The Seattle P-I’s Joel Connelly writes about the rush of local politicians scrambling to take credit for light rail ahead of next month’s inaugural ride, sparking bemused (and deserved) condescension from The Oregonian’s Jeff Mapes:
Seattle’s first light rail line – yes, you read that right, it’s only taken the Emerald City 23 years to catch up with Portland – will start service in just 43 days. And it’s a big issue in local politics, with everyone jostling to claim credit.
As Mapes points out, the long debate over the high initial cost of investing in rail vs. bus service may never end, but… “if Portland serves as an example, once this train gets going, it will have a lot of momentum.”
too bad ours is technically superior to theirs.
they can only run 2 car trains because portland runs their trains at grade in the middle of the city, while we can run 4 car trains because of the transit tunnel and our long length stations.
we’re approaching metro rail, not light rail.
Portland is going to open their Green Line in September. We haven’t caught up yet. TriMet does sort of have one failure, WES or the Westside Express, a Suburban Commuter Train from Wilsonville connecting with the MAX Red and Blue lines at Beaverton. The DMUs used on the train keep breaking down. I do not know if it is because the cars were built by a company now out of business, although it should not be an excuse. The BUDD RDC still runs in daily service in areas like Dallas and Victoria B.C, decades after the company quit making them.
The next Portland line will be the line to Milwaukee. That one has a better chance to proceed than the Yellow Line extension to Vancouver, Wa. The next phase of the inner city Portland, Streetcar, will be the East-shore Willamette line, completing the loop. The vehicles the City of Portland is buying to sustain the service once it is completed, will be coming from United Streetcar LLC, a subsidiary of the Oregon Iron Works. These are the first Modern Streetcars built in the U.S since San Francisco MUNI took delivery of their last PCC Car, No.1040. That was around 1952.
Also, TriMet continues to keep their Type 1 LRVs in service even though they are inflexible(cannot run solo because of their High Floors and no lifts, need to be run with a Type 2, Type 3, or the new Type 4, which are low floor LRVs), and could retire them after 25 years(which they are getting close to), but instead gave them a rebuild. For about $100,000 each, they get another 20 years out of them.
1) Good point. I think the technical term for what we are building is called Light Rapid Transit, being mostly Grade Separated. Similar to the LAMTA Green Line(Not the BLue Line which is accident prone, due to grade crossings), and some portions of the C-Train in Calgary and the Edmonton LRT system.(Ironic, Electric Light Railing seeming to succeed in Canada’s Oil Patch, and even powered by wind-generated electricity).
Portland provides an interesting contrast with how transit services are provided up here. The revenues needed by TriMet for excellent bus and light rail service are much less than what ST and METRO haul in.
TriMet uses a financing package comprised of a greater percentage of federal grant money, less regressive taxes, less taxing overall, and NO sales taxes. They’ve got an extensive bus network, 50+ miles of light rail either built or under way, and only $94 million in debt outstanding. METRO and ST haul in sales taxes at a 1.8% clip: far more than any of their peers. ST already has over $1 billion of long term bonds outstanding, and in the next ten years plans on selling $8 billion more in long term bonds.
Portland’s businesses pay a payroll tax of about $380 million a year, vs. ST/METRO’s collections that next year will be about $1.2 billion. Boy, we’re stupid fucking chumps, huh?
Everywhere else people and communities are served with buses and light rail paid for through existing revenue sources, lots of federal funds, public/private partnerships, and in the case of TriMet a very modest tax on businesses. That’s a fair financing package, and it’s nothing like METRO/ST’s abusive financing model.
No general taxes are levied on people there by TriMet, during or after light rail construction. Apparently some Oregon cigarette tax revenue is used, and part of another existing State revenue source is used as security for bonding. But absolutely no massive general regressive taxation of people and families like Sound Transit and METRO use.
The first 15 miles of TriMet light rail there were completed in 1986, Fed grants paid the most and local taxes paid only 17% of that.
A 18-mile extension was completed in 1998, Fed grants paid the most and local taxes local taxes paid only 27% of that.
A 5.5-mile extension to the airport was completed in 2001, local taxes paid about 70% of that with the rest from private money making up the balance.
