Sound Transit's Billion Dollar Staff

The previous post detailed the Seattle Times Traffic Lab project to “Comment about how money is spent on transportation” hadn’t “commented” on the Sound Transit 2025 Proposed Budget and Financial Plan”.  This post details more examples in the 2025 budget worthy of comment.

For example, Appendix C “Departments and Staffing Budgets” details budgets by department total $957.5 million for 1572 positions gives an average cost per position in 2025 of $609,000.  A 36% increase over the $447,000 per position for the 1570 positions and $701.8 million 2023 budget. Both would seem worthy of comment on “how money is spent”. (Especially since the cost of each Staff position “dwarfs” the $200,000 each of  the 18 Sound Transit Board of Directors previously thought "worthy of comment")

The number of positions in 2025 budget for each department also raises questions.  First, where do those who occupy the positions work?  There’s no indication the 1572 staff positions in any department are collocated somewhere. That not doing so would seem to detract from effectiveness. Also, why are there 194 "executives" in the 2025 budget, 30 more than those in Design, Engineering & Construction Management Department presumably responsible for expanding the system.  Also, one can understand the 320 positions in Operation and 89 in Safety for operating the transit system 

The question remains why they need 75 positions in Communications, Marketing, and Engagement Department, 74 in Finance, 42 in Human Resources, 145 in Information Technology, 30 in Legal, 99 in Planning, 226 in Portfolio Service Office, and 127 Passenger Experience Departments. Especially since each position is costing $609,000.  

A question the Traffic Lab should comment on.

They should also comment on Sound Transit obfuscating transit system expansion costs by no longer releasing the monthly Agency Progress Report.  It’s 180 pages typically included a "Link Light Rail Program Overview" of the 16 projects detailing, “Authorized Project Allocation, Commitment to Date, Incurred to Date, and Estimated Final Cost" 

Each project had a Project Summary, Key Project Activities, Closely Monitored Issues, Project Cost Summary, Risk Management, Contingency Management, Project Schedule, Staffing Summary and a breakdown of the project into smaller packages to facilitate implementation. For example, the June 2024 version included 10 pages of details for the Federal Way Link Extension (FWLE).  That its “Staffing Summary” included both the 32.8 in ST Staff and 72.9 consultants whose "positions"  weren't included in the 2025 budget.

The bottom line is Appendix C in the Sound Transit 2025 Proposed Budget and Financial Plan” and no ionger releasing the Agency Progress Report raises questions worthy of Traffic Lab comment.

Traffic Lab Still Doesn’t “Get It”

The previous 2 posts detailed the Seattle Times Climate Lab didn’t "get it" that the allowances imposed because of I-2117 rejection won’t be imposed on more than half the pollution from those burning fuel in their vehicles or natural gas in their homes.  This post opines the paper’s Traffic Lab project that “comments about how money is spent on transportation” doesn’t “get it" regarding Sound Transit’s spending on the “largest transit system expansion in the country”.

It continues more than a decade of the paper not including auditing Sound Transit as one of their top-ten legislative actions.  A competent audit would “likely” conclude 4-car light rail trains don’t have the capacity to reduce multilane freeway peak hour congestion and cost too much to operate off peak. That King County Metro, Snohomish Community and Pierce County Transit already provide bus transit to commuters that could have been increased to meet future needs.  

Thus, light rail should not have been extended beyond UW station, across I-90 Bridge or beyond SeaTac airport.  Yet Sound Transit still plans to use 4-car light rail trains to replace bus routes into Seattle, reducing transit capacity into the city, and nothing to reduce roadway congestion. The more the extensions the more the lost transit capacity.

In 2021 the Traffic Lab abided Sound Transit’s decision to no longer release a  Quarterly Service Delivery Performance Report.  It had provided comparisons of transit system operations, costs and ridership during 2021/Q1 with Sound Transit budget predictions for the quarter. This year they abided Sound Transit decision to no longer release the  monthly Agency Progress Report.  Ending nearly 10 years of typically 180 pages summarizing projects and major contracts status, risks and perfoarmance for capital projects. They continue to abide Sound Transit Board members, each getting some $200,000 in compensation, who are more intererested in transit oriented development and affordable housing than in reducing the areas congestion.

This year they’ve haven’t recognized that the Starter Line and Lynnwood Link debut's ridership have debunked Sound Transit’s apparent “Field of Dreams” premise, “if we build light rail, riders will come.”  The areas the Ballard-to-SODO and West Seattle Links will serve already have better access to transit into and out of downtown Seattle than what would be available with light rail. 

Thus, neither area needs light rail for transit, avoiding the need to spend more than $12 billion on a 2^nd tunnel under Seattle and more than $6 billion on a 2^nd Duwamish Waterway bridge for light rail tracks from Alaska Junction to SODO.  That terminating Lined 2 at existing CID rather than extending it to Lynnwood also appeases those opposing current 2^nd tunnel route. 

The latest example of the Traffic Lab not “getting it” about how money is spent, it hasn't responded to the Sound Transit Board's 11/21/24 approving the 2025 Proposed Budget & Financial Plan. The budget claims “Ridership estimates are updated regularly with new assumptions including in-service dates for new extensions.  Yet the 2025 budget predicts the Line 1 extension to Federal Way and the Line 2 to Redmond and to Lynnwood will increase Link ridership from current ~34 million to ~58 million in 2026 is the same as the 2024 budget despite Starter Line and Lynnwood ridership a fraction of 2024 predictions

The 2025 budgets financial data should raise additional concerns. It includes some “dubious” claims for getting nearly $800 million each year in Federal Grants for several years in the 2030s.  (Especially since the recent election results)  The budget for 2025 shows Revenues and other financing sources” total $4.4 billion, with $1.5 billion from additional TIFIA loans. (yet only 1% coming from fares) Yet the 2025 budget spending for the year “only” totals $3.2 billion, so why the need for the $1.5 billion loan.

The 2025 budget also includes a new financial feature detailing paying off debts. Appendix I: Debt Obligations” detail the “Amount outstanding as of Dec 31, 2023” loans for paying off existing loans issued from 2009, 2015, and 2021 extend as far as to 2050.  That TIFIA and RRIF loans to "finance a portion of their eligible project costs" includes loans obtained on 5/28/24 for East Link, Northgate, the Operations Facility East, and Lynnwood Link: that were all thought to be essentially paid for.  Yet payments don’t begin until 12/31/2025 and continue until 2061:20 years after ST3 taxes approved in 2016 for 2017 to 2041.

