Seattle Times Still Doesn’t Get It

The February 8th Seattle Times editorial “Strong Transit needs Fare Enforcement” epitomizes the paper’s slavish support for CEO Rogoff's Sound Transit problems: 

The agency set a goal of paying 40% of Link light rail operating costs through fares. When the numbers are finally counted, it expects to only hit 5% last year. 

The loss in fare revenue isn’t a new concern. Sound Transit Agency Progress reports of Risk Management issues included the following need for Fare Paid Zones:  

 

August 2020 

• Fare Paid Zone (FPZ) - Scope change to add FPZ modifications to stations could cost more or take longer than anticipated. 

January 2021 

• ST imposed changes to Fare Paid Zones could require substantial demolition/remodel at station entrances. 

  
  

Apparently, the cost of modifying stations for FPZ exceeded the benefit as later Progress Reports no longer included the issue. Still their 2021 budget assumed Link farebox recovery would be 15.1%. The Seattle Times response to the 5% recovery typifies their identifying the problem but “vague” as to solution. 

Elected officials must make finding comprehensive solutions to fare box evasion quickly a high priority. 

The Seattle Times still doesn’t “get it.” The likely major reason 2021 farebox recovery was a third of predictions was, not because riders weren’t paying, but because there were far fewer riders than predicted. Sound Transit’s Northgate Link website had predicted it would add 41,000 to 49,000 daily riders by 2022. The Times had called the Northgate Link debut, “Transit Transformed” predicting its three stations would add 42,000 to 49,000 riders.  

Thus, any attempt to find solution to fare box evasion should also consider revenue lost from fewer riders. It’s been four months since the Northgate Link debut yet Sound Transit refuses to release Link ridership. (They haven’t released their normal Quarterly Service Performance reports with “boardings per trip,” “cost per boarding” and boardings at individual stations since Q1 2021.)  Again, the likely result, funds lost by fare evasion were dwarfed by the funds lost because Northgate Link ridership was a fraction of predictions. (The result of a lack of parking at light rail stations or stations with bus routes to those stations.) Yet the Seattle Times continues abetting Sound Transit ridership opacity. 

Whatever the ridership, the lower farebox recovery also reflects increased operating costs with the Northgate Link extension’s longer routes. Sound Transit's March "2021 Financial Plan and Adopted Budget" reported Link light rail operating costs as $30.17 per Revenue Vehicle Mile. The 8.4 miles added by the round trip from UW to Northgate and back adds $253.43 per car or $1,013.72 per 4-car trip. The Link’s schedule for 125 daily trips adds $126,715 to operating costs. Rather than attempting to increase farebox recovery by reducing fare evasion, Sound Transit could reduce operating costs with fewer routes, or fewer cars per train, yet assiduously refuses to do.

 

The bottom line is Seattle Times asking legislature to help Sound Transit collect fare revenue exemplifies a decade of abetting Sound Transit. The paper has ignored countless blog posts urging they ask legislature require a performance audit of their plans for Prop 1 expansions. Even a cursory review of Sound Transit plans to confiscate the I-90 Bridge center roadway would have concluded light rail routed through DSTT didn’t have needed capacity. That light rail routed through DSTT should have never been extended beyond UW to Northgate or beyond SeaTac. Funds spent on those projects dwarf any farebox revenue lost from evasion.  Funds spent on further extensions do nothing to increase capacity, they only exacerbate the problem.

It's something the Seattle Times still doesn’t get.  (And a major reason I'm a candidate for Senate to expose.)