Sound Transit’s Modern Wonder?

The August 30th Seattle Times heralded Sound Transit’s modern wonder: “How light rail floats on the lake.” It typified the paper’s Traffic Lab detailing how it “works” rather than what it “does”.  Another example of the paper’s project “that explores the region’s policies that determine how we get around and how billions of dollars in public money are spent”. 

 

The article “suggests” the Traffic Lab project receives substantial support from Sound Transit. (It's the only Seattle Times "project that doesn't mention its outside financial support.) For example, the article details how “light rail  ridership systemwide has reached 175,000, a boost of almost 50,000 boardings”. Yet neglects  to mention that Sound Transit’s 2 Line ridership reported only boarded 1375 in July. 

Multiple posts on this blog have detailed that the lack of light rail ST3 extension sustainability if it’s based on the assumption that their cost wouldn’t exceed “derived benefit”or burden our grandchildren.

 

Another example of light rail problems was the August 24th Jake and Spike, Kiro FM radio show, ‘Sound Transit is a disease’.   The two spar over whether the region’s massive transit investment is worth it.  It included the Washington Policy Center Director analysis “Transit ridership across the Puget Sound region is down 10.5% since 2015, even as the population has grown by 14% and transit funding has nearly doubled from $2.6 billion to $4.7 billion”

 

The TPC director analysis found that total boardings across Metro, Sound Transit, Community Transit, Pierce Transit, and Everett Transit dropped from 176.3 million in 2015 to 157.7 million in 2025. Even Sound Transit, which opened major light rail extensions during that period, reported a 9% decrease in passenger miles. Transit mode share now sits below 3% of all regional trips, with light rail carrying less than 1%,

 

The bottom line is the TPC report is just another example of those detailing the failure of Sound Transit’s Modern Wonder.

Sounder Sustainability”

The previous blog detailed how Sound Transit “Sustainability” should result in a transportation system whose operating costs can reasonably be expected to not be a perpetual drain on the area’s finances.  That  any system of internal accounting controls in which the cost of the system being implemented should not exceed the benefits derived. 

The 2025 Sound Transit Report published in July included a Sounder staff of 28.2 full-time equivalent positions, a cost of more than $600 million for completion and a $45.90 cost per boarding for 2025. The August release of the 62-page System Expansion Monthly Status Report included 30 pages dealing with Sounder.  Clearly considering it a priority despite the fact their Ridership for June was only 7172 average weekday Sounder boarding

Clearly Sound Transit has chosen to spend far more on Sounder than what would be reasonably considered sustainable if doing so required the cost not exceed the benefits derived.  Sound Transit service area residents deserve far better for the taxes they pay than for what they will get from Sounder

 

Sound Transit Board’s Sustainability?

The video of the sound Transit Executive Committee Aug 6^th meeting exemplifies their failure to recognize problems with their version of Sustainability.  The meeting included a presentation, “Update Sustainability Plan (2026-2030) and how Sound Transit was expanding regional environmental benefits, that in 2025, 86% of the 14 targets had been completed and environmental goals for 2026 and beyond. 

The meeting was then suspended for what was said to be a 20-minute Executive Session to discuss the performance of a “public employee and litigation, or potential litigation to which the agency is likely to, become a party". Whatever the reason the 20-minute session took nearly an hour and the Executive Committee meeting afterwards ended with no further discussion.

“Sustainability” should also result in a transportation system whose operating costs can reasonably be expected to not be a perpetual drain on the area’s finances.  The  2025 Annual Report included the following statement concerning the following  “Statement of management’s responsibility”

Limitations exist in any system of internal accounting controls in which the cost of the system being implemented should not exceed the benefits derived.

Yet, any rational review of the cost of Sustaining maintenance and operation of light rail trains on ST3 extensions beyond Lynnwood and Federal Way will dwarf any benefits derived. The fact that the limited number of potential boarders and their fare revenue will leave the area’s grandchildren’s grandchildren to pay should not be considered “Sustainable”.  A similar analysis of the funds needed for boring a second tunnel under the city or a second Duwamish waterway bridge is also not “Sustainable”.   

Both service areas already have far better access to transit from near where they live to where they want to go, negating any potential “benefits derived”.  Sound Transit service area residents surely deserve this version of Sustainability and the resultant less costs. 

The bottom line is Sustainability is a question as to how long the Seattle Times Traffic Lab continues to ignore the fact that benefits derived from Sound Transit having a board of 18, a staff of 1400, and budget of more than $1.4B are dwarfed by the costs of providing those services.