The bottom line is the lack of Traffic Lab response to the Sound Transit approval of the 2025 Proposed Budget and Financial plan continues their decade of “not getting” the failures.

 

 

Climate Lab Still Doesn’t “Get It”

The December 15^th Seattle Times front page article “All the state’s top climate polluters hand in emission allowances—except one” demonstrates the paper's Climate Lab still doesn’t get it.  That the claim by Joel Creswell, who manages Ecology’s climate pollution reduction program, suggests he’s unaware of a 2022 Energy Information Agency (EIA) detailing the sources for the state’s 74.4 million metric tons (MMT) of CO2 emissions.

The EIA reported emissions included 42.5 MMT from transportation, 11.5 MMT from industrial use, 9.5 MMT for electric power, 6.2 MMT residential, and 5.0 MMT commercial.  Thus, Creswell’s claim “Of the 97 major polluters in the state, 96 have turned in their share of the allowances” raises all sorts of questions. 

The 96 presumably included the state’s five oil refineries, who emitted 6 MMT. and the 9.5 MMT from generators burning coal and natural gas for electric power.  Most of the allowances for the 11.5 MMT industrial emissions were probably from those making cement (a ton of CO2 for a ton of cement).  However, even those buying the allowances presumably just increased the price of their product to reflect the cost.

Creswell made an issue of the Cosmo Specialty Fibers and how the state could “theoretically fine the company $8.6 million a day” for not paying despite the plant being closed for three years.  That they will continue to require they pay for emissions even if the plant never reopens. That every other "polluter" submitted their share of allowances as required, 19,526,071 in all.  A number which will be reduced in the future to increase the cost and encourage further emission reductions.

The bottom line is Creswell claims “Such high levels of high levels of particapation are a good sign the market is working as intended”.  Apparently not recognizing the Climate Pollution Reduction Program is not getting allowances from those emitting more than half the state’s CO2’s emissions. 

Drivers will pay more for the fuel for their vehicles yet pay nothing for the 20 lbs. of CO2 emitted by burning a gallon of gas. (22 lbs. from diesel).  Those using electric power to warm their homes, cook their food, or charge their EV batteries will pay more. However, those burning natural gas in residential areas to heat their homes or in commercial areas where they work, won’t.

Thus, it’s highly unlikely future allowance price increases due to reduced number will significantly reduce the state's CO2 emissions. It’s unfortunate those selling the allowances don’t recognize that reality.  Even worse, the Seattle Times Climate Lab, the paper's initiative that explores the effects of climate change in the Pacific Northwest,” abets them.

 

Seattle Times “Climate Change” Advocacy

The Seattle Times December 11th Westneat column, “Climate advocates won by not mentioning climate” and the paper’s December 12th Climate Lab articles heralded the “benefits” of rejecting I-2117.  

Yet any benefits from reducing CO2 emissions on “Climate” will be limited to reducing the state's 0.117% of the planet’s total.  That even those benefits to Washington residents will be dwarfed by the CO2 coming by jet-stream from China.  

The paper’s Climate Lab article “State carbon market prices jump after initiative failed” includes the following:

The states Dec.4 auction raised nearly $272 million from some of the state’s largest poluters by selling about 5.3 million 2023 and 2024.

Apparently not acknowledging (or recognizing) charging refineries for their emissions will increase the costs of providing the gas, but do nothing to reduce the far larger emissions from those using the gas.  That charging power companies for the emissions from burning natural gas to create electricity will do nothing to reduce the  emissions from those using natural gas. The irony being those who rejected I-2117 in hopes of reducing emissions will pay the increased price for the electric power they use for heat pumps to warm their homes, cook their food, or charge their EV batteries.

The article doesn’t detail how much of the $272 million came from those making cement. That energy needed to bake the limestone, and the CO2 released from the chemical reactions of making the cement result in one pound of CO2 emitted for every pound of cement. Thus, the cost for a ton of cement will increase by whatever the taxes are on a ton of CO2.  Costs that will undoubtedly be passed on to those using the cement for concrete in construction.

The Climate Lab article “King County, Seattle sue over natural gas initiative” details plans for King County and the city of Seattle to file a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a natural gas initiative gas initiative passed narrowly by voters last month.

Yet Sec. (2) of the I-2117 includes the following:

 Every gas company or largecombination utility shall provice natural gas to all persons and corporations in their service area even if other energy sources may be availalbe

Apparently those suing are relying on a state Supreme Court, who has previously degreed Capital Gains are taxible income, to conclude I-2117 violates state’s constitution. Presumably with some ”justification”.

The bottom line is, whatever the reason for rejecting I-2117, the “benefits” of reducing the state’s CO2 emissions will be dwarfed by CO2 on the jet stream from China. That the "climate" benefits of requiring refiners and power companies to pay fees for emissions that will undoubtedly be passed on to consumers, will be dwarfed by those burning the fuel in their vehicle or the gas in their home.  That the costs added to making cement for congrete will increase construction cost throughout state.

Another example of the Seattle Times not recognizing the limited benefits of rejecting I-2117 and who will pay for doing so.

Sound Transit’s 2025 Transit Development Plan

The previous post concluded the Lynnwood Line 1 ridership should be an alarm for the 2025 Line 2 extension to Redmond.  This post details concerns with the Sound Transit Transit Development Plan 2024-2029 and the following changes for 2025:

Link Light Rail 2: Line service expands to Downtown Redmond and Lynnwood City Center Stations

ST Express Bus: Evaluate routing for Routes 510, 522, 542, 544, 545, 550 554, and 556, discontinue temporary Route 515

The TDP raises all sorts of questions.  Does expanding Line 2 mean extending the current Starter Line 2-car service every 10 minutes for 16 hours from Redmond to Lynnwood?  The Line 1’s current schedule provides trains from Lynnwood to Angle Lake every 10 minutes from 4:56 am until 9:06 pm increasing 12 and 15 minute headways until 12:01 am.  Thus, routing both Line 1 and Line 2 to Lynnwood will result in trains every 5 minutes for 16 hours a day.

An earlier post detailed the extension beyond UW Stadium only attracted 16,100 riders, a fraction of the 24,400 to 35,000 from Lynnwood and 41,000 to 49,000 from Northgate Sound Transit had projected. That the limited ridership and high operating cost resulted in a $20 cost per rider.  The TDP for routing Line 2, two-car trains beyond CID to Lynnwood every 10 minutes for 16 hours will add over $200,000 in operating cost without adding significant riders.

