March 08, 2007
More cost overruns on the light rail boondoggle
Seattle Times: "It's back to drawing board: Sea-Tac rail stop gets 1 bid"
Just one company bid to build Sound Transit's landmark light-rail stop at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, at a price $43.5 million higher than expected.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at March 08, 2007
05:14 PM | Email This
1. In Simsville $43.5 million is chump change, pal....I'm waiting for the final estimate for the tunnel north under Capitol Hill, under the Ship Canal and to the University District -- now that is gonna get some headlines...
2. Just the tip of the iceberg.......
Typical liberal lowball estimating
3. Did you see the picture of the station? My god, no wonder it costs so much. Why can't we just have a platform with a roof over it rather than some monument to Sound Transit.
4. To BornRight #3................
are you sure you were born right, or just chose that lifestyle?
and about why it costs so much to build the monument to sound transit, it's "your" money. But then again, you knew that.
5. To fRed #4
And your point is...................?
6. Well now since is already is over 2 Billion over budget and half as short, I hope everyone remembers these underestimated promises when they come for 12 Billion more this year.
I will certainly be voting H no H no on both of their proposals.
As if that will matter with the Sims Elections department counting the mail in votes.
7. How is this an overrun? The bid hasn't been accepted.
8. You're wasting words by saying Sound transit has more overruns...that goes without saying.
9. I notice you guys never comment on roads projects (or Iraq projects) going way further over budget than mass transit projects which score much higher in public opinion polls.
Not to mention big roads projects coming down the pipeline will force many private property owners to give up their homes and property for roads projects which aren't even fully funded. It will be instructive to see how you deal with that problem.
Is this a permanent blind spot you guys have?
10. BTW, this was a private contractor (and good Republican) taking advantage of a one-bid contract. Given the incredible waste of money your no-bid friends at Halliburton have brought us taxpayers, wouldn't you clowns consider this a "victory?"
11. Benjamin- You are wrong. SoundPolitics does frequently comment about road projects going over budget. Those mistakes are, of course, the fault of the governor.
12. Benjamin, I'm still excited about the new Sound Transit Bus Station at the 520 exit that cannot be accessed by buses. Combine that with the bus station tunnels that have light rail tracks built the wrong width for light rail and you begin to see a pattern. That pattern is "progressives" who are completely incompetent. Now, shall we talk about the Seattle school system or King County's election board?
13. Daniel K-
You are correct technically speaking I suppose.
So let's appease you, you anal weasely little prick, and just call it overbudget instead of overrun. Sheesh.
Oh and Daniel K...my concern is the OVERUNS & CHANGE ORDERS that will occur after the project is started.....and never reported to the taxpayers.
When Sound Transit goes back to the drawing board, it means one thing.....
How do we get what we want & screw the taxpayers?
They will scale down the project, then once it is started add change orders. Just watch.
14. #10 Benjamin
How odd, none of you complained when Clinton was using Haliburton?
Jokes on you fool.
15. The questions should be asked who is going to pocket millions in selling bonds for these projects. Instead of talking about the cost to build something. Any project. When you bond the money you give a cut of tax payer money to one lawyer group in Seattle. You get the cost estimate of let say 100 Million Dollars. But the politicians are going to bond the money over 30 years. They calculate how much it is going to cost. I did a quick calculation I made some assumptions that Interest Rate is 6% and that you have a 30 year payback. I do not include the cut the lawyers make for selling the bonds Because I do not have a clue on their cut of the total funding. Overall for every 100 Million in Bonds. The price tag is just under 600,000 per month in taxes. The cost over 30 years is 215 Million Dollars. The cost of interest to make a project by funding is never talked about. Just the cost to build it yet we the tax payers should consider that it is actually at a minimium double what they claim. And that is without costs of selling the bonds which only one lawyer group in Washington State gets all that money. Democrat have a monopoly on getting that money. No wonder they can buy so many elections to keep the status quo. Do not want any competition to that honey pot.
Why is it that all big projects get bonded. Instead of pay this month for X amount of projects we pay for a small set of mega projects that go for 3 to 10 years but have to pay for them for 30 years. And when the projects are done to keep people working they need the same amount of money bonded for another 3-10 years of work. So in fact Every so often they need to start the bonding again to pay for more projects.
