Legal Challenge Needed

 Several recent posts have raised the issue as to what voters authorized with Sound Transit 3 approval in 2016.  They have opined it only allowed Sound Transit to collect property, sales, and motor vehicle excise taxes from 2017 to 2041.  Thus, ST3 taxes could not be used for debt service payments beyond 2041 for the  $17B "Tax Based Debt" in CEO Rogoff's 2019 Long-Range Budget Plan for 2017-2041.

Sound Transit has used ST3 passage to claim it funded "voter approved projects". That the need to fund those projects outweighed the need to limit projects to what could be funded with ST3 taxes.  The first example of the result was Rogoff's 2019 long-range budget.  It expanded the funding available by 2041 from the $53.8B projected in 2016 to $96B projected in 2019.

However, even with that increase in funds available, costs had increased to where there was a $17B "Tax Based Debt" in 2041.  Thus, taxes would have to be extended well past 2041 to make debt service payments.  A financially responsible Board could have used that debt to justify rejecting the 2019 budget.  Instead they approved the budget and renewed his contract for three years with a hefty raise.

The "Long-Range Financial Plan Analysis" in Sound Transit's 2021 Financial Plan and Adopted Budget" amplified the problem.  It included the following with regard to the Board's ability to direct transportation system expansion:  

Scope Increase:  The LRFP assumes that future system expansion projects will retain the size and scope originally approved by voters under Sound Move, ST2 and ST3.  But as the system is built out the Board may determine that future projects' scope may need to be altered and potentially increased to meet voter approved goals, public concerns, or other reasons.  Such future expansion decisions cannot be known or captured in the current LRFP, and could potentially increase the Agency's financial risk.

Note their "Financial Plan" didn't include any need to limit projects because of cost constraints.  Instead giving the Board the option of allowing future projects that "could potentially increase the Agency's financial risk".

Sound Transit presented their "Financial Plan Update: April 2021" to the Board on April 22nd.  It included charts showing costs had increased to where the 2041 "Tax Based Debt" had increased from $17B in 2019 to $34B in 2021.  However, the program was deemed unaffordable, not because of the increased 2041 debt, but because the needed debt exceeded the "Available Debt Capacity". The shortfall began in 2030, increased to $7.9B in 2035, and remained at that level until 2041.  

That debt was presumably the reason for one of the Financial Plan Update's Key Considerations,  "Project scope discipline remains important".  At least "suggesting" the need to eliminate some of the extensions.  Instead, Sound Transit Board Chair Kent Keel's response was a plan to delay projects until the money needed could be borrowed.  

His realignment proposal was an agenda item during Sound Transit's June 24th Board meeting.  As no video of the meeting is available it's unclear what projects were delayed, for how long, and at what cost.  The result will undoubtedly be hundreds of millions will be spent on construction beyond 2041 and billions spent annually debt service payments for far in the future.

The bottom line is the Sound Transit 2021 Budget "Scope Increase" exemplifies why they should be legally challenged.  Let the legal system decide whether the Sound Transit Board has the authority to decide the need for "Voter-Approved Extensions" outweighs  the need to limit projects to voter-approved ST3 funding.  

It's something a competent Seattle Times Traffic Lab would advocate.  Their likely failure adds to why I'm a King County Executive candidate this year.