The TDP for ST Express Bus service discontinuing 515 along I-5 means the 482 October boardings, presumably 241 riders, will no longer have access to bus routes from Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace to multiple stops in Seattle.  Service every 10 minutes from 4:30 am to 8:35 am inbound and 3:00 pm to 6:15 pm return. 

The  515 schedule travel times from Lynnwood to 5th & Pine was 30 minutes for the 7:25 am, the 5:35 pm return route from 4th and Pike took 41 minutes to reach Lynnwood.  Comparable Line 1 travel times from Lynnwood to Westlake were 32 minutes at 7:26 am and 32 minutes at 5:26 pm.  However, any travel time savings is at least partially offset by more convenient stops in Seattle for both inboumd and outbound routes.

The TDP for ST Express Bus to “evaluate” 510 will presumably terminate the route from Everett at Lynnwood T/C rather than continue with a stop at Mountlake Terrace before the non-stop route into Seattle.  Its schedule and travel times are similar to 515 with 956 boardings and 478 riders with similar access benefits in Seattle. 

The  TDP to use Line 1 to Lynnwood to replace 510 and 515 routes into Seattle will add 719 boardings to the 21,135 October boardings with the light rail extensions beyond UW Stadium. Those boardings along with the 6289 UW Stadium and 10,003 Capital Hill boardings total 37,400 along Line 1 to Westlake; well within the capacity of 4-car trains every 10 minutes. Especially since many of the UW District and Stadium boardings are presumably during afternoon return.  Thus there’s no need to route Line 2 to Lynnwood and incur its additional operating cost.

The TDP’s remaining route changes are the result of a June 21, 2014 Sound Transit proposal to Mercer Island city council to use light rail to replace I-90 bus routes into Seattle. All I-90 corridor buses would terminate at Mercer Island P&R and ST550 will no longer be routed from Bellevue into Seattle.  

Despite years of objections from Mercer Island city council and island residents, the council felt compelled in a July 16, 2019 meeting to agree to accept the Sound Transit “Bus Intercept” plan. Thus, both Sound Transit and King County Metro I-90 corridor buses will be terminated at the Mercer Island P&R and the October 4374 ST550 boardings (2187 riders) will lose their current access to transit. The need to transfer to and from light rail on Mercer Island, the loss of access to multiple stops in Seattle, and hassle of access for the return trip may dissuade many current transit commuters. 

The bottom line is the Lynnwood extension ridership has debunked Sound Transit’s “field of dreams” assumption for extending light rail beyond the UW Stadium station. The Sound Transit TDP for 2025 for routing Line 2 to Lynnwood and “evaluate” ST Express bus routes reflects their failure to acknowledge that result.

 

Sound Transit’s 2025 Startler Line “Alarm”

The previous post concluded the limited ridership added by the Lynnwood Link should have been a “wake-up” call negating Sound Transit’s “Field of Dreams” presumption “If we build light rail, riders will come.  This post details why their plans for the Downtown Redmond Extension to the Starter Line will “likely” result in another “alarm”.

Sound Transit plans for 2025 were detailed in a recent Claudia Balducci flyer,"What's ahead for King County".  She’s used her position as System Expansion Committeee chair to “Look forward to " more light rail" to new stations at Marymoor Park Village and Downtown Redmond in 2025 spring.  That in late 2025, when the "I-90 segment connects Eastside light rail to Mercer Island, Seattle, and the rest of the system".

The  Downtown Redmond Link Extension is scheduled to open in 2025 Spring with access at Downtown Redmond Station and to 1400 stalls at Marymore Village Station before connecting to Starter Line at Redmond Technology Center (RTC) . The extension adds 3.4 miles to the Starter Line route from RTC to South Bellevue T/C. At Sound Transit’s ~$30 per mile light rail cost, the two-car trains will add ~$200 for the 6.8-mile round trip.  Maintaining current schedule for trains every 10 minutes fro 16 hours a day requires 96 trips, ~$19,000 per weekday.  

Sound Transit hasn’t predicted the ridership added by the Downtown Redmond Link's 2 stations.  However, Sound Transit’s September Ridership—Ridership website for Line 2 Starter Line was 5493  daily boardings. Presumably reflecting 2746.5 average riders and far less than the 4000-5700 riders predicted. Thus, the 8-station Starter Line ridership, like the limited riders added by the 4-station Lynnwood Link, have apparently debunked Sound Transit  assumption “if we build light rail, riders will come”.

The “alarm” with the Redmond extension should be commuters currently use the KCM Rapid Ride B route from Redmond Transit Center to RTC and into downtown Bellevue. (Like RapidRIde E Line from Aurora  Village)  It  provides access at 12 scheduled stops between Redmond and RTC and 12 more into Bellevue T/C, with a maximum of 50 possible stops.   The  RapidRide’s 12 scheduled stops from RTC to Bellevue T/C, an alternative to the Starter Line’s 5 stops presumably detracts from its ridership. The 12 RapidRide stops between downtown Redmond and RTC will be an even bigger access advantage over 2 stops on light rail.

It provides routes from 4:14 am to 11:44 pm from Redmond T/C to Bellevue T/C every 10 minutes during peak commute increasing to 15 off-peak and 30-minutes late night. During peak commute it takes15 minutes to Redmond T/C and 20 minutes more to Bellevue T/C. While the trip takes longer than the Starter Line the stops along 148th Ave, 156th Ave, and NE 8th make it far more accessible. 

The bottom line is the RapidRide provides up to 50 stops along route from Redmond to Bellevue T/C.  The increase in access for inbound trips to Bellevue and egress for return trips should have been an ”alarm” for Starter Line ridership.  The 2025 Downtown Redmond Extension debut will “likely” reaffirm that ridership alarm and its $19,000 cost per day. 

Lynnwood Ridership Debunks Need for 2nd Tunnel

The video of the November 21^st Sound Transit Board meeting included another example of the board ignoring Chinatown objections by not selecting the 4th Ave Shallow route for the second tunnel.  They objected despite all the problems with the 4th Ave route detailed in the prior System Expansion Committee meeting. 

The result being the Chinatown area will be devastated by a minimum of seven years boring the second tunnel through the area. However, the recent Lynnwood Link ridership debacle is not only another reason to not devastate Chinatown, it also provides another reason to not even bore a second tunnel.

Previous posts have detailed that 4-car light rail trains don’t have the capacity to accommodate the riders needed to reduce multilane freeway lane peak hour congestion and cost too much to operate off peak. That Sound Transit should have never extended light rail beyond UW Stadium, across I-90 Bridge or beyond SeaTac.

