Seattle Times Ignores ST"s Real Revenue Problem

The September 2^nd Seattle Times Traffic Lab front page article “Sound Transit goes all in on gentler fare enforcement” typifies a failure to understand Sound Transit’s real “revenue problem” isn’t from those not paying for riding light rail it’s the high cost of providing those light rail routes. Sound Transit’s 2022 long term budget projects spending $58.8B on light rail extensions between 2017 and 2046.  Operating and Maintenance (O&M) of light rail will cost $18.9B and most of the System of Good Repairs (SOGR) cost, $9.4B, will be spent on light rail. 

Yet total fare revenue in the budget from all the transit modes was limited to $8.3B.  And that was based on  Sound Transit's dubious (delusional?) projections for ridership added by light rail extensions.  The Seattle Times should urge Sound Transit to pay more attention to the costs of providing the routes rather than attempting to make up for the lost fares by spending $672 million on “gentler fare enforcement”.

For example, spending $58.8B completing the 116-mile light rail extensions averages $0.5B per mile to construct.  The $18.9B O&M and $9.4 SOGR for the 116-mile adds $0.24B per mile, costing Sound Transit $0.74B for each mile of extension for from 2017 to 2046.   By reducing the 116-mile extension by 11 miles, the money saved would offset the complete loss of toll revenue for the entire period.

 Sound Transit could also reduce costs by avoiding unneeded operating costs. An example would be terminating East Link at the International District/Chinatown Station.  Ending the costs of routing 4-car trains to UW and beyond to Northgate.  Sound Transit budgets light rail car operating costs at ~$30 per vehicle revenue mile. 

With 4-car light rail trains, the ~20-mile round trip to Northgate and back adds $2,400 to the trip cost, or ~$260,000 for 110 routes a day, costing ~$82 million for a “310-weekday” year.   Terminating East Link would avoid spending nearly 4 times the $21M Sound Transit budgeted for 2022 Link Fare revenue and more than 2 times the $36M fare revenue from all the transit modes.  

The money saved by terminating East Link at International District would do more than end Sound Transits need for any fare revenue. It would also avoid halving the DSTT’s limited number of light rail trains to SeaTac.   The question is who would be harmed?  East side commuters wanting to go beyond International District could transfer to Link Line 1 for the commute to Westlake Station and beyond.  Extending the route adds unneeded capacity to UW, to Northgate, and beyond.

Again, the Seattle Times needs to recognize Sound Transit’s revenue problem is not they can’t collect fares for the service, it’s because they spend far too much providing the service.  A recent example is Sound Transit's  decision to spend $600M on 2 transit stations, at 85th St on I-405 and on 130th St on I-5.  That’s more than 15 times the total fares Sound Transit expects for the year. Yet the service the two stations provide is limited by the fact neither has parking for access.

That extending the light rail spine along I-5 does nothing to increase capacity, it only adds cost for light rail construction and operation of light rail trains. Using the light rail extensions to replace bus routes reduces transit capacity into Seattle and reduces access for current riders. BRT provides far more transit capacity along both I-5 and I-90 corridors at a fraction of light rail cost. What’s needed are local bus routes to provide access for commuters.  

The Times should urge Sound Transit divert the light rail spine funding to the far shorter West Seattle and Ballard Link. The service provided would benefit far more since 70 to 80% of the two links projected 80,000-95,000 riders would live within walking distance of stations.  The costs could be slashed by terminating the Ballard Link at Westlake Station. Ending the ultimate example of excessive cost for service provided by no longer spending $5 billion and years of disruption to provide Ballard commuters a tunnel under Seattle.

The bottom line is the Seattle Times and Sound Transit need to recognize the solution for light rail's revenue problem is to reduce the cost of providing the service rather than spending $672M attempting to increase fare revenue.