On January 25th, ReThinkTheLink.org hosted a public forum at the Center for Active Living in West Seattle to discuss the proposed West Seattle Light Rail Extension (WSLE), drawing a crowd of concerned citizens and transit advocates. The forum, led by Alan McMurray of Rethink the Link, aimed to delve into the facts surrounding the project, using information gleaned from Sound Transit's documents and public records. The panel included John Niles, an independent researcher and transportation consultant; Martin Pagel, an engineer, cyclist, and transit advocate; and Martin Westerman, an advocate for urban green space preservation. Conrad Cipoletti, a carfree community advocate, moderated the panel.

The forum took place just weeks before the anticipated Record of Decision from the United States Department of Transportation (DOT), expected on February 28th. Despite assurances from incoming Secretary of Transportation, Sean Duffy, that previously approved projects would receive his support, panelist John Niles raised concerns that the project could still be affected by President Trump, who could delay or stop it.

The forum sponsors prepared a "gallery walk" of images depicting the most likely path for the train, listed the 271 properties affected and much more. ReThinkTheLink published their own "altenative" response to Sound Transit's FEIS which raises many of these same issues.

Cost Escalation Concerns

The panel expressed significant concerns about the project's escalating costs. Martin Pagel stated that the current cost per mile between SODO and West Seattle is approximately $1.9 billion, making it the second most expensive light rail project in North America, behind New York City. He stated the bridge cost is included in the $1.9 billion dollars per mile. John Niles pointed out that the cost estimates do not include debt service costs, which are the interest on the loans. He noted that Sound Transit is working hard to ensure they can meet their financial obligations. Additionally, Niles emphasized that Sound Transit is essentially a permanent tax, collecting $6.5 million a day in local taxes. He also stated "We're we're right at the top. I'm actually claiming that the whole Sound Transit program is the biggest in the world."

Voter Approval and Project Changes

The panel discussed how the current project differs from what voters approved in 2016. Pagel noted that voters approved the idea of a light rail to West Seattle, but without the critical details such as cost, loss of housing and small businesses. "The first thing on the list was better bus transit. The second thing on the list was let's look at light rail. Looking at light rail means not just lines on a map," stated Pagel. John Niles argued that the project now costs more, carries fewer people, does more environmental damage, and has viable alternatives. According to Niles, "We said you voted for light rail to West Seattle. We're serving it up, right? Look at that. It's all we've laid it out here. Now, you know, it costs a little more than we thought, doesn't carry as many people as we thought. Maybe tears down some more houses and businesses than we thought." Pagel also pointed out that the original plan of a light rail line from West Seattle to downtown Seattle has been scaled back to a line that runs from SODO to West Seattle.

Ridership and Transit Alternatives

Panelists questioned the projected ridership, noting that the WSLE is expected to serve only 5,400 riders per day at a cost of $1.3 million per rider, making it a poor use of public funds. Pagel stated, "Metro Transit will cancel a route if it costs more than $10 per rider."

Metro's own website however does list ridership costs in the $11 to $12 average cost range so Pagel's claim here could be mistaken.

He also said, "the cost per rider the day they open if they open will be $1.3 million a rider,". Martin Westerman pointed out that Sound Transit had originally estimated 37,000 daily riders before the ST3 vote, and later 27,000 daily riders after ST3, while current estimates are only at 5,400 per day.

John Niles emphasized the importance of improving the existing bus system, citing that an investment of even a fraction of the project's budget into the bus system could produce amazing results.

The panel also noted that current plans do not connect to downtown Seattle, but only to SODO, requiring transfers to reach downtown. Pagel also stated that Metro Transit will continue to run the buses, meaning that none of the reallocation of bus hours will happen until the line gets continued to downtown, which they expect to be decades away.

Environmental Concerns

The forum also raised significant environmental concerns. The panel noted that the project would cause irreparable damage to ecosystems and generate 380,000 tons of carbon from construction that would not be mitigated by savings in carbon emissions. They also raised issues with the destruction of green space and trees. According to Pagel, “the FEIS now shows that it will have the carbon impact from the construction. It will generate more carbon from the construction than it will ever save us."

John Niles pointed out that the environmental review process is primarily focused on where to place the light rail, rather than the benefits of alternatives like a better bus system.

Q&A Session

The forum concluded with a Q&A session where community members voiced concerns and sought clarification. Some of the questions and comments included:

•

A community member asked about the fate of trees cut down for the project, specifically mature trees that are most efficient at absorbing carbon. Pagel answered that Sound Transit says nothing about this.

•

One attendee stated that West Seattle is different from Ballard, in that Ballard has one central commercial area with several highways leading into it, whereas West Seattle is a series of isolated communities, creating a need for inter-community transit. Pagel agreed that it is easier to serve Ballard but the Ballard line would serve South Lake Union, Seattle Center and Interbay.

•

A West Seattle resident expressed a preference for buses, and asked how to get an initiative on the ballot to stop the light rail. John Niles responded that Sound Transit is not subject to transit and cannot be voted on again. He noted that the best approach would be to contact state representatives.

•

Another attendee questioned the panel's legal strategy, and why there is no legal representation. John Niles stated that Sound Transit has commitments from most law firms in town, making it hard to find new lawyers.

•

A community member asked why Sound Transit is allowed to not talk about construction carbon. A panelist responded that Sound Transit does mention it in the EIS, but it is buried in the last appendix. Another panelist said the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency should be a leverage point.

Call to Action

The panelists encouraged community members to voice their concerns by commenting on the environmental record before the February 28 deadline. They also urged attendees to contact their elected officials at the city, county, and state levels to express their concerns. The panel also urged that any comments to the DOT include that the comment is a reaction to the need for input into the record of the decision.

The forum underscored significant community concerns about the West Seattle Light Rail Extension and served as a call to action for greater transparency, a focus on community needs, and a more comprehensive assessment of transit options. The panelists also stated that they are not sure how to get the message across that the Sound Transit project is not what the voters originally voted for. The website rethinkthelink.org was provided as a resource for additional information and opportunities to get involved