Republican Legislators Should Demand a Sound Transit Audit

(I only recently learned about the probe and the results.  Republicans can and should do more.)

Republican Legislators Should Demand a Sound Transit Audit

An Oct 24 King 5 report “Sound Transit deceived lawmakers and public, Republican-led probe finds” typifies the sorry status of legislative efforts to deal with Sound Transit’s fatally flawed ST3 "Prop 1 and beyond” light rail extensions.   The Oct 24^th report was based on the Sept 24^th and Oct 5^th testimony before the Senate Law and Justice Committee on whether the bill language for ST3 was unconstitutionally drafted and if Sound Transit misled the legislature on the size of the final ST3 package.

The Republican report’s conclusion could be summarized with the following:

The results of a state Senate investigation into Sound Transit found that the agency misled lawmakers and the public while trying to pass a $54 billion transit package. 

The response to the report from the Democrats on the committee and from Sound Transit could be summarized with:

"The committee’s final report is a sham that the minority members did not even have a chance to review before its release,” Sound Transit spokesperson Geoff Patrick said in a statement.  Sound Transit has also said it was completely transparent about all aspects of the ST3 ballot measure.

Apparently the Democrats on the committee (and Sound Transit spokesperson Geoff Patrick) were unaware a Sound Transit 7/8/2016 post entitled: “ST3 plan would cost typical adult $169 annually or $14 per month” included the following:

Here’s how much a typical adult would pay if ST3 is approved:

MVET

An adult owning the median value motor vehicle would pay an additional $43 per year in MVET if ST3 were passed. The updated calculation reflects an annual median value $5,333 of vehicles in the Sound Transit District. MVET taxes are determined by a state of Washington depreciation schedule for a specific vehicle’s model and production year. The previous calculation relied on a less representative average vehicle value of $10,135 for the more expansive tri-county area, for a significantly higher annual cost of $78 per adult. 

The committee Democrats (and the Sound Transit representative) may not have been aware of the post because Sound Transit discontinued the website ST3tax.com, “How much tax per year will you pay for if ST3 passes” soon after the Jun 8^th post.  The Republican conclusion Sound Transit merely “misled voters” doesn’t do justice to such blatant mendacity.  (see 7/13/17 post for details)

Sound Transit’s estimates for property tax increase, while not mendacious, are surely misleading.  They averaged home values throughout King, Snohomish and Pierce counties to arrive at a “typical” home value with taxes substantially lower than what those who pay the tax will pay.

Thus the Republicans concern about Sound Transit misleading the public about what they would pay to extend light rail are surely justified.  However they should be even more concerned about what they will have to pay for operating light rail trains over the ST3 extensions and what benefits commuters will get from all those paying the higher taxes. 

It cost roughly $25 a mile to operate a light rail car or $100 per mile for a 4-car train.  Extending Central Link from UW Stadium station to Everett adds 58 miles or $5800 to each round trip cost.  By comparison the UW to Northgate 4.3 mile extension adds only $860 to round trip costs.  The billions spent extending Central Link beyond Northgate to Everett increases round trip operating costs by nearly $5000.  Yet they do absolutely nothing to increase capacity.

A 2004 PSRC “High Capacity Corridor Assessment” concluded the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel (DSTT) limited light rail capacity to 8880 riders per hour, slightly more than half Sound Transit’s 16,000 rider-per-hour claim.  The limited capacity, at least during peak commute, means any riders added by the extensions will displace those from stations nearer Seattle.  While extension riders will presumably have to pay higher tolls the added costs will dwarf any potential fare-box revenue increase. 

Assuming 200 round trips per day, the resulting shortfall between operating costs and fare-box revenue for the extensions will be nearly $1 million.  While shorter south end extensions beyond Angel Lake to Tacoma and across I-90 Bridge to Redmond would have lower operating costs the total shortfall will create a huge financial "black hole" requiring they extend ST3 taxes for far into the future.   

Sound Transit compounds the extension operating cost deficit by neglecting to add parking needed to access extensions.  All of the P&R facilities with access to either I-5 or I-90 corridors are essentially already full.  Sound Transit commitments to add parking within walking distance of the extension stations provide only a tiny fraction of what’s needed.  They wait until 2024 to begin spending a measly $698 million on 8560 parking stalls by 2041. 

Thus, the only way Sound Transit can use even the extensions' limited capacity is to route their buses to light rail stations rather than into Seattle.  The limited capacity means the resultant reduction in number of buses on HOV lanes will have a miniscule affect on congestion. 

Again, the Republican concern about Sound Transit “misleading” the legislators and voters about what it would cost for ST3 extensions are only a part of the problem.  Far more important is the fact they chose to extend Central Link rather than bore a 2^nd tunnel for the extensions limiting its capacity to a fraction of what’s needed to reduce congestion.  That the extension operating costs will create a financial “black hole” for the area’s transportation funds.  That they neglected to increase access by adding the 10s of thousands of parking spaces needed for even their limited capacity.

The only way to resolve these issues is to conduct an independent audit.  The Republicans on Law and Justice Committee along with those on the House and Senate Transportation committees should “publicly” demand an independent audit. The legislature previously used its oversight responsibility in 2008 when they authorized an Independent Review Team (IRT) because of concerns the I-90 floating bridge couldn’t withstand light rail loads.  They surely have the authority to require an audit.  

Make Democrats on both committees, especially Rep Clibborn, who reportedly has used her position as “chair” of the transportation committee to block any legislative attempts to “oversee” Sound Transit, explain their objections.  It could also force Sound Transit to explain why they neglected to comply with RCW 81.104.00 (2) (b) requiring they consider less expensive (e.g. BRT) options across I-90 Bridge.   Also ask them what procedures they used to estimate ridership for the extensions by 2040: for example the claim the extension to Everett would add up to 119,000 riders daily. 

Republicans surely have a responsibility to the entire area to demand the audit.  While the results may not stop Sound Transit they will at least alert commuters about what's coming and that is didn't have to happen.

jj