Two new extensions are under construction. A 8.3-mile extension will be completed this year, Fed grants are paying the most and local taxes local taxes cover 40%. A 14.7-mile extension will be completed this year, with Fed grants paying half and state and local taxes covering the balance.
TriMet’s reasonable taxing practices clearly demonstrate how unreasonable – and punitive to people – Sound Transit and METRO’s leaders are. TriMet taxes in a fair, modest way. ST/METRO hammers the public with exactly the wrong kind of taxing scheme, and far too much of it.
Much less tax is needed in Portland, to subsidize that FAR bigger bus and train system. In Portland, the TriMet buses and light rail had about 105 million boardings last year – about 20% fewer than ST and METRO combined. The total taxes for TriMet this year will be about $230 million; the comparable figure for ST/METRO is $1.2 billion, with ST’s car tab taxes on top of that.
That approximately $230 million in TriMet taxes is on par with what TriMet took in during all the prior years it was in heavy light rail construction-phase spending. That amount of tax is not expected to go up much over the next couple of decades either, despite all the good TriMet is doing with it. And again, that is a modest tax on businesses, with bigger companies paying more.
ST/METRO’s taxing and spending practices are nothing short of abusive in comparison.
Hey “Evergreen Railfan” –
By my calculations ST’s hauled in about $4.8 billion in local taxes since April 1997. What’s your estimate, and let us know how you derived it.
Also, how much tax (sales and car tab) do you think ST plans on confiscating prior to the initial planned rollback (est. 2038)? I’d like to see you derive a figure for that – heck, it might be something on the order of $48 billion, right?
Boy, that’d sure be fucked up, as ST’s capital spending (YOE) estimates only are in the range of $17.5 billion.
Looking forward to your response! Don’t run away like all the “ST fans” always do when a question gets asked!
The other one that bugs me is the “this costs too much” argument. The general point made against EVERY rail system ever created in the nation, ever. It cost $x more than our current horses, cars, etc. Yes.
No rail system ever created, on it’s very FIRST leg, with ALL the money spent on startup (updating downtown tunnel, building rail yards and maintenance facilities, buying trains, etc) will ever be justified on cost. But that’s not the point.
NY city HAS TO have subways to work. The first one was absolutely MORE expensive and just riding a horse on the same path. But that wasn’t the bloody point. Seattle doesn’t HAVE TO have rail yet. Almost. But as it grows (and it will) and we fail to magically create new land to build new freeways between Lake Washington and the Sound, it will be more and more congested and we will HAVE TO have it just like NY does to function.
You can argue when that tipping point is, but the funny thing is, thinking about $s, is the sooner you do it THE CHEAPER IT IS! If we had built this (started) back in the 60’s it would have cost 1/5 as much or less.
Seattle is just in the awkward size where it’s just STARTING to need this, so you can argue we should wait. But only so long, because it just costs more with each and every passing year.
“Portland’s businesses pay a payroll tax of about $250 million a year, vs. ST/METRO’s collections that next year will be about $1.2 billion.”
re 5: Is there any way you can factor in the increased business activity brought about by decent mass transit — or is it just the money that ST does or will take in?
If the latter is the case, then highways are a money pit, as they bring in no $$$.
Well highways aren’t a money pit because people and businesses use them all the time to get around and serve all manner of personal and economic needs and desires.
The problem with this light rail here is the tax cost (including how taxes are used to secure the debt in amounts that greatly exceed capital and operating costs) and the lack of density. Those factors mean far too much tax of the wrong type is being used to serve too few people. We won’t ever have the density required to utilze this light rail system properly. And the cost of it in comparison to LRT systems now under construction is grossly expensive.
All you have to do is look at everywhere else that LRT systems are built, and look at how little it cost local taxpayers, to understand this financing plan is HORRIBLE.
There is nothing wrong with LRT in the abstract. There is nothing wrong with LRT if it is paid for the way other places pay for it. There is nothing wrong with the cost other places pay for LRT. But here, on every one of those scales, this system is a complete disaster. There is simply no two ways about it. This Sound Transit project hauls in billions and it doesn’t even employ local people to any great extent, the big profits are made by out of state entities (except the law firms that designed it).
Just try comparing it from a cost/financing model to anyplace else. It is bad, bad, bad . . ..
