By james art 
On the left is Konrad Cipolletti. Martin Westerman, Martin Pagel and John Niles, panelists for the ReThinkTheLink.org Light Rail Forum held at the West Seattle Center for Active Living on January 25.
Photo by Patrick Robinson
On January 25 ReThinkTheLink.org hosted a public forum at the West Seattle Center for Active Living to discuss the proposed West Seattle Light Rail Extension (WSLE), drawing a crowd of concerned citizens and transit advocates. The forum, moderated by Allan 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, independent researcher and transport consultant; Martin Pagel, engineer, cyclist and transit advocate; and Martin Westermann, an advocate for the preservation of urban green spaces. Conrad Cipolletti, an advocate for the car-free community, moderated the panel.
The forum was held just weeks before the expected decision by the United States Department of Transportation (DOT), which is expected on February 28. Despite assurances from incoming Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy that pre-approved projects will receive his support, panelist John Niles expressed concern that the project could still be influenced by President Trump, who could delay or stop it.
Forum sponsors prepared a “gallery walk” of images depicting the train’s most likely path, listed the 271 affected properties and more. ReThinkTheLink posted its own “alternative” response to Sound Transit’s FEIS which raises many of these same questions.
Concerns about cost escalation
The group expressed significant concern about the escalating costs of the project. Martin Pagel said 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 after New York City. He said the cost of the bridge is included in the $1.9 billion per mile. John Niles pointed out that the cost projections do not include debt service costs, which are interest on loans. He noted that Sound Transit is working hard to ensure they can meet their financial obligations. Niles also emphasized that Sound Transit is essentially a permanent tax, collecting $6.5 million a day in local taxes. He also stated, “We are right at the top. In fact, I would argue that the entire Sound Transit program is the greatest in the world.”
Voter approval and project changes
The panel discussed how the current bill differs from the one approved by voters in 2016. Pagel noted that voters approved the idea of light rail to West Seattle, but without critical details such as cost, loss of housing and small businesses. “The first thing on the list was better bus transport. The second thing on the list was to look at light rail. Looking at light rail means more than just lines on a map,” Pagel said. John Niles argues that the project now costs more, carries fewer people, does more damage to the environment and there are viable alternatives. According to Niles, “We said you voted for streetcar to West Seattle. We serve it, right? Look at this. That’s all we’ve laid out here. Now, you know, it’s costing a little more than we thought, it’s not carrying as many people as we thought, maybe it’s going to destroy more houses and businesses than we thought.” Pagel also pointed out that the original light rail plan from West Seattle to downtown Seattle is reduced to a line that runs from SODO to West Seattle.
Transportation 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.”
However, Metro’s own website lists fares in the mid-$11 to $12 range, so Pagel’s claim here may be wrong.
He also said that “the cost per rider the day they open, if they open, will be $1.3 million per rider.” Martin Westerman pointed out that Sound Transit originally estimated 37,000 daily riders before the ST3 vote, and later 27,000 daily riders after ST3, while current estimates are only 5,400 per day.
John Niles emphasized the importance of improving the existing bus system, citing that investing even a small portion of a project’s budget in the bus system can produce incredible results.
The panel also noted that current plans do not connect to downtown Seattle, only to SODO, which requires transfers to get to downtown. Pagel also said Metro Transit will continue to operate the buses, meaning none of the reallocation of bus times will happen until the line runs downtown, which they expect to be decades away.
Concern for the environment
The forum also raised significant environmental concerns. The panel noted that the project would cause irreparable damage to ecosystems and generate 380,000 tonnes of carbon from construction, which would not be mitigated by carbon savings. They also raised issues with the destruction of green spaces and trees. According to Pagel, “The FEIS now shows that there will be a carbon impact from the construction. It will generate more carbon from the structure than it will ever save us.”
John Niles pointed out that the environmental review process has focused primarily on where to put light rail, rather than the benefits of alternatives like a better bus system.
Question and answer session
The forum concluded with a question-and-answer session where community members raised concerns and sought clarification. Some of the questions and comments include:
•
A community member asked about the fate of trees cut for the project, specifically mature trees that are most efficient at sequestering carbon. Pagel responded that Sound Transit isn’t saying anything about it.
•
One attendee stated that West Seattle is different from Ballard because Ballard has one central commercial area with several freeways leading into it, while West Seattle is a series of isolated communities creating a need for transit between communities. Pagel agreed it’s easier to serve Ballard, but the Ballard line will serve South Lake Union, Seattle Center and the Interbay.
•
A West Seattle resident expressed a preference for buses and asked how to get an initiative on the ballot to stop the streetcar. 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 officials.
•
Another participant questioned the panel’s legal strategy and why there was no legal representation. John Niles said Sound Transit has commitments from most law firms in the city, making it difficult to find new lawyers.
•
A community member asked why Sound Transit is allowed not to talk about construction carbon. A panelist responded that Sound Transit did mention it in the EIS, but it was buried in the final appendix. Another participant said the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency should be a point of leverage.
Call to action
The panelists encouraged community members to voice their concerns by commenting on the environmental record before the Feb. 28 deadline. They also urged attendees to contact their elected officials at the city, county and state level to voice their concerns. The panel also urged that all comments to DOT include that the comment is in response to the need to record the decision.
The forum highlighted significant community concerns about light rail expansion in West Seattle and served as a call to action for greater transparency, a focus on community needs, and a more holistic assessment of transit opportunities. The panelists also said they weren’t sure how to convey the message that the Sound Transit project is not what voters originally voted for. The website rethinkthelink.org was provided as a resource for additional information and opportunities to get involved