While I agree with Executive Sims, your editorial mischaracterized the choice.

First, Executive Sims is still on the Sound Transit Board. He was one of two negative votes on the Sound Transit 2 plan. You wrote: Sims used to be a member of the board of Sound Transit.

Second, the disagreements between Sims and Mayor Nickels had little to do with Ballard bus service. Sims correctly argued that the Sound Transit 2 funds in the outer four sub areas would have been better used on bus service and bus capital rather than on long extensions of Link light rail. Nickels favored the maximum extension of Link light rail. So, they largely agreed on the Sound Transit 2 expenditures in the North King County sub area that includes Ballard, though the extension between Northgate and the county line may have been in contention. Sims argued for additional suburban bus service, not Ballard bus service.

When Link light rail is extended to Northeast 45th Street and Northgate, the North King County sub area, including Ballard, will get additional bus service. Many bus hours will be redeployed. But that will not happened until about 2020 with an affirmative vote on Sound Transit 2 (Proposition 1, Nov. ballot).

Third, the disagreements had more to do with timing than Ballard issues. Sims would have delayed the Sound Transit 2 vote to await the tolling regime on the limited access highways, a replacement for the sales tax, and a more robust economy, as he anticipated the upcoming recession.

Note that one Ballard bus route, the 44, runs on clean quiet electricity, not diesel.

Jack Whisner

Whittier Heights