat trip and added a transfer knows nothing about transit and their opinion about such matters should be disregarded completely.   No one would voluntarily choose a transfer vs a single seat.  The idea that you can run feeder busses to rail lines and offer some one a “trip” is absurd, no one is interested in such drivel.  They might accept it if they had no other choices, we might provide it if we had no other options, but the truth is people do have other options, and we do have other choices.  We could, for example, offer more single seat bus trips that reduce transfers.  Yes, this offends the sensibilities of system operators who prefer to “optimize” on high volume, which is another way of saying making the service worse for users.  When you take this attitude, people with choices will choose otherwise.  And then you’ll call them names.  So be it.   A transfer is a dead end. 

  • Too much August 28, 2025 (9:15 pm)

    I love light rail but they have too many projects. They need to prioritize one or two. Having the light rail from Everett to Tacoma would be an impressive feat. 

    • Derek August 28, 2025 (10:50 pm)

      We need east/west. More people live in West Seattle and Ballard than many of the stops going north/south. Plus we already have Sounder for that leg at least.

      • Question Authority August 29, 2025 (4:28 pm)

        Those people already live close enough to the core of the Seattle area to use other means of transportation that don’t cost Billions.

  • TWrong August 28, 2025 (10:31 pm)

    Bring back all of the old Metro Express runs. This is the same money grab that the monorail expansion was in the early 2000s. If you didn’t live here before, same old s*** different year. They cancel all the express runs because of covid. Trying to push sound transit. The three stops do not even begin to serve S Delridge, Highland Park, White Center etc. If I missed any other neighborhood, my apologies.  You’d have to get off the bus you normally take to downtown, to get on the train that will let you off where? Really think about it. 

  • Derek August 28, 2025 (10:50 pm)

    Bad used cars from the 90s are like 23k now and insurance is like $200+/mo. I don’t care what this costs. Build it!

    • Al King August 29, 2025 (5:15 am)

      Derek/K. DON’T WORRY! Light rail will get built. It will be horrendously expensive but you, and everyone else who promised blank checks will happily pay without question and saddle those who have limited incomes with the bill. Not everyone has the unlimited income like you do. 

    • Alki resident August 29, 2025 (10:35 am)

      Derek it’s a blank check. The rest of us care what the total amount comes to. It’s coming out of our pockets. 

      • At any cost August 29, 2025 (7:42 pm)

        Alki Resident: Coming out of your pocket?  Ok.  How much?  How much are you going to pay per year for this (pick any cost, initial projected, current projects, worst case scenario)?  Give me facts and figures, and then you get my pity.  Sure you care what the amount comes to.  But I’m curious if you have any clue what that amount will actually be.  Prove me wrong.

  • Morgan August 28, 2025 (10:55 pm)

    Stop the car vs train what aboutism…this is tens of billions of dollars. Even for road projects that adds up to real money—and we should stop adding roads, too. What’s  the opportunity cost of leveraging our tax base this much? What transit can be cheaper? Winter is coming and we have a regressive tax system about to hit a recession. We are nuts to endlessly double down on rail. Plus I don’t see much display of competence and just constant larding up at every station design detail. I’m putting on tinfoil hat and opting to join the gondola brigade now. Nuts to this.

    • John Gathly August 29, 2025 (5:50 am)

      I’ll take a mix.  add Gondola’s from certain areas but also continue light rail in others.  These create a system of transit that lasts far far longer than any single tax year or group of years.  Once you create the system, it’s there and you only have to maintain it.  It’s worth the investment.

    • Dad August 29, 2025 (6:47 am)

      I liked the gondola idea team from the beginning after reading that group’s analysis.  I have been on urban gondolas/trams in New York, Barcelona, and Taipei, they work great.  Commuter friend in Portland liked that one, though I haven’t been on it.  Obviously not the same capacity/hr as light rail, but not too bad.  Much better return on investment, seems to me.  Trains are terrific, too, but at any cost and in really challenging geographies?

    • k August 29, 2025 (7:20 am)

      Cars vs. trains IS the crux of the argument, because if we don’t have a train then we are stuck with cars as the remaining option.  The only cheaper transit is walking and bike riding, but our infrastructure for those barely exists.  There is no tax-free option.  There is no displacement-free option.  Light rail is the cheaper and less disruptive option of the two in the long run.  I don’t want my kids spending half their salaries on car upkeep and half their day sitting in traffic.  This isn’t even about me anymore.

      • Platypus August 29, 2025 (10:33 am)

        You’re right K, there are no better options than trains. This isnt an old technology, we are just behind the times. 

      • anonyme August 29, 2025 (5:43 pm)

        You’ve really never heard of displacement-free buses?