What’s different now is the Lynnwood Link boardings have debunked the Sound Transit’s “Field of Dreams” approach, "if we build light rail, riders will come." That very few of the 80,000 residents who Sound Transit reported lived within a mile of one of its 4 light rail stations chose light rail for their commute into Seattle.  That routing Line 2 trains to Lynnwood would add very few riders but could double the high operating cost.

Thus Line 2 trains should be terminated at the existing CID station with easy access to northbound or southbound Line 1 trains, without the need for a 2nd tunnel northbound.  That the need for the 2nd tunnel southbound can also be negated by the Lynnwood Link’s ridership results.

In this case because the area served by Ballard to SODO link already has multiple stops for access along KCM routes with more convenient egress in Seattle.  A sure recipe for another failure of Sound Transit’s “Field of Dreams” light rail ridership and their need for a second tunnel.

The bottom line is the Lynnwood Link ridership debacle should be a “wake-up" call regarding Sound Transit’s heralded “largest transit system expansion in the country”.  Negating the need for the second tunnel is just part of the “alarm”.

 

My Candidacy for King County Executive

The November 13th Seattle Times headline “King County executive will not seek reelection” and the accompanying article “Claudia Balducci launches her campaign to succeed Constantine” prompted this early announcement I too intend to file. It’s something I’ve done against both Constantine and Balducci during the past decade.  Not to win, but to use the Voters’ Pamphlet to inform county voters of their failure to address the area’s roadway congestion.

While both may be fine people in many respects their actions as chairs of the Sound Transit Board and Board System Expansion Committee reflect a failure to understand what constitutes effective public transit.  That public transit’s goal should be to attract enough of those who can’t or don’t chose to drive to reduce congestion for those that do.

Neither has recognized that 4-car light rail trains don’t have the capacity to accommodate the riders needed to reduce peak-hour multi-lane roadway congestion. That extending light rail doesn’t increase that capacity and adds to their costing too much to operate off-peak. Thus, light rail should have never been extended beyond UW stadium, across I-90 bridge or beyond SeaTac. 

Constantine selected board members based on their ability to attract support for the extensions and Balducci as the System Expansion Committee chair to expedite them.  He used his position as King County Executive to serve as Board chair with over $230,000 as compensation with compensation averaging over $200,000 for the other18 members he selected, presumably expecting their support..

The previous post detailed how that Sound Transit Board had apparently ignored a September ridership report showing boardings for both Lynnwood and Northgate Stations were far less than projected.  Debunking Sound Transit Board's apparent “Field of Dreams” approach “if we build light rail extensions, riders will come". 

The Line 2 route extensions next year will confirm that revelation, especially the folly of routing it thought DSTT and need for 2nd tunnel. A result that may have influenced Constantine’s decision to retire. However, Balducci apparently doesn't have concerns. Her recent flyer "What's ahead for King County" looks forward to "more light rail" to new stations at Marymoor Park Village and Downtown Redmond in 2025 spring.  That in late 2025, when the "I-90 segment connects Eastside light rail to Mercer Island, Seattle, and the rest of the system".

The bottom line is my King County Candidacy will use the Line 1-to-Lynnwood boarding results to validate concerns in previous Voters’ Pamphlets about light rail trains ability to reduce congestion. To advocate not extending light rail beyond Lynnwood T/C or light rail to Ballard, terminating Line 2 at existing CID, not drilling 2^nd tunnel or spending more than $6 billion on a light rail from Alaska Junction in West Seattle to SODO.  Again, not to win, just to inform voters.

Sound Transit Ignores Implications of Lynnwood Link Debacle

The video of the 11/14/2024 System Expansion Committee Meeting demonstrates the Sound Transit Boards continuing its failure to effectively deal with the areas transportation problems. It began with “interim” CEO Goran Sparrrman announcing Sound Transit had received awards for its construction of the Lynnwood extension. He neglected to mention the number of boardings the extension had attracted. 

The Sound Transit Ridership-Ridership website reported the four Lynnwood Link stations totaled 8400 boardings in September.  A fraction of the 24,400 to 35,000 they had projected prior to the debut, presumably based on their assessment of the link's four stations being within a mile of 80,000 residents.

The  Northgate Link boardings were also far less than expected.  The September result for the four link stations totaled 8401 boardings, again a fraction of the 41,000 to 49,000  they’d earlier predicted.  Thus, the total boardings added by extending light rail beyond the UW Stadium station was 16,001, belying Sound Transit “Field of Dreams” approach, “if we build light rail extensions riders will come".

Sparrman also neglected to mention what it cost Sound Transit to accommodate those riders. The 4.2-mile extension from UW Stadium to Northgate extension and 8.5-miles from Northgate to Lynnwood add ~25 miles to the round trip from the  Westlake Station.  Sound Transit budgets light rail cars at ~$30 per revenue mile.  Thus, the extensions add  ~$3,000.00 per 4-car round trip.  Sound Transit’s current Line 1 schedule shows trains every 10 minutes from 5:07 am to 8:47 pm, 12-minute intervals to 10:23, 15 until12:08 and a final train at 12:50 am. The resulting 107 4-car  trips add ~$320,000 to daily operating costs.  

The combination of limited ridership and high operating costs results in a  $~20.00 per boarder cost.  Yet  Sound Transit CEO Sparrman neglected  to include either  “detail” in his presentation and typical of the Board’s System Expansion Committee, they didn’t ask.  Neither acknowleged  the significance of the Lynnwood results.  

The most obvious is the result of extending light rail to Lynnwood should end any plan to extend light rail to  Everett Station.  The cost of implementing the 16-mile extension and six new stations, routing trains to either Mariner P&R or Everett Station  will dwarf any potential benefit.  The Lynnwood Link failure to attract riders should also raise doubts about Sound Transit plans to spend $6 billion on a second bridge over Duwamish Waterway for a light rail extension from Alaska Junction in West Seattle to SODO.

Even more relevant is the “limited” ridership clearly indicates there’s no need to route Line 2 trains next year from Bellevue through DSTT to Lynnwood.   Thus, Sound Transit should terminate the East Link at existing CID Station.  Schedule its operation to meet I-90 corridor demands rather than provide half the trains to Lynnwood.   Avoid the need to limit Line 2 trains to avoid excessive costs for Lynnwood-to-UW stadium operation. Terminating Line 2 at the CID Station also allows the existing DSTT to accommodate all the current Line 1 trains from SeaTac to Lynnwood, mitigating  the need for a second tunnel

That result was especially timely since the 11/14/24 System Expansion Committee meeting also included a presentation concerning  the results of outside consultants evaluating three second tunnel alternatives: Dearborn Street, 4th Ave Shallow, and 5th Ave Shallow Diagonal.  All three alternatives would require disrupting  traffic and demolition of existing buildsings. They concluded that  “Construction Duration Drivers”  favored  the Dearborn Street Alternative, taking 7 years to complete.  

