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.