By
Editorial Board
November 3, 2008
Editor’s note: The Daily will be endorsing local initiatives and candidates all week. Read and consider our perspective and, as always, we welcome your letters.
Mass transit expansion has been a long time coming.
Seattle considers itself to be a world-class city — but without a viable mass transit system, we are not even close to achieving this status.
Sound Transit’s Proposition 1 will increase Sound Transit bus services and expand the capacity of Sounder trains between Tacoma and Seattle.
But the real crux of the proposition is the addition of another 36 miles of light rail service, which will expand the yet-to-be-completed light rail system to include service to Lynnwood and the Eastside.
A current light rail link from downtown Seattle to SeaTac airport is nearly completed, and a link from the UW to downtown will be completed by 2016.
The costs of such a project would be great; in fact, the numbers vary significantly depending on whom and when you ask.
Figures have ranged from $18 billion to $160 billion in taxpayer dollars. The money would come from federal grants and sales tax: five cents out of every $10 purchase.
A proposal like this won’t go away. Last year, Sound Transit nearly passed a similar proposition, even though the costs at the time would have been six cents out of every $10 purchase.
The long-term benefits of a practical mass transit system are enormous and outweigh the costs: Students would be able to commute more effortlessly to the UW from different areas, and the environmental and economical impacts would be largely positive.
Jobs would be created in the short-term with the construction of the links, and jobs would also be created in the long-term with the maintenance and engineering of a functional light rail system. People would be less inclined to use their cars, decreasing the amount of fossil fuel we consume regularly.
We should ride on the momentum of Sound Transit’s light rail plan.
While it may not be realized for several years, a proposition like this is necessary for us to increase our standing as an environmentally-forward city. Places like Portland, San Francisco and Vancouver, Canada all have reliable and efficient light rail systems.
We need to join their ranks. Vote yes on Proposition 1.
— The Daily Editorial Board
For more information on Sound Transit’s Proposition 1, visit future.soundtransit.org/documents/mailer.pdf
12 Comments
#1 John Niles
on November 3, 2008 at 1:03 a.m.(Vancouver, Canada | Unverified Name)
Light rail from Husky Stadium to SeaTac Airport is fully funded for construction and operation without Prop 1. See http://www.bettertransport.info/pitf/... . This includes an $813 million Federal grant that Sound Transit expects to be awarded within the next few months.
Thus, even without the 5 cents on ten dollars additional sales tax that Prop 1 will authorize, Seattle is going to be "world class" with a north-to-south light rail subway becoming elevated in daylight near the airport. Tukwila to Nordstroms opens next July. This line is paid for with the taxes from the 1996 Sound Move election.
Prop 1 is about doubling Sound Transit's tax income from one million dollars per day to two million, so that the agency can build 19 more rail stations at $600 million each. Seems high to many.
Or we voters can reject Prop 1 and let Sound Transit continue to spend the considerable money that they will continue to collect despite whatever result occurs on Election Day.
#2 Charles A.
on November 3, 2008 at 1:26 a.m.(Seattle, WA)
http://www.masstransitnow.org/
#3 Gregory J.
on November 3, 2008 at 1:30 a.m.(UW Campus)
Well put. The benefits far outweigh the costs.
According to the US Bureau of Transportation Statistics, the average cost of owning and operating a vehicle in the US is $8,121 annually (assuming 15,000 miles driven). This proposal would cost the average working adult about $69 a year. That's less than 1%.
It's time for us to look forward, far into the future, and realize that the sooner we can invest in mass transit, the better.
#4 Gregory J.
on November 3, 2008 at 1:43 a.m.(UW Campus)
I should add that the figure of $8,121 does not even include the portion of our tax dollars which go toward highway construction and maintenance of roads.
#5 Katie
on November 3, 2008 at 8:11 a.m.(UW Campus | Unverified Name)
I'm so glad The Daily endorsed this! It sends the right message out to the UW community: this is a advancement that we need to be ready for our future. Thanks for showing your support!
#6 John
on November 3, 2008 at 12:06 p.m.(Seattle, WA | Unverified Name)
Sound Transit is one of the most poorly managed organizations in our government. They measured the tunnel for the light rail in the south incorrectly and spent money on equipment that wouldn't fit. Furthermore these plans of theirs have traditionally come in over budget and behind in completion date.
