Inslee's "Dire Situation"?

The Seattle Times November 25th edition front-page article, "Inslee: State faces dire situation as virus cases skyrocket," portends an eminent disaster.  That 3,482 new cases and 35 new deaths "shattered previous records".  That, "hospitalizations for the new virus mean hospitals could have to delay treatment".

However if one bothered to look at the actual data on page A6 the 3482 cases and 35 deaths were preceded by 2 days with no cases and no deaths.  Virus hospitalizations were a tiny fraction of the total and total hospitalizations were 3000 below the 11,362, 80% capacity level.

It's unclear how many people were tested during the 3 days however the 28-day average positive test rates increased from 4% on November 1st to 12% on the 23rd.   Meanwhile, from November 17th, when directives began, the 14-day averages for positive cases increased from 1710 to 2215 per day and for deaths from 13 to 15 per day.  Those resulted in overall mortality rates declining from 0.76% to 0.67%.  However it's not enough to look at the overall rate.

The A6-page pie charts show those under 60 had 83% of the 2215 cases but only 10% of the 15 deaths.  Thus the mortality rate for Washingtonians under 60 was 1.5 deaths/1838 cases or 0.08%.  (For those under 20 the mortality rate was 0.)  However the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) 2018 mortality rates for those 15-64 was 1.69%.  Thus approximate 20 times the number of people under 60 who died from virus did so from over causes.

For those over 60 the 17% of cases but 90% of deaths the mortality rate was 13.5 deaths/376 deaths or 3.6%.  Again the NCHS mortality rate in 2018 for those from 65 to 84 was 6.26%, 74% higher.

By comparison an estimated 61,000 out of 45 million U.S. residents who had the flu in 2017-2918 died, a mortality rate of 0.135%.  Comparable numbers in 2018-2019 were 34,157 out of 35.5 million died, 0.095% mortality.  And this was with a vaccine.

Clearly COVID-19 is no more serious for those under 60 than the common flu.  Yet Inslee's directives fall far more heavily on the 80% of Washingtonians  under 60.  They are the ones who either work at or patronize the restaurants and bars, gyms, bowling lanes, movie theaters and gyms.  Limiting their access to religious service and forbidding weddings and funerals adds to their loss.  All of the limitations on schools, social gatherings, travel, and sporting events will have little impact on mortalities for the 80% of Washingtonians under 60.

Meanwhile Inslee's directives will have less impact on the 20% of Washingtonians over 60.  Many  will be retired,  less active socially, have pre-existing conditions, or in nursing homes, so its unlikely his directive will significantly reduce their mortality.  However, for the ones most impacted by the directives, the 80% under 60,  for the 1 person out of 1000 who dies from the virus, 19 will die from other causes.

The bottom line is Governor Inslee (and apparently the Times) refuses to recognize that COVID treatments have improved to where more than 999 out of 1000 of those under 60, and 96 out of 100 of those over 60 will survive the virus.  The entire state will pay a heavy price if he continues to do so.  On December 15th residents can make their own decision as to whether the reduction in cases or deaths per day was worth the lives disrupted if not devastated by the directives.

Abating the ST Board "Light Rail Spine" Debacle.

Sound Transit held a virtual public hearing 11 a.m. November 12th to accept public comment on their proposed 2021 Budget'.  I had responded to their offer to accept comments prior to the meeting with a somewhat revised version of the, "Sound Transit CEO Rogoff Incompetence" post on this blog.  It was one of three submitted to the board prior to the meeting.  I've been waiting for the meeting video to post Sound Transit's response on the blog.

The Nov 12th morning meeting video became available on the 17th.  However the participants failed to mention any of the prior submissions.  (They were originally posted but are no longer available on Internet).  Since no one had signed up to speak during the meeting it was adjourned as having "no public comment".  

The video of the subsequent board member meeting also became available on the 17th.  It mentioned the fact Bill Hirt and two others had submitted comments.  However, none of the submissions generated any response from the board members present.  Instead they recommended the Sound Transit Board accept Sound Transit's Finance Department  budget for 2021 in their December 17th meeting.

It's just another year of more than a decade of Sound Transit Board incompetence.  Sound Transit should have never been allowed to extend light rail routed through the DSTT beyond UW to the north, SeaTac to the south, or across Lake Washington.  The way to reduce I-5 and I-90 congestion was to increase access to transit with additional parking with access to increased bus capacity into both Seattle and Bellevue.

Instead the board has allowed Sound Transit to spend billions on light rail extensions that don't increase transit capacity and spend nothing to increase bus transit ridership that would.  The board's "likely" approval of the 2021 budget on December 17th continues the incompetence.  

The most blatant example was the board's prior approval of CEO Rogoff's 2019 budget for 2017-2041.  It proposed spending $96.2B over those years implementing the country's most massive transportation system expansion.  The budget's light rail ridership projections were delusional and it continued the decade long refusal to increase bus ridership.