Or put it in this context the gas tax you pay today does not go to start new projects but much of the money is already promised to pay bonds. So of course if you want more projects accomplished the only way is to keep increasing the gas tax and other taxes every few years or else there will be no funding to maintenance, No money to pay for needed road projects, ect.
The money is already spent so anything new or a major project must have some means to increase taxes to pay because even though Millions of Dollars come in every year it is already spent to pay existing bonds.
I am a firm believer in Pay as you go. No Bonds. If tax revenue from Gas Tax is 50 Million this year. You do the projects that are within that 50 Million budget for the next year. Defer non emergency work and Budget the money that comes in to do the work you can afford. Not leave payments for the grandkids to pay off.
Also if you are mass Transit the cost of Maintaining the existing running of the system gets paid first. Then as excess money comes in you start projects. The major mistake is to believe that once a project is built(Which is very expensive) that the cost to run the system every year has to be subsidized by Tax payers. This means that their budget will have to increase taxes because less money to do capital projects is available because they have to pay to keep the exisiting infrastructure working. Never hear about the annual costs of the new system to the tax payers once it is on line. Normally over half of the cost to run the system is paid by the taxpayer.
No wonder they want to bond the money today because then they can increase taxes even more to keep what they built running. And every few years they can ask for more money to do more projects. They have to because there is no money to do new projects unless we vote for more taxes. Because the money they collect today is already spent for the next 25- 30 years.
16. Light rail construction is well under way. By 2009 we'll have service to SeaTac - just like the voters were promised.
The taxes have not increased. Projects for the most part are coming in on time, and under budget. The problems of the old days are long past, and the new administation is nationally recognized for excellence. The elected leaders on the board are charting a prudent, effective course.
We need real mass transit in this region. We can build on success with ST2!
17. Once again I come with my suggestion that an initiative be put before the voters which would require any the supporters of future project which is put before the voters which promises to build ANYTHING have in their possession a "performance bond" sufficient to make up the shortfall between their "estimated" cost of the project AS DESCRIBED and their estimate plus a 15% contingency. If their estimate were "conservative" (as they always claim their estimates are) the cost of this bonding would be reasonable, however if it were total bullshit (which they KNOW that their estimates are) they would have trouble finding a bonding source, unless and until they brought their estimate into the range of reality. Can someone tell me why this solution is not feasible?
18. Does anybody care project this incompetence in estimating (or outright lying, it's hard to know for sure) onto the replacement tunnel project?
19. Get wise. There are plenty of forces in this town that do not want rail to the airport. Among them: taxi companies, shuttle companies, limo companies and so on who want to charge you $40 to get the 16 miles downtown.
Who started the "monorail" boondoggle? Yep, Dick Faulkenberry, a taxi cab driver.
20. Call me incompetent, too. All my estimates on building my house and using those numbers for my garage are down the tubes due to cost inflation.
But, it is almost a double underestimate of the cost. They surely should have been aware going into the bid that this would happen. There is no reason for this type of error.
My house two years ago versus garage addition this year. I couldn't use house construction costs, so I estimated and found the costs to be 25% higher
for my garage construction. But, that was factored in and I expect to be on budget by the time construction is complete and after all the bids are in.
This "going to bid" without an estimate or with a faulty estimate is an example of gross incompetence.
21. This isn't my area, I'm just speaking as a citizen. It seems to me that the officials want to build Taj Mahal structures instead of utilitarian structures that serve the purpose. What is great about Chicago's system is it utilitarian, but it moves people. I wonder if the monorail could have been built if it were not run like one of those pre-bubble tech start-ups and stations and other amenities were just plain instead of wanting every station to look like the Gehry musuem in Bilboa? It is great to have art, but personally I'd rather have trains that come on a more regular schedule, like every ten minutes.
22. What I'm most interested in is not how many Seattleites are going to take this train to the airport for the 3 or 4 times a year they might go, but how many commuters this train will take into Seattle each day. I would like to see the ridership on the existing train before committing billions more to expand it. Unfortunately, that won't happen, as we will be forced to vote on ST2 before we know if ST1 is a success. So count this household as two no votes. Not that it will matter - the legislature will just push ST2 through even if the vote fails.
23. How about some more good stuff?
1. Every public (paid with taxpayer funds) construction project also has to pay state sales tax. That includes schools roads and rail. That is about 8.8% average added to every bid.