The pro-light rail organizations have consistently over estimated the impact of light rail on our commute. We can accomplish the same impact by better utilizing and expanding on our current bus system.
Furthermore it seems ridiculous to think that anyone in their right mind is going to take light rail that isn't already taking public transit.
#7 Russ W.
on November 3, 2008 at 12:33 p.m.(UW Campus)
I use sound transit buses every day. I also drive a car, but not on my daily commute.
With some ambivalence I had to vote no on prop 1, because any benefits to us as students are nonexistent. The measure gives little help to the bus system and mostly gives us promises for the next few decades. I don't think we can trust that those promises will even be kept.
I'd like a rail system, but I don't want to vote for a huge sales tax increase on the off-chance that we might get one.
#8 Charles A.
on November 3, 2008 at 3:31 p.m.(UW Campus)
@ 6 & 7: Did you actually read the plan?
http://future.soundtransit.org/docume...
http://www.masstransitnow.org/the-plan/
Read it yourself before you decide whether or not to vote for it. It's comprehensive, will cost the average taxpayer $69 per year (with rollback after project completion), create over 65,000 jobs, reduce annual emissions by 180,000 metric tons per year, greatly expands bus services in addition to building light rail, and establishes a citizen oversight panel to audit the project.
The only objection I have is the use of sales taxes to fund the project, which will disproportionately affect lower and middle income taxpayers. A progressive state income tax is a better choice. However, it's far better than the alternative, which is to do nothing while our transportation infrastructure crumbles before our eyes.
Do your research, Russ and John. It will give you the debate abilities above that of a fifth grader.
Vote YES on Proposition 1.
#9 Jason P.
on November 3, 2008 at 5:24 p.m.(Kirkland, WA)
@6
John, I'm not sure, but I think you may be confusing Sound Transit with the monorail people. The monorail did turn out to be a stereotypically governmental project that went monumentally behind schedule and over budget, but Sound Transit actually has a very good record of accurately predicting expenses and construction times.
@7
Yeah, Russ, it may not directly benefit UW students -- but you're going to graduate some day. ;)
@8
yeah? well your like, tottaly some forth gradr!
But seriously, Charles. Insulting people you disagree with will make them dislike you as a person, and will make everyone else disregard you and ignore whatever substance is in your arguments.
Just don't do it!
#10 Gregory J.
on November 3, 2008 at 8:27 p.m.(UW Campus)
It might be fair to say that Sound Transit WAS one of the most poorly managed organizations in our government, however that's no longer the case these days.
In 2001 the agency underwent serious reforms, brining in independent auditing, zero-based budgeting, and other measures to keep finances and contracts in line.
Since then, all but one or two contracts have been UNDER budget, with the agency consistently getting good marks on audits.
Developing a regional transit system is no easy task. A decade ago, Sound Transit was a fledgling agency and they screwed up several times, but their record has by and large been clean since 2001.
Check out the ST page on accountability:
http://www.soundtransit.org/x1236.xml
#11 Kirk H.
on November 3, 2008 at 10:32 p.m.(UW Campus)
The Daily realizes that Prop. 1 will be immensely beneficial to UW students immediately, by adding more that 100,000 service hours to Sound Transit Express busses, express bus ramps, bus rapid transit on the 520 bridge and more Sounder commuter trains, . Prop. 1 will give the large portion of UW students that commute to campus more frequent, reliable bus service that will allow their commute to campus easier and faster.
Just ask any student who crams onto the 545 and must stand while waiting in bumper to bumper traffic on the 520 bridge to get to and from school, and you'll get a unanimous answer for more bus service which Prop 1 provides.
I also commend the Daily for its foresight and realizing that with two light rail stations in the U district, it will allow students to live all across the region and still have a reliable commute to campus, freeing students from the horrendous prices of U District housing.
So don't make the mistakes of our parents 40 years ago, and vote yes on Prop 1 so we can start building the Mass Transit System that our beautiful region deserves.
~Kirk~
#12 John N
on November 4, 2008 at 12:28 p.m.(Berkeley, CA | Unverified Name)
Prop 1 is 88% devoted to light rail extensions that will begin to open in 2020.
If Prop 1 is rejected, Sound Transit will be tying up less of its present tax authority on light rail extensions, and thus will have more money to expand the well-patronized express bus service across Lake Washington.
Post a comment