For comparison the 4th Ave Shallow Alternative, the favorite of the vast majority of those commenting at meetings,  would  take 12 year to complete.  Other details such as boardings or travel times weren’t significantly different.  Thus, the decision was made to proceed with implementing the Dearborn Street Alternative.

The bottom line is routing Line 2 through DSTT to Lynnwood will either double the cost of the Lynnwood extension or severely restrict Line 2 schedules.  Terminating it at the existing CID station will eliminate that problem and mitigate the need for a second tunnel. (Also appease those who supported the 4th Ave Shallow CID location) The potential for saving  $13 billion and a minimum of 7 years disrupting  downtown Seattle should not be ignored.

Seattle Times Didn't Get the I-2117 Message

The previous post opined that the fees imposed by voters’ rejection of I-2177 would have little effect on the state’s CO2 emissions.  The Seattle Times apparently didn’t get the message. Their Sunday Opinion Editorial “Voters State’s Landmark Climate Law at Critical Time”’ heralded the 60% of Washington voters who affirmed the Climate Commitment Act.  That the “CCA created a cap-and-trade auction market” with the premise, “Pay for what you emit”.

The previous post detailed how those paying the CCA for emissions included the refineries that provide fuel for our vehicles, bake the limestone to create cement, or burn natural gas to provide electricity to heat our homes, cook our food, or charge EV batteries.  

However, it also detailed how those burning fuel in vehicles made up 36.5 of the 42.5 million metric tons (MMT) emissions from transportation. That the power companies burning natural gas emitted 9.5 MMT, less than half the state’s 20 MMT CO2 from burning natural gas.  Thus those buying fuel or paying for natural gas won’t be “paying for what they emit”.  

The bottom line is that unless those emissions are subject to some tax the state will never achieve the Climate Commitment Act goal “net zero carbon emissions by 2050”.  That the fees resulting from the “political courage to keep to the cause of fighting climate change” by rejecting I-2177 are more the result of the Times misinformation and mendacious ads.

That I-2117 is highly unlikely to be the “gold standard” for the other 48 states.

 

Taxes From I-2117 Rejection

 The November 6^th Seattle Times article “Voters support state’s carbon market” exemplifies what happens when those opposing I-2117 were able to fund advertisements that dwarfed any attempts to support it.  That rather than inform readers about the mendacity of those efforts the Times abetted it with an October 18^th article concerns about what happens if the tax goes away.  

This post details what will happen because the tax didn’t go away.  A 2022 Energy Information Agency (EIA) reported Washington emitted 74.4 million metric tons (MMT) of CO2.  The emissions included 42.5 MMT from transportation, 11.5 MMT from industrial use, 9.5 MMT for electric power, 6.2 MMT residential, and 5.0 MMT commercial. 

The transportation emissions were from refiners refining crude oil into fuel and from vehicles burning that fuel. The five Washington fineries emitted 6 MMT of CO2.  Thus, the remaining 36 MMT were presumably emitted from burning the fuel.  The result of ~20 lbs. of CO2 emission from burning a gallon of gasoline and ~22 lbs. from diesel.  Somewhat less than a pound of per mile for cars but more for heavier vehicles. Charging refiners based on the CO2 they emit rather than the gallons they sell limits the effect of taxes on emissions.

A large part of the industrial 11.5 MMT CO2 emissions results from making cement. The energy needed to bake the limestone, and the CO2 released from the chemical reactions of making the cement result in one pound of CO2 emitted for every pound of cement. Thus, the cost for a ton of cement will increase by whatever the taxes are on a ton of CO2.  Costs that will undoubtedly be passed on to those using the cement for concrete in construction.

The taxes can be applied for the CO2 emissions resulting from those  burning natural gas to generate electric power.  However, like the taxes for refiners, the taxes won’t add to what residential and commercial users pay to burn the  natural gas.  

The bottom line is rejecting I-2117 will result in refineries, those  making cement  or  burning natural gas to create electricity, paying taxes for the CO2 they emit.  Costs that will inevitably be passed on to those buying the gas and those heating their homes with heat pumps and charging the batteries in their cars. 

However, the taxes won't apply to the emissions resulting from those using the fuel to power their vehicles or natural gas to heat their homes, where they work, or cook their food.  Thus, rejecting I-2117 is a very small step towards a CO2 free state

Current Seattle Times Board Doesn’t “Get It”

 The Tuesday Traffic Lab front page article, “Lynnwood light rail might just be too popular for its own good” typifies a Seattle Times that doesn’t “get it”.  The paper has spent more than decade abiding Sound Transit spending billions on light rail extensions beyond UW stadium, across I-90 Bridge, and beyond SeaTac that will do absolutely nothing to reduce the area’s congestion.

In this case claiming, “Every one of the garages connected to light rail stations in the region is out of room during the morning commute” attests to its success.  Failing to recognize filling the 3633 parking stalls added by the link provided a fraction of Sound Transits latest  25,300 to 34,200 projected riders. (substantially less than an earlier 37,000 to 57,000 prediction). That plans to charge $2.00 (that could grow) to reserve a stall for morning commuters does nothing to increase capacity. That those arriving after 2:00 pm won’t have to pay is of little solace as it’s “unlikely” they’ll find an open stall.

The paper has never recognized Sound Transit’s real problem is a Sound Transit Board that doesn’t understand what constitutes effective public transit.  (Despite each member getting ~ $200,000 in compensation).  That a transit system’s goal should be providing sufficient commuters who can’t or don’t want to drive to reduce the congestion for those that do. 

The Board either does not recognize or chooses to ignore the fact 4-car light rail trains don’t have the capacity needed.  The problem being safe operation requires 4 minutes between trains, whether they be Line 1 or Line 2 trains.  

The article claims “Ridership hasn’t been too much of an issue, for either Sound Transit or Snohomish Community Transit, now that its bus service better connects its passengers to the Lynnwood station".  Apparently not recognizing that using light rail trains to replace bus routes into Seattle reduces transit capacity, does nothing to reduce I-5 GP lane congestion, and the former bus riders reduce access for current link riders.

