Today's Times: "Seattle Monorail Project makes final debt payment"
The net loss to taxpayers -- dollars that went to monorail staff, lawyers, engineers, bankers, architects, property experts, city departments, and others -- is about $120 million.At least it's done with. Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at September 07, 2006 10:23 AM | Email This
The agency likely will shut down permanently next spring or summer, once the Legislature approves the closure and legal claims against the project are resolved.
The corpse is twitching, let's keep an eye on it.
Okay, I am a suspicious old bastard, I'll pop the champagne when no one is drawing a paycheck, the phones are disconnected, and the eerie music stops.
Posted by: JCM on September 7, 2006 10:28 AMThose are the same tax-revenue parasites that gave birth to Sound Transit as well. They also are the deep pockets now pushing for passage of the Sound Transit Two/RTID ballot measure in 2007. Their payoffs from THAT would make what they got from the monorail debacle look like chicken feed.
This is the real shame.
Posted by: swatter on September 7, 2006 10:47 AMSound Transit, on the other hand, is addressing regional transportation issues that currently exist and will likely grow in the future. Concentrating density around transit hubs is good policy. It may not seem like a big deal right now, but with the likely growth in our region, something is going to have to deal with it.
We can't build more capacity on I-5 - it just isn't going to happen and it is a short-sighted answer anyway.
Cost is huge, yes, but we are building for the future. Personally, now that I live in South King County, I would most definitely ride Sounder if I worked downtown. While it may not gain me much now in terms of time savings, I can rely on its schedule and the bus does not give me that reliability. I have seen traffic get worse in just the last 3 years - it most certainly will continue to do so and as it does, Sounder service will remain a constant and become more appealing. I see that option getting more and more used each day (I work across the street from the tracks).
Unlike the monorail, Sound Transit is building and moving. While I am certain there is waste (it is a government project, after all), the tracks are going up.
Sound growth and transportation planning are critical. Imagine if our leaders in the 70's had taken some measures to control sprawl and plan for mass transit... we would have a reliable system that would be providing many people alternative ways to get to work. Instead, we have to fight for a system in its infancy. 20 years from now, we will look back on our decisions and be glad that we did it. I am sure of it.
Posted by: nobody on September 7, 2006 10:50 AMIt would mean Seattle drivers would have to pay for the extra tabs for a longer period of time. I think that is more than fair as it was their (Seattle voters) actions that caused these property owners to loose their property.
Posted by: nobody on September 7, 2006 10:59 AMAny idea you like is a good use of taxpayer money (e.g. alaska bridge to nowhere)
Get real...
Posted by: Tim Tremaine on September 7, 2006 11:21 AMVoters were provided with a deceptive ballot measure in 1996. The words in Voters Guide referred to a Ten-Year Plan, and the Ten-Year Plan stated that ST expected to need $1.98 billion in local taxes to construct all the system elements.
If ST had delivered what it promised the voters in 1996 we now would have light rail running from up in the U. District to the airport and beyond, and something like double the number of Sounder trains running every day. The sales tax also would be ready to be reduced to some lower level (just enough to retire debt and pay some operations subsidy). The idea was great, but it turned into a nightmare.
Whenever somebody says they support Sound Transit (like you are doing), it is always fair to ask whether that supporter has any idea of the tax costs. The usual "response" is a non-response; the poster is never heard from again. I am not attacking you here, and don't take this the wrong way, but I've got a simple question for you: can you identify any document or statement from anyone at ST that estimates when ST will have collected enough taxes to finish construction of the (significantly) scaled-back system promised in 1996?
From what I hear, ST literally has no plan to back off on its taxes EVEN AFTER it has collected enough to finish what it was given authority to build. In other words, and I hope I am wrong about this, ST plans on collecting more taxes than it needs to construct the system and subsidize operations.
ST expects to take in over $300,000,000 in taxes this year alone, and that number is growing at a huge rate because the primary revenue source is a very regressive sales tax. The increase in it from '04-'05 was 8.2%. The poorest in our community pay the most proportionally. Most of them get zero benefit from something like Sounder commuter service. That money could ripple through the private sector instead, providing multiples of wealth to small businesses and individuals on the lower rungs of our society's ladder. It is a terrible extraction of wealth - I could name several alternative public sector recipients who could make this a better region if they had a fraction of that money (schools, public health, etc.).
The idea of mass transit is great, but the institution of Sound Transit is an abject disaster that the people subject to its taxes are powerless to limit or stop. It is a profoundly anti-citizen entity, and it should be opposed at every opportunity.
In other words, the Sound Transit Board is not held accountable for the misleading publicity it generates, the grossly uneconomical performance of its infrastructure, and the maliciously misleading propaganda that enabled its 'election' in 1996.
The whole entity should be forced to stand for re-election so that its murky and dishonest politics may be brought to light and publicly debated.
Posted by: Hank Bradley on September 7, 2006 11:48 AMDon't retire the "Die, monorail, die" slogan just yet.
Posted by: Bill K. on September 7, 2006 09:55 PMI understand there will be no formal audit of SMP. However, it would serve the public to know who received the big payouts from SMP over the years. Apparently the net "loss" of tax money was $120,000,000. Could SMP post something showing who the twenty largest third-party payees were? Obviously the sellers of the 34 properties got big payments, but we know who they are - it is the others that we the taxpayers don't know about who should not remain hidden for their roles in this debacle. Thank you.
Posted by: never forget on September 8, 2006 07:16 AM