        • K August 29, 2025 (6:35 pm)

          Buses run on roads, which are the highest-displacement option in terms of infrastructure (I-5 displaced some 40,000 residences and 5,000 businesses in the downtown core alone).  So, no, I have never heard of off-road buses.  An off-road bus is a train.

  • Eric 44 August 28, 2025 (11:09 pm)

    I will use Uber or ride my bicycle not a fan of sound transit they act like they can just throw their train set wherever they damn well please and tear down local businesses and then have it all run over budget and then the taxpayers get screwed

    • Platypus August 29, 2025 (10:35 am)

      Your uber will get stuck in traffic, because it will add to traffic. Roads can only handle so much capacity and we are there and adding more people. The only way to continue to move people is to increase density. Trains are the highest density transit mode.

  • WS Guy August 29, 2025 (2:31 am)

    Meanwhile they have been dumping density into West Seattle in anticipation of future transportation capacity.  They have deferred work on Fauntleroy due to this project, leaving it to decay and choke on more and more traffic.  

    Confidence in this rail project is too low. The new density needs to stop – starting with slashing the new Comprehensive Plan, but also suspending new MF permits.  Fauntleroy needs repair also. 

    • AK August 29, 2025 (11:39 am)

      I agree. We are full and the density is just ridiculous in West Seattle, Maybe not building a train will keep more people from moving here. 

    • Brandon August 29, 2025 (12:26 pm)

      Just the opposite will happen likely, they will force growth and use it to justify the need for the train and more money wasted.  The more people they have, the more difficult it will be to travel by car, eliminating private property and forcing people to rely on the local government for public transportation.  Then they’ll promise new fixes for votes for an issue they created.  It’s the part of the playbook.  What they don’t care to mention is the part where affordability gets worse, taxes hike, and businesses leave, and everyone is then trying to escape out but can’t. They have a fix for that too, I’m told.

  • WS Guy August 29, 2025 (2:42 am)

    It is my duty to repeat my suggestions here:

    OBVIOUS SAVINGS
    – Eliminate Avalon station
    – Revert back from the acquisition of the entire Jefferson Square block to the cheaper and more central Bank of America lot.

    NEED EVEN MORE SAVINGS?
    – No rail line.  Build only the new bridge, but as a bus-only transit corridor that feeds directly into the SODO busway (5th Ave S.). That will connect us to SODO station.  Open this route to autonomous vehicles ( eg Waymo taxis, vans, and buses) once they reach our area.  Think in terms of future dynamic transit instead of archaic fixed rail. If you haven’t taken a Waymo yet, try one and see the future.

    NEED MORE RIDERS?
    – Build an office / tech employment zone in the “Triangle”.  That creates two-way traffic so riders come to WS for work instead of only exiting in the AM and returning in the PM.

    • Platypus August 29, 2025 (10:37 am)

      Waymo will only add more traffic, literaly worse than what we have now because when they drop someone off there will be many cars that are empty. Fewer cars is the only answer

      • WS Guy August 29, 2025 (1:57 pm)

        Progress!  In the past my suggestions to plan for autonomous vehicles was met with scorn and mockery on this blog because “magical self-driving vehicles are a pipe dream, they will never happen”.  

        We have moved to a new stage of resistive ignorance.  “They have happened, but I assume that they cause even more traffic [even with widespread development, adoption, and cooperative city planning].”

  • Brian August 29, 2025 (5:27 am)

    We always knew it was going to cost a lot more than the initial projections. And these revised costs are wrong as well. They are painting a pretty optimistic picture at the moment, but I would not be surprised at this point to see the West Seattle leg scrapped. 

  • North Admiral Cyclist August 29, 2025 (5:43 am)

    Sound Transit has been a great asset to the Seattle Metro Area, and I believe LRT is part of our necessary future. That said Sound Transit has unfortunately disrespected a large portion of the tax base in West Seattle for decades.  We in West Seattle need to wake up and smell the coffee. Firstly, 20 years ago, Sound Transit declared war against West Seattle (and Ballard) by attacking the Monorail project that would have served West Seattle and Ballard – both huge contributors to ST’s tax base, and both areas getting relatively little in return. Say what you will about monorails, the Seattle Monorail would be in operation today had ST not used public funds and their public contracting muscle to attack the monorail project. Just look at ST’s service map to see large “blank” areas, rail service “deserts”, in West Seattle and Ballard. Two communities that have steadfastly underwritten the costs for extending ST’s LRT far north, south and east of Downtown Seattle. It would be truly sad if car-centric naysayers in West Seattle short-sightedly contribute to the death of a second rail project serving our West Seattle community.

