A.G Ferguson for Governor Biggest Caveat?

 The July 7 Seattle Times Editorial “Bob Ferguson for Governor” admittedly “makes this decision with caveats”.  However, those caveats didn’t include his biggest caveat, abetting Sound Transit malfeasance. 

For example, there would be no East Link if Ferguson had held WSDOT lawyers “accountable” in the 2013 Freeman litigation opposing light rail on I-90 Bridge. They told  the federal judge the center roadway could be used for light rail because their addition of a 4^th lane on the outer roadway would make the center roadway unneeded for vehicles.  Yet the document the WSDOT cited stipulated the center lanes were still needed for wehicles.  The result will be public transit on the  I-90 Bridge limited to one 4-car light rail train every 8 minutes, a fraction of what’s needed to reduce I-90 congestion.

 

Ferguson’s office abided Sound Transit making  a mockery of federal environmental laws claiming East Link would not impact noise levels in the Mercer Slough Park. Yet planning to spend millions shielding homes hundreds of feet away and across a major roadway from this “non-existent" noise.  Ending forever the quiet solitude of the park.

 

However, the biggest reason for Ferguson caveats is his failure to hold Sound Transit “accountable” for not complying with the Revised Code of Washington (RCW), the permanent laws now in force.   RCW 81.104.100 details the code requirement for high capacity transit system planning.  

 

(2) High capacity transportation system planning is the detailed evaluation of a range of high capacity transportation system options, including: Do nothing, low capital, and ranges of higher capital facilities.  High capacity transportation system planning shall proceed as follows:

 

 (b) Development of options. Options to be studied shall be developed to ensure an appropriate range of technologies and service policies can be evaluated. A do-nothing option and a low capital option that maximizes the current system shall be developed. 

 

Yet there was no indication Sound Transit ever considered two-way BRT on I-90 Bridge center roadway or additional bus routes along I-5 from Everett or Tacoma. That there was no reason to extend light rail beyond UW Station or SeaTac.  That when I raised the issue with A.G. Ferguson’s Consumer Protection Division I received the following response

 

Dear William James Hirt,

Thank you for contacting the Consumer Protection Division of the Attorney General’s Office. Your complaint has been reviewed and it was determined that the issues presented are under the regulatory authority of another agency. Your complaint has been closed accordingly.

 

We referred your complaint to the following agency. Please contact the identified agency directly with questions about the status of your complaint.  

 

Sound Transit Board of Directors

c/o Board Administrator

401 Jackson S

Seattle, WA 98104

 

While his office apparently admitted I had a “legitimate concern” they delegated the response to whether Sound Transit had violated the RCW to Sound Transit.  The below excerpts from Sound Transit’s response gives a whole new meaning to attempting to “exculpate” their approach.

 

As you noted in your complaint, Chapter 81.104 RCW requires development of a high capacity transportation system plan, and RCW 81.104.100 specifically sets forth the requirements that must be included in that system-wide plan. Sound Transit developed draft and final system plans that complied with these requirements and included extensive public outreach from 2005 to 2008. 

 

Yet there’s no indication Sound Transit ever considered 2-way BRT on I-90 Bridge or additional BRT on I-5. The below Sound Transit response concerning East Link was even more absurd.

 

Project level reviews are not subject to the requirements in RCW 81.104.100. As noted in your complaint, the project level review of the East Link project did include a no-build option. Your presumption that this was due to the requirement in RCW 81.104.100(2)(b) is not correct. As indicated above, this statutory requirement applies to system-wide plans, not project level reviews.

 

My attempts to get A.G Furgusons office response continued to be they lacked the authority to require Sound Transit comply.  The result has been billions have been spent on light rail extensions for light rail trains that don’t have the capacity to reduce multilane freeway peak hour capacity and cost too much to operate off-peak.  That Sound Transit exacerbates that problem by using the trains to replace bus routes, reducing transit capacity into Seattle.  

 One can only question whether much of Furguson’s overwhelming financial support comes from the Associated Builders and Contractors and their labor Unions who have prospered as a result.  A  potentially big caveat for A.G Ferguson’s candidacy.