2. State law also mandates on every public construction project that 2% goes to "public art".
3. Most public construction projects also are required to have 10% of their work force as "apprentices". That is common laborers who might be learning a new trade.
So you can add 11-30% to every taxpayer funded project for stuff that is not needed other than to appease the socialist and their voter base.
24. O.K. now for the "$95.3 million, far more than the $51.8 million expected by Sound Transit's engineers and consultants" question. How does the cost/benefit ratio to the citizens of the region compare when considered in the light of what an equivilent expendature would provide if invested in improved bus service? This comparison is what is known as "value engineering." I use the "public transportation" system frequently, when it is more efficient than driving, and it is my position that had the amount of money invested in light rail been spent on improving the buss service this region would have A#1, first class public transportation that serves ALL of the citizens of the ST Region.
25. *sigh* Sorry JDH. Your buses-stuck-in-traffic dream is worthless snake oil. It's been a proven loser out of the gate every time some city gets suckered into trying it. Why do you think every metropolitan region in the West is building (or expanding) light rail?
The voters in 1996 charged the agency with bringing us light rail. While you (and CETA and Kemper Freeman) continue with your asphalt fantasies, the rest of us will be benefiting from long-overdue investments in transit solutions.
26. binding performance audits. period.
WVH 21--yep--grew up on them from kid through grad school. worked for me. for school AND jobs. simple. functional. dependable. even in blizzards & storms.
even though subsidized. (which, i'm told, economically most public busses have to be.) i didnt mind paying for them, since they WORKED!
and--get this--built EFFECTIVELY without all the paralyzing "studies & consensus" that we love to wallow in without showing any "get-it-done- stones" here in the NW.
not to mention having no "1% for art-fart" usless boongoggle stuff. (pardon my analogies).
27. "The voters in 1996 charged the agency with bringing us light rail."
Yeah, and the agency won that vote by drawing a mendaciously exaggerated cartoon of a lovely long system, over a mendaciously lowballed pricetag.
When the real world rudely intruded on those wet dreams, were we given a vote on the shortened rails with the raised pricetag? No? And the commissars who gave the fake figures weren't tarred and feathered? No? It turns out that votes for or against public works projects in this town are generally scuttled by overfed politicians in smoke-filled rooms (that's not tobacco either).
And the light-rail loonies continue to loot the public for their losing schemes to benefit a small fraction of the travelling population at a bloated expense to all the rest.
28. You've got to get over your bitterness about losing in 1996. If you knew anything, you'd know the project is UNDER budget.
There's usually no point in giving facts to anti-transit ideologues like Insufficiently Sensible, but no harm in trying I suppose:
"Construction of Sound Transit's initial 14-mile light rail line, linking downtown Seattle and Tukwila, is running $200 million under its overall budget, but cost increases on parts of the project are causing concerns among agency officials."
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/267560_soundcosts21.html
And the Airport Link project IS under budget (with the exception of the SeaTac station bid). Net that difference out from savings elsewhere, and the agency's right on the money (in the black, actually). Not that this will sink in through some thick skulls . . ..
29. #28 - Is that the budget of the original 21(?) mile line that was promised? Just asking...
30. O.K. now let's take a close look at ST's John Ladenburg's stewardship of public funds on the one segment of light rail that is now operational.
1) ST operates Express Buss service ~4,500 service hours/year that runs a route which duplicates the light rail to within one block.
2) Elected Tacoma and Pierce County officials and upper management have financial connections to, relatives heavily invested in and close business associates and contributors with financial interests in many of the development projects you see going on in Tacoma.
3) These include condo projects which Elected Tacoma and Pierce County officials have already granted ten-year tax abatement to. Which means that a person living in a modest home in Tacoma's west side is already paying for the fire, police, garbage and every other service for freeloaders who are living in $500,000 to $1,300,000 condos.
4) Part of the SELLING POINT that the sellers use is that there are MULTIPLE LAYERS of FREE (yes John Ladenburg pushed the "fare box" through so Tacoma Link light rail that was originally slated to have a cost to the riders is now "free") public transportation at the doorsteps of these condos.
5) What this entire fiasco amounts to is a massive transfer of money, under the direction of John Ladenburg and the rest of the Elected Tacoma and Pierce County officials and upper management, from the tax paying public to the benefit of themselves and those closely connected to them.
This is a scandal and a disgrace of the first order. This wasted bus service could be used to serve populations that are paying into the ST kitty but get