  • John Gathly August 29, 2025 (5:46 am)

    How much of this projected budget involves contracting out to private companies assessing the potential cost overruns?  I don’t know how it works in this particular public/private collaboration, but I’ve seen it over and over again in school funding.  Districts will fire multiple teachers, use that money to pay 1 consultant, who will treat the problem as if it’s a business and try and do cost-cutting.  That’s almost always what they recommend, so you can keep the teachers, don’t hire consultants at inflated prices, and then assume their recommendation would be to cut spending on anything except administration staff.  I wonder how much the cost overruns involve overpaid consultants to tell you about your cost overruns.

    • WSB August 29, 2025 (10:12 am)

      There are definitely consultants involved. The principles document, for example
      https://www.soundtransit.org/st_sharepoint/download/sites/PRDA/ActiveDocuments/Motion%20M2025-36.pdf
      has the paragraph:

      Drive Decisions with Data and Insight – The Sound Transit Board, to the maximum extent
      possible, will ground its decisions in data and the best available information. While uncertainty is
      inherent in major infrastructure projects, we will rely on third-party expertise when appropriate to
      support objective review and ensure informed decision-making at every stage.

    • North Admiral Cyclist August 29, 2025 (1:25 pm)

      In answer to the question above, Sound Transit (like SDOT, KCDOT and WSDOT) primarily use private companies (engineering and architect consultants) to prepare the majority of their plans, designs, cost projections and the construction management.  Their in-house staff mostly just report what the private contractors tell them.  

  • anonyme August 29, 2025 (6:52 am)

    The east-west problem can easily be solved by keeping the station across the bridge, adding shuttles from various points in WS to the station, and increasing bus service – all at a tiny fraction of the cost of this boondoggle.  And it doesn’t take decades of an ever-burgeoning bureaucracy and rebranding to accomplish it.  Do it now.

    • Jake August 29, 2025 (12:29 pm)

      Big problem, those fight cars for traffic. Unless you plan includes walled-off lanes so cars cannot enter.

  • Brandon August 29, 2025 (7:58 am)

    Sounds transit doing what sound transit does….already floating the “new property tax” proposal that of course Seattle voter will approve

    • WSB August 29, 2025 (10:05 am)

      Sound Transit is a three-county entity.

  • Mark32 August 29, 2025 (9:16 am)

    I’m shocked, shocked Sound Transit needs even more money.

  • Bronson August 29, 2025 (9:28 am)

    So basically what this is saying, without saying it, is that there is no way this project begins its build in 2027 and those of us on the property acquisition list are yet again left in limbo because ST dilly-dallied around for so long with hundreds of unnecessary “outreach” sessions when it should have been designing and building, letting costs run away from them. Honestly, I am sick and tired of being in limbo for 9 years since this boondoggle passed. Just build it already because it’s not getting any cheaper waiting around (again) and this region has shown no hesitancy in passing tax increases that will be inevitably needed to fund this; so why the worry over funding?

    • WS Res August 29, 2025 (10:24 am)

      The people demanding the “outreach” sessions are your neighbors. I hope you’ve talked with them about how they’ve prolonged your difficult and frustrating situation and your desire for the rail project to move forward.

      • Bronson August 29, 2025 (12:52 pm)

        I have, and with the exception of a few gondola nuts, they all agree that the outreach has been overly extensive, costly, and largely unproductive, giving voice to NIMBY-ism. 1 year of outreach, 2 at the most, would have been enough. One thing I hope voters have learned through this is that half-baked ideas like ST3 should be rejected in the future. These things should be more fully fleshed out; mode, design, routing, etc., before getting to the voter.

    • Scarlett August 29, 2025 (3:05 pm)

      I know,  those annoying NIMBY’s who had the gall to demand more compensation for their homes and businesses should have been shoved – “swept” – out of the way.  

  • Dysfunction August 29, 2025 (10:59 am)

    The Sound Transit taxing district isn’t a Seattle thing. It’s parts of 3 counties. There is no way any new taxes will be approved, nor should they even be proposed for something that was voted on already. People, especially outside Seattle, are done with Sound Transit. And any ideas for future projects, like a “ST4, are a pipe dream

  • Brandon August 29, 2025 (11:56 am)

    We already did the math last time the project hiked for the West Seattle expansion and for every added rider for the train you could buy that passenger a 70k auto that does more than go in one straight line.  People said the cost didn’t matter when it was pointed out, and they will continue to do so, that’s fine.  But the argument it’s cheaper than car ownership as gas around the county gets to the lower $3s (except WA, because you know), becomes even more laughable, especially while this train boondoggle grows and reliability falls as it expands.  We were in laughing so hard we cry territory then, I don’t know what we’d call this now.. probably just the cry.  While I do applaud ST for actually taking a minute to reassess, they should really scrap, and we know that won’t happen.

