From Newsgroup: alt.law-enforcement

Big fat government overspends and fails in Puget Sound..

key #1 the August board meeting when Sound Transit revealed a budget gap
of $35 billion. That increase equates to over $20,000 per household in
the Sound Transit taxing district.
key #2 To date, Sound Transit has spent over $25 billion, and now
extracts over $1,700 per household per year in taxes, but most residents
do not benefit from that generous support.
#3 in 2019 Uber and Lyft carried more passengers in King County than
Sound Transit carried on light rail.

from https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/sound-transits-light-rail-initiative-doesnt-make-the-grade/

Sound TransitrCOs light rail initiative doesnrCOt make the grade
Oct. 29, 2025 at 8:00 am Updated Oct. 29, 2025 at 8:01 am
When we look at what Sound Transit actually delivers, we find light rail carrying less than 1% of all trips in the region at an exorbitant cost
per rider, writes the author. Pictured is a light rail train traveling
south alongside Interstate 5 at the Mountlake Terrace Station on July
21, 2025. (Nick Wagner / The Seattle Times)

By Charles Prestrud
Special to The Seattle Times

In July, Sound Transit announced an rCLenterprise initiativerCY intended to ensure the agency rCLcan deliver the greatest benefits of ST3 within
available financial capacity.rCY The expected result is an updated plan by mid-2026. The effort was necessitated by significant cost increases,
though the July presentation gave no dollar amount. The magnitude of the problem became clear in the August board meeting when Sound Transit
revealed a budget gap of $35 billion. That increase equates to over
$20,000 per household in the Sound Transit taxing district.

Sound Transit has faced serious problems before, always viewing the
problem as financial and the solution as additional revenue, deferred implementation or perhaps some cost reduction. Never considered was the possibility that there might be something fundamentally wrong with its
light rail plan.

Related
West Seattle light rail costs soar again | Traffic Lab
Sound TransitrCOs expansion plans balloon by up to $35 billion | Traffic Lab
No budget repair exercise will fix the underlying problem, which is the
high cost, high risk, inflexibility and low ridership inherent in the agencyrCOs plan. It is now glaringly obvious the proposed light rail
projects are far more expensive than voters were told, will take many
years longer to build, require demolishing homes and businesses, and
most importantly, fail to address the regionrCOs real transportation needs.

Sound Transit has sidestepped these issues by alluding to hoped-for
benefits that might be gained in future decades, an argument disproved
by their own data. Before the ST3 vote in 2016, Sound Transit prepared a benefit/cost analysis (based on very optimistic assumptions) that showed
that costs would exceed expected benefits all the way out to year 2071. Updated cost estimates reveal that building more light rail makes the
poor benefit/cost outcome much worse.

The second argument that Sound Transit offers is the importance of
making good on the promises made to voters. However, careful examination
of Sound Transit ballot measures shows what voters approved was not
specific light rail projects; rather, it was a specific set of taxes.
Voters were told the tax revenue would be used to create an effective
and efficient transit system serving the entire region. But when we look
at what Sound Transit actually delivers, we find light rail carrying
less than 1% of all trips in the region at an exorbitant cost per rider.
Board members might wonder whether it makes sense to continue throwing
tens of billions of dollars at light rail projects expected to have even higher costs and much lower productivity than the existing lines.

This dismal performance is not due to lack of revenue. To date, Sound
Transit has spent over $25 billion, and now extracts over $1,700 per
household per year in taxes, but most residents do not benefit from that generous support.

The Sound Transit presentation describing the rCLenterprise initiativerCY acknowledges that much has changed since the ST3 plan was developed.
That is certainly true, and the changes in travel patterns and the
advances in technology ought to inform the boardrCOs decisions just as
much as their updated cost estimates and revenue forecasts. Those
far-reaching changes are reducing demand for transit, but they are also creating superior mobility options.

By coincidence, on the day Mayor Bruce Harrell held a news conference reiterating his commitment to the Ballard and West Seattle light rail extensions, Waymo announced its plan to roll out automated rCLrobotaxisrCY
in the Puget Sound region. Transit agencies have looked askance at Uber
and Lyft, and the potential for autonomous vehicles rarely gets a
mention in transit agency plans, but in 2019 Uber and Lyft carried more passengers in King County than Sound Transit carried on light rail. That
is an indication of both the public preference for on-demand
point-to-point service and the size of the potential market.

The only way Sound Transit can make good on its commitment to provide an effective and efficient transit system that serves the region is by
facing up to the fact the proposed light rail extensions arenrCOt the
answer. As has become apparent from the three previous plan rCLrealignments,rCY no amount of budget Band-Aids solves the problem of a failed system concept.

With the benefit of hindsight, it is clear that buses and other types of flexible transit are a better fit for the dispersed travel patterns
across the regionrCOs growing suburban areas, most of which will never be served by light rail. That reality needs to inform Sound TransitrCOs
revisions to its regional transit plan.

Charles Prestrud: is the director of transportation at Washington Policy Center, with 30 years of transportation experience, including serving as WSDOTrCOs planning manager for King and Snohomish counties.

Most Read Opinion Stories
Why TrumprCOs East Wing demolition needed to happen
Seattle Times editorial board endorsements: Nov. 4, 2025, general election
A pause in SNAP benefits is a public health emergency; state must act now
U.S. canrCOt afford to keep expanding the size of its welfare state
Seattle Public Schools families: Meet the new boss with an open mind


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2