When queried about ridership, Sound Transit claimed, “numbers were taking longer to ‘vet and release’ due to the changes related to expansion.” The Traffic Lab apparently unaware Sound Transit’s initial October Ridership—Ridership website had included boardings at each of the four link stations that totaled 8395; again a fraction of the 25,300 to 34,200 predictions.  (Sound Transit’s later releases deleted both August and September boardings.)  

The bottom line is the September 28^th Sound Transit Board meeting heralded the success of the Lynnwood Link debut claiming “71,000 rode the system just on opening weekend”.  However, neither the October 10^th System Expansion Committee nor the October 24^th Sound Transit Board Meeting mentioned the subsequent weekday operating boardings.

That an October 19^th, 2016, Seattle Times editorial made the following recommendation:

Reject Sound Transit 3 and demand a better plan

Apparently concerned about giving Sound Transit authority to spend $54 billion funding ST3 from 2017 to 2041 suggesting:

Voters in the Puget Sound region should say no to Sound Transit 3 and ask Sound Transit to provide a more reasonable plan with more accountability.

It’s time the current Seattle Times editorial board takes note.

ST Board’s Delusional West Seattle Decision

The YouTube video, “Sound Transit Board selects West Seattle extension route” finalizes its plan to spend up to $7.1B on a 4.1- mile light rail extension from Alaska Junction to SODO. That they’d okayed proceeding with final design and construction will begin in 2027 and take five years to complete.. Some caveats are the increase from the $2.3B in 2016 was attributed to costs based on increasing design from 10% to 30% of final. Thus, finalizing the design may require further costs increases. Also, the $7.1B was in 2024 dollars so nearly 8 years of inflation will see a substantial increase. 

 However, the real caveat is the West Seattle extension’s limited benefits. That spending whatever it takes to construct a second bridge over Duwamish waterway for a light rail connection between Alaska Junction and Sodo will do little to improve public transit.   

King County Metro already provides Rapid Ride C and Rapid Ride H, 24-hour service to the entire area.  During peak commute Rapid Ride C buses run every 15 minutes from Westwood Village, Fauntleroy Ferry to Alaska Junction, down Avalon Way, across West Seattle Bridge to Highway 99, 3^rd Ave in Seattle, and Westlake Ave to South Lake Union.  Schedules typically show 20 minutes from Alaska Junction to 3^rd Ave & Seneca.  Late night and early morning intervals stretch from 20 minutes to hourly.  

Rapid Ride H runs on a similar schedule from Burien T/C to White Center along Delridge Way to West Seattle Bridge to Highway 99 and 3^rd Ave, taking 18 minutes from Myrtle St on Delridge to Madison St on 3^rd Ave.  KCM also provides Route 21 along 35^th Ave in West Seattle, again down Avalon Way, across bridge to Sodo and 1^st Ave into Seattle.  It’s routed from 4:40 am to 12:42 am, again on similar intervals. All three routes provide multiple stops for access in West Seattle and egress on 3^rdAve in Seattle and beyond.  

By comparison West Seattle Link riders’ access will be limited to those withing walking distance of Alaska Junction, Avalon, and Delridge stations or those transferring from bus. It’s not clear what the extension’s schedule will be, but Sound Transit’s claim West Seattle Link extension Improves transit service frequency, reliability, and capacity is dubious at best.

That the “Preferred Alternative” benefits the passenger experience with “Direct and convenient bus/rail connections at all stations” apparently assumes commuters will want to transfer to and from light rail for the route to SODO. There they’ll have to transfer to get to CID and walk to desired destination and reverse the walk and transfers for their return.  The fact they’ll have “High quality transfer between Link Lines at SODO Station” does little to enhance the transfer.  That comments at the September board meeting indicated the SODO station will devastate the area's development prospects.

That benefits claimed for the extension, “Substantial eTOD & Joint Development opportunity in Alaska Junction” is hardly a benefit for the 63 businesses and 145 residents lost because of construction.  That it “minimizes residential displacements” is of little comfort for those losing their homes.  It’s also not clear why light rail from the Alaska Junction to Sodo “Enhances mobility and access”. Or the benefits of it saving 15 minutes for the commute to Westlake in 2042.

The bottom line is the Sound Transit Board continues their “field of dreams approach” that if we build light rail riders will come.  That commuters who currently have access to three KCM routes to multiple stops in Seattle will choose to transfer to a light rail route to SODO for the commute. That they are willing to spend up to $7,100 million in 2024 dollars and years devastating the area along entire route to do so.

That’s way beyond being merely "optimistic",  that’s delusional.

 

 

Sound Transit Hides Lynnwood Debacle.

A previous post detailed how the initial Sound Transit Starter Line ridership for August showed 1695 riders, a fraction of 4000-5700 predictions.  That plans to use Line 2 to provide half the trains to Lynnwood would require Sound Transit double the number of light rail cars in the Starter Line area. The result being operating costs will dwarf any rational farebox revenue.  Subsequent Ridership—Ridership reports neglected to include the August results.

The September 26th Sound Transit Board meeting presntations included reports the light rail extension had  68,000 residents living within a mile of the 4 new Line 1 Lynnwood stations.   That “71,000 rode the system just on opening weekend”.

The initial October release of Ridership—Ridership data indicated very few of those residents chose to ride Lynnwood Link.  It included the September ridership from the August 30^th debut for each of the four link stations and total boardings are listed below: 

Lynnwood T/C                                5094

Mountlake Terrace                         1353

Shoreline North                              947

Shoreline South                             1002

Total Boardings                              8395

Again, subsequent Ridership—Ridership reports neglected to include either August or September results. Thus, the ridership data detailed here is limited by what was recorded prior to deletion.

The 8395 ridership was "good news" for Line 1 riders because those using downstream stations won’t be “crowded out” by Lynnwood Link riders.  (Sound Transit concerns resulted in their implementing a 515 route from Lynnwood to Seattle and an additional Sounder route from Everett.)

The “bad news” for Sound Transit was the 8395 riders were far less than the 25,333 to 34,200 Sound Transit predictions and a tiny fraction of the 71,000 who rode the system on opening weekend. Clearly, 8395 riders using light rail each day for the commute into and out of Seattle does little to reduce I-5 congestion.  Especially since most of the Lynnwood Link riders previously rode buses.

For example, the Initial release of those boarding at Northgate dropped from 8007 in August to 4085 in September.  A clear indication many of the 5094 Lynnwood T/C boarders previously rode buses to Northgate for the commute.   Some of those boarders were the result of Sound Transit’s decision to terminate ST512 there rather than continue into Seattle. However, the number of ST512 boardings for September in the initial release wasn’t recorded prior to it being deleted.