The 2019 budget projected in 2041 Sound Transit would have a debt of $17B, requiring $1B annually for debt service payments, a $1.5B annual Operation and Maintenance Budget, and $0.8B for State of Good Repair by Assets cost.  The budget projected paying for those expenditures in 2041 with $3.7B in tax revenue, $0.1B in grants and $0.47B in fares.

However the ST3 funding voter approved in 2016 ends in 2041.  (Sound Transit used legislation enabling them to ask voter for $1B annually for 15 years to extend the ST3 taxes to 2041).  Thus all the ST3 tax revenue will disappear in 2041.  The budget accounted for that loss with,  "Upon completion of all voter approved transit projects, the Sound Transit Board will initiate steps to roll back the rate of sales and use tax collected".  I't not clear "initiating steps to roll back taxes", reflects that loss.  

Two years ago a competent transit board would have recognized the folly of CEO Rogoff's plan to spend $96B on a transit system expansion that in 2042  results in a $1B annual debt service payment and $2.3B operating expenses with no way to pay.  (A competent transit board wouldn't have even allowed the Prop 1 extensions.)  

Instead they would have recommended funds for the light rail spine be diverted to the far less expensive to construct and operate Ballard-to-West Seattle link.  Some of the spine funds would be used to add parking with access to increased bus capacity to reduce I-5 congestion.  Instead the board not only approved Rogoff's budget, they renewed his contract for three years with a hefty raise.

Hundreds of millions have been spent on the spine but little to increase bus transit.  The board is currently on a path to approve his equally inept 2021 budget response to the corona pandemic.  The Nov 12th meeting video detailed plans to spend more than $1.5B on light rail expansions beyond Angel Lake, Northgate, and Overlake that do nothing to increase transit capacity.  (Doing so requires they need a new $700M loan.)  That when completed they'll increase operating costs, reduce access for current riders and do nothing to reduce area congestion.

The 2021 budget delays the West Seattle-to-Ballard link that would provide 100,000 commuters transit into Seattle.  It continues a decade of refusing to increase bus transit capacity and increases the outstanding debt in 2041. (It would seem the lack of ability to fund debt service payments might be a deterrent to lenders.) 

The "likely" Sound Transit Board approval of CEO Rogof's 2021 budget for light rail spine is just the latest example of incompetence.  Sound Transit should have never been allowed to extend light rail beyond UW or SeaTac.  It's way past time for the Seattle Time editorial board and Traffic Lab to recognize that reality.  Doing so before the December 17th Sound Transit Board vote could prevent them from spending another $1.5B, at least abating the debacle.

The Times Abets ST CEO Incompetence

The September 3rd post "Seattle Times Response to ST Transit Development Plan 2020-2025" critiqued the Times Sept 2nd Editorial, "Speak up on Sound Transit Plans" response to TPD. 

The editorial opined:

"Concerned residents should review and comment on 'what's in the works'.  Consider it the start of a vital, regional discussion".

"Substantial revisions to Sound Transit's work plan, included the current mix of rail and buses, may be needed"

The Times urging residents comment on "what's in the works" 12 years after Prop 1 passed seems rather "belated".  The suggestion revising "current mix of rail and buses" ignores Times abetting Sound Transit decade long refusal to increase bus transit capacity.  The editorial shows the Times still doesn't recognize their real problem contending:

 

"The promised spine linking Everett, Seattle, and Tacoma must be completed".

The Times has never recognized the DSTT limited light rail capacity to where the riders added by the extensions will reduce access to current light rail riders, potentially ending access during peak commute.  However the public response they generated to the TDP led to it no longer being available on the Internet.

Still the Times continues to abet  CEO Rogoff incompetence.  His October 14 "Financial Plan update & Proposed 2121 Budget" can best be described as an "overview"with a series of charts showing the pandemic impact on both the "Long Range Financial Plan" and the "Proposed 2021 Budget".

The "Long Range Plan" consists of a 4-year delay for the West Seattle-to-Ballard Link.  His Proposed 2021 Budget provides no details on current transit mode operation,  He funds his "System Expansion" with a $700 million TIFIA loan and a further increase in property tax.  Rogoff neglects to include the $700 million in the long-term  pandemic debt chart.  The Sound Transit Board had apparently previously approved a property tax increase, $125 for $500,000 home, to replace potential I-976 loss.

That remains in effect despite I-976 being invalidated and the board is being asked to impose an additional increase this year.  The Times apparently abets Sound Transit doing so with no clear indication as to what gave the Sound Transit the authority for either increase, what additional rate do they intend to ask for, and what limits that increase.

The Times abetting Sound Transit "spine" precludes a far better option to mitigate pandemic impact; use the existing funds to expedite the far less expensive West Seattle-to-Ballard link.  Thousands of additional Seattle commuters would benefit instead of existing Central Link riders losing access because of Lynnwood and Federal Way extension riders.

There would be no need for the TIFIA loan or the property tax increase.  The Times was right to suggest residents comment on "what's in the works" with Sound Transit's TPD.  It's even more important they stop abetting Rogoff incompetence by informing readers about better options than Rogoff's 2021 budget.