. . . and nobody should jump in and say “building a highway now would cost 5x as much for the capacity” because that’s not a valid argument.
Capacity can be increased on existing highways by raising fuel prices, congestion-priced tolling, and other means. Bear in mind since a ton of jobs downtown were lost (WAMU, etc.) there are no real capacity problems now, esp. with high fuel prices.
The obscene regressive taxing of THIS light rail plan is a freakin’ abomination. Again, I’m not saying building new superhighways is the answer, because I don’t think increasing travel capacity to downtown Seattle is a major need. We’ve got plenty of other social needs that should be dealt with first.
. . . and yes, business activity in some sectors I guess would be increased by virtue of light rail (as would ease of commutes of government workers who live far away from their jobs which are at the terminal downtown of LRT). However, that to me just suggests that the tax burden should fall on businesses, as it does in Portland.
No way should ST’s obscenely expensive “tax by billions more than needed for capital and operations costs” financing plan be supported by regressive sales taxes that harm those with the least in our community to a disproportionate extent.
Our light rail kick’s there’s ass though: more grade-separation, more dedicated right-of-way, longer trains and more subway.
Their’s is like the SLUT dragged all over the county.
10 ‘. . . and nobody should jump in and say “building a highway now would cost 5x as much for the capacity” because that’s not a valid argument.’
Why the hell not?
If the true cost of building our “interstate” highway system were borne by the local businesses and commuters who use it the most, our entire landscape and style of living would be very, very much different from what it is today.
Admittedly, the financing and planning of ST is a very expensive mess. That doesn’t mean that the massive federal subsidies that went into laying the concrete upon which our everyone-in-his-own-car culture has grown, originally in the name of creating a “military transportation network”, didn’t skew the entire equation. At the time most of it was undertaken, nobody really questioned the ultimate costs.
12 Yeah, but like the man said…it’s been dragging them around for nearly a quarter of a century already.
@6
Exactly.
re 9: “Well highways aren’t a money pit because people and businesses use them all the time to get around and serve all manner of personal and economic needs and desires.”
Really?? That was my point. I’m amused that you feel you have to restate it for me to understand. So, if I am to understand your point, you seem to be saying that the light rail will forever connect points A, B, and C — and nothing more. Therefore, based on your calculations, it lacks the ‘density’ to improve the economy. BUT: If accessible light rail connects the east side, Everett, Woodinville, Auburn, Renton, etc., wouldn’t that meet your standards of density?
re 9; Are you sure you are not a Hyundai salesman? Sounds like your anti-rail stance has more to it than just the pure light of cost, reason, and density concerns.
Apeman was a Kinks song. Did you know that? I did.
@Apeman:
I’m sorry the taxes ST is using to finance itself don’t meet with your approval. Take it up with the State Legislature. They are the ones who created the taxing authority ST uses.
There is a further problem that many taxes used to finance rail systems in other jurisdictions may not be legal under the Washington State Constitution. For example gas taxes can’t be used for transit here.
Ape Man is right on about the taxes. Except. The number is much closer to $6 Billion in taxes collcted. Insane. That works out to several $hundred per passenger per trip. The absolute worst ROI of any rail system in the world. -NOT- something to be proud of.
Everyone has hashed out all the faults and failures of this particular “light” rail system. They are too numerous to list: Chief among them being the incongruous route that cuts through hills rather than going around (for far less money) and thereby providing access to significantly more people and the ignorance of developing a congestion relief system create MORE congestion by travelling in the same dimension (surface of the earth) as existing traffic.
Lastly, cars, busses and trucks will be here far longer than “light” rail. Especially seeing that it’s impossible to use “light” rail to move your furniture. The Interstate highway system was the leading factor in the tremendous economic growth in America in the late 20th Century. As America turns from its greatest strength, i.e. roads, it will become much, much weaker economically.
Wish TriMet would fix their broken ticket machines. Several times I’ve been to Portland in the past two years, when I took TriMet’s light rail rather than driving a car there, so many broken ticket machines (and unhelpful or rude TriMet staff). Say what you will, Portland’s system is wonderful in some ways, awful (some staff) in other ways, makes it hard to use in still other ways (broken ticket machines).
Maybe Seattle will have an NBA team 23 years from now, too?