Also, many of the Lynnwood Links 8395 total boardings were presumably the result of Community Transit’s decision to use the Link to replace all the 400 routes into and out of Seattle.   Commuters from Stanwood, Marysville, Lake Stevens, Mukilteo, Edmonds, Mill Creek and others were all routed to one of the Link’s 4 stations.. However there’s no information about how many or where they transferred or how many were dissuaded from using transit because of the need to transfer to and from light rail for the commute.

The ”bad news” resulting from only 8395 riders is also the cost of providing those rides. The 8.5-mile extension essentially doubles trip length and cost from Northgate to Westlake. Sound Transit budgets light rail car operating costs at ~$30.00 per revenue vehicle mile.  Thus, the 8.5-mile extension from Northgate to Lynnwood adds $2040 for each 4-car train’s round trip.

Sound Transit’s current Line 1 schedule shows trains every 10 minutes from 5:07 am to 8:47 pm, 12-minute intervals to 10:23, 15 until12:08 and a final train at 12:50 am. The resulting 107 trips add $218,280 to Line 1 daily 4-car operating costs.  That next year when Line 2 trains are also routed to Lynnwood, enabling Sound Transit plans for routes every 4 minutes during most of the day. The costs of operation will more than double but do little to increase riders.

The “really bad news” for Sound Transit is the Lynnwood Link ridership again demonstrates the fallacy of its "field of dreams" approach that “if we build it riders will come”.  That extensions to Everett and Federal Way are not only unlikely to reduce I-5 congestion, their operating costs will be a huge financial burden for the entire Sound Transit service area.

One can only hope the Sound Transit Board recognizes that reality rather than continue to hide the debacle.

Seattle Times I-2117 Poll Results

The Sunday Seattle Times front page column “Poll: Initiative to repeal state carbon market loses ground” typifies the result of voters seeing on TV or reading on newspapers misinformation at best or outright lies about I-2117.  That those funding Bill Nye the “Scientist Guy” and similar anti I-2117 claims on TV care more about funding they’ll get from taxes on carbon than the lies their money is funding. 

A previous post detailed what they're reading. That the Seattle Times editorial page writer, Kate Riley “didn’t get it” in last Sunday’ Opinion page. That there’s ample evidence that global warming is the cause of increasing atmospheric CO2 not the result of increasing emissions.  That any benefit to Washington to reducing CO2 emissions (0.117% of total planet) is dwarfed by CO2 on jet stream from China.

Another example, the Seattle Times October 18^th front page Climate Lab article “State’s carbon market pumps billions into projects, but what happens if it vanishes” goes beyond mere incompetence. The Climate Lab, purportedly, “an initiative that explores the effects of climate change in the Pacific Northwest and beyond” flat out lies.  

That any benefits from battery powered cars or ferries, electric appliances or heat pumps in homes is more than offset by the "likely" need for additional fossil fueled generators and transmission lost in distributing the energy.

The big lie is the claim CO2 emissions are pollutants. Atmospheric CO2 makes the earth livable temperature wise and fuels the plant life that feeds us and gives us oxygen to live.

The “consequence” of passing I-2177 will be some “commission” will not be allowed to charge CO2 emitters whatever fees they feel are necessary to meet some undefined reduction.  Charges those providing the gas for our cars or the cement for our buildings that will inevitably be passed on to their customers.  

Kate Riley Still Doesn’t “Get It”

 

The Sunday Opinion page “Get ready to vote” headlines Seattle Times editorial page writer Kate Riley’s response to a millionaire-activist funded initiatives. That he is pushing special interests’ agendas, rather than the general public’s interest, and bulldozing anyone in his way. That’s not leadership, that’s destructive and our state can ill afford. One of which is I-2117 claiming “it derails a critical path to Washington’s carbon reduction—and offers nothing in its place.  

She presumably played a major role in the editorial boards “Our “Guide to voting on the statewide initiative” with more details opposing I-2117.  It claims this “wrongheaded initiative would tie the hands of lawmakers attempting to make Washington more resilient to heat-trapping greenhouse gas emissions already profoundly affecting the world around us.”  

She’s apparently not aware that Washington’s CO2 emissions make up only 1.56% of the countries.  That the United States made up 11.2% of the worlds. Thus, any reduction in global temperatures from rejecting I-2117 and limiting Washington’s emissions are limited to reducing the states 0.117% of the total. That, except for California, none of the other states with far higher CO2 emissions are making any attempts to charge emitters.

The claim greenhouse gas emissions already profoundly affect the world around us is belied by thousands of years of ice core data.  That CO2 levels lagged global temperatures, indicating CO2 emissions are the result of global warming not the cause.  That increased temperature caused by the Sun increase CO2 outgassing from oceans, increasing atmospheric levels. That lower temperatures result in more CO2 being absorbed by the ocean, reducing those levels.

The bottom line is the Opinion cartoon comments “Now the rest of you can sort out the consequences”.  The “consequence” of passing I-2177 will be some “commission” will not be allowed to charge CO2 emitters whatever fees they feel are necessary to meet some undefined reduction.  Charges those providing the gas for our cars or the cement for our buildings that will inevitably be passed on to their customers.  

That even if Riley’s dubious claims for rejecting I-2117 are valid.  Any effect on reducing the states CO2 emissions will be dwarfed by CO2 on jet stream from a China that’s planning to increase its 30% of the planets by 25% by 2030.  

The entire area will pay a heavy price is they heed Kate Riley’s opinion.

Traffic Lab Abides ST Dropping Agency Progress Report

A previous post reported that Seattle Times changed its Traffic Lab project from one that “digs into the region’s thorny transportation issues” to one that “comments about how money is spent on transportation”.  Yet they’ve abided the Sound Transit decision to “retire” the monthly “Agency Progress Report”. 

The June version of the report included the normal following Editor’s Note:  

Sound Transit’s Monthly Agency Progress Report summarizes projects and major contracts status, risk, and performance for capital projects. 

However, it also included the following status update: 

As of June 2024, the Agency Progress Report is retired. Information about project status can be viewed on each projects web page

Thus, the  August 2 release of the June 2024 version was the last of 5 years of the latest version of the180-page report.  Different versions of the monthly progress reports have been released since at least 2015.  The last 5 years have  included a Link Light Rail Program Overview listing 16 projects detailing  "Authorized Project Allocation, Commitment to Date, Incurred to Date, and Estimated Final Cost" 

Each project had a Project Summary, Key Project Activities, Closely Monitored Issues, Project Cost Summary, Risk Management, Contingency Management, Project Schedule, Staffing Summary and a breakdown of the project into smaller packages to facilitate implementation. For example, the June 2024 version included 10 pages of details for the Federal Way Link Extension (FWLE).  