    The Urbanist had a decent article the other day over the lack of switchbacks leaving the 1 and 2 lines through Lynnwood at risk of single tracks for further distances when something inevitably goes wrong with trains coming every 4 minutes (that’s assuming the 2 Line actually crosses the lake or leaves Redmond without copper thieves messing it up).  If you insist on wasting money, at least fix what you have done poorly (albeit over budget already) before you make it more worse.

    After this phase, I expect us to quadruple down and collectively lose our marbles and insist on stepping on each one deliberately to spite ourselves because it’s this regions way to “progress”, ignoring wiser options.  God forbid we save money when its other people’s money we are spending.

    • WS Guy August 29, 2025 (2:12 pm)

      Yes, the stepping-on-rakes continues.  Probably due to entrenched government influencers lining up to slop at the trough of money that this project creates. 

      With a little vision you could imagine self-driving buses on our arterials.  (imagine them as independent train cars if your brain is locked on trains).  Self-driving cars dart into streets and pick up on-demand passengers.  

      Through a communication network, all vehicles communicate with each other so that they can cooperatively merge onto arterials without slowing down.  They effectively form “trains” of a mix of large and small vehicles.  While on dedicated roadways (either purpose-built or set aside by repurposing parking lanes) they never need to stop, only slowing and speeding up to time their arrivals at signaled intersections.

      Nearing their destinations, the smaller vehicles break off from the trains to dart into smaller streets to deliver passengers, pulling aside when needed to  await their next riders.

      All of this could be built and sustained by private enterprise… but not if we blow our money on single-use rail going to a handful of stations.  Instead the money should be going toward the infrastructure and regulations to support and coordinate AVs at this scale.

      What I describe will be happening in progressive cities, unlike Seattle, and once the superiority of this system becomes an embarrassment to us we will find ourselves tearing out rail that nobody uses and wishing we had designed the new bridge for wheeled vehicles.

    • K August 29, 2025 (3:01 pm)

      Brandon, you guys did that math, and multiple people pointed out how the math was wrong and the cost was way closer to like $1500 per person.  I spend more than that in a year on insurance and gas.  You can dig up the old thread with the corrected math.  Everyone in three counties is paying for the light rail, not just West Seattleites.

      • Brandon August 29, 2025 (6:22 pm)

        Oh whoops. My math was wrong. 7,000,000,000 divided by 24,000 expected daily riders isn’t 70k. It’s more like 291k, my bad. So, we could give everybody 4.5 premium cars – thanks for the correction, K.

        If you’re talking about the cost per person though, that’s even wilder.  The extension is the equivalent of redistributing $1,500 from the three county residents to 24,000 transit users for a train worth 291k to them specifically. Genius!

  • Platypus August 29, 2025 (3:46 pm)

    This announcement is exactly what we should demand of sound transit. They are being cautious, communicative, and reacting to changes to the plan. This is real project management, its just with huge numbers. The fact they ae being proactive is exactly what is expected. When has road construction ever tried to save money or even let us know how much things cost. It is unfortunate that the cost is higher than initially planned, but it is the reality and they are being open and honest and looking at available options. What is the controversy here besides “trains are bad”?

  • Many options August 29, 2025 (4:04 pm)

    From my experience in many cities around the world:

    Restricting cars one day a week by license plate
    Pros: 20% reduction in cars on the road. 
    Cons: Hard to convince people to give up their cars.

    Dedicated bus lanes with cement barriers– Pros:
    Busses not stuck in traffic.  Cons:
    Giving up a lane.  People can bribe police
    to use them.

    Gondolas – Pros: Quick to build.  No need to displace houses or businesses.  Quiet. 
    Cheap to build.  Good views.  Cons: Might not like seeing them over your
    yard or rooftop.

    Water Taxis – Pros: Quick trips with no traffic.  Pleasant experience on the water.  Cheaper infrastructure.  Cons: Limited service area.

    Light rail or subway – Pros: Passengers not stuck in
    traffic.  People don’t depend on
    cars.  Cons: Expensive to build.  Construction takes a long time in some places.

    Motor-rickshaws that you stand up in– Pros: less cars
    on the road.  Good for short trips.  Good for carrying groceries etc.  Cons: Can lead to creation of local mafias changing
    prices on a whim and providing information about the neighborhood for the
    purpose of crime.

    Busses – Pros: Less cars.  No need to drive.  Cons: Crime on them. 

    All cars – Pros: Anyone can
    drive.  Cons: Too much traffic.

  • DEFUND SOUND TRANSIT August 29, 2025 (5:37 pm)

    Disgusting but not surprising.

  • Please August 29, 2025 (10:21 pm)

    Wish they would just give up. Total waste of time and money for something you literally could take the bus or water taxi across the water.

Leave a Reply to Many options Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.