The webpage Sound Transit is recommending for information about project status includes a Map, a page with several paragraphs detailing “Overview”, what the FWLE is, its benefits, current project status, facts, and a winter 2022 picture of the Federal Way Station. The picture entitled “2023 Federal Way Extension accomplishments” includes a “Watch on YouTube”. Nothing on August 2024 status.

Again, for a project that “comments about how money is spent on transportation” the Traffic Lab has had little to say about how Sound Transit spends the funds voters approved in 2016.  What began as $54 billion collected between 2017 to 2041 has “evolved” into spending $145 billion between 2017 to 2046 and a $28 billion in "tax backed debt" in 2046 when taxes approved in 2016 end in 2041.

The Sound Transit Board deciding on how that money is spend is made up of 18 elected officials who receive an average of $200,000 annually in compensation.  Most who do so by sitting in front of computers at their office or home, two to three hours, two or three times a month. They sometimes comment but nearly always approve whatever they’re asked to spend. 

The bottom line is the Traffic Lab abided Sound Transit ending the Service Delivery Quarterly Performance Report more than 3 years ago. It had provided details of Link Revenue Vehicles Hours and Miles Operated, Trips Operated, Boardings per hour and trip, and Cost per Boarding.  The monthly Agency Progress Report has provided needed details on how the Sound Transit Board is spending the money to create that service. A Traffic Lab that’s called the board “non-specialists”, should not abide them no longer releasing it.

Ending ST Express Route 550

The previous post detailed Sound Transit should mitigate the costs of Starter Line’s limited ridership by terminating Line 2 at CID. Ending the need for 4-car trains and schedules set by need to provide half the light rail capacity to Lynnwood and beyond. This post details why Sound Transit should use the money saved to continue ST Express 550 into and out of Seattle rather than end it when Line 2 service begins.

Sound Transit currently routes ST550 from 4:57 am to 12:20 am from Bellevue T/C along Bellevue Way, South Bellevue and Mercer Way stations to 4^th Ave and Pike St to Convention Place in Seattle. Intervals between trains increase from 10-minute peak ,15-minute off peak, to 30-minute early morning and late evening.  The schedule shows during peak commute the 8:08 am ST550 bus takes 30 minutes to reach 4^th Ave & Cherry. 

Sound Transit’s August Ridership-Ridership website reports ST550 had 4362 boardings and presumably 2181 riders, 25% more than the Starter Line. The “likely” reason, commuters had access to ST550 at 6 stops between Bellevue T/C and South Bellevue Station and 7 stops in Seattle. Starter Line access on east side was limited to East Main in Bellevue and DSTT stations in Seattle

At $15 per mile, the ST550, 22.5-mile trip from Bellevue to and from Convention Place costs $337.50 or $33,750 for the 100 daily round trips. However, as the previous post details, terminating Line 2 would reduce Starter Line operating costs from $190,000 to $76,000.

Sound Transit could save an additional $29,000 by using ST550 to replace Starter Line to South Bellevue. Use the Bellevue T/C as the interface between ST550 and Starter Line.

The bottom line is Sound Transit’s plan to stop ST550 (and terminate all I-90 corridor buses on Mercer Island) is an attempt to boost Line 2 ridership. However, the Starter Line’s “ominous” results reflect the lack of access available with Rapid Ride B between Redmond and Bellevue.  ST Express 550 provides similar access between downtown Bellevue and South Bellevue T/C. (and better access in Seattle)  King County Metro will presumably continue with Rapid Ride B. Sound Transit should do the same with ST550.

Those living along the route into Bellevue have already endured years of disruption from light rail construction.  Sound Transit should not be allowed to use light rail trains to replace ST550 and end their access to transit.

Ominous Starter Line Ridership.

 Previous posts have questioned Sound Transit’s Starter Line farebox recovery expectation and the predicted 4000-5700 weekday riders.   Sound Transit stopped releasing their Quarterly Service Provided Performance Reports in Q1/2021. It had detailed vehicle hours operated, miles, trips, boardings per trip, and the cost per boarding. That the cost per boarding during Q1 2020, pre-covid, was $5.82. It also provided riders added at each of the light rail stations. 

Sound Transit replaced the boarding data with a “Ridership-Ridership” website with updates monthly on all its transit modes. The website initially included the following boardings for August. (It’s no longer available)

Bellevue Downtown.                               737   

BelRed                                                    181

East Main                                                142

Overlake Village                                      266

Redmond TC                                          999

Spring District                                         233

South Bellevue.                                       632

Wilburton                                                200

Total  Boardings                                      3390

Assuming each Starter Line commuter made to-and-from destination boardings, so the number of riders is half the boardings.  Thus, in August,1695 commuters rode the Starter Line daily, a fraction of the 4000-5700 projections. (Similar to the 14,721 riders for their 41,000-49,000 Northgate predictions)

The costs of providing that service is another concern. Sound Transit budgets light rail car operating costs as ~$30 per revenue mile, so a 2-car train will cost ~$800 for a round trip on the 6.6 mile route.  Their schedule, trains every 10 minutes for 16 hours a day, requires 96 trips. At $30 per-mile-per-car, the 6.6-mile extension would cost $76,000 per day.  

Thus, in August, it cost Sound Transit $19.50 for each of the 3390 boardings.  Dwarfing the Q1 2020 $5.82 cost. Assuming the commuter paid $3 for boarding, the farebox recovery $3/19.50 is 12.6%, about half Sound Transit’s target.  

What makes the number of Starter Line riders so egregious is Sound Transit plans to use Line 2 to provide half of the trains to Lynnwood and beyond.  Their current operating plans for Line 2 would require 4-car trains every 8 minutes during most of ot the day.  

Its “unlikely” 4-car trains every 8 minutes will attrack more Starter Line route riders.  However, increasing  the number of light rail cars from 2 to 4 and number of trains from 6 to 7.5 per hour will result in Starter Line operating costs 2.5 times higher, $190,000 for 16 hour service; 2.4% farebox recovery.

The bottom line is multiple posts on this blog have detailed why Sound Transit should have never been allowed to confiscate the I-90 Bridge center roadways or extend light rail beyond UW or SeaTac.  The resulting increased operating costs have far outpaced firebox revenue, reducing recovery.   It's now limited to detailing attempts to mitigate the damage by terminating East Link at CID and opposing light rail extensions.  The ominous Starter Line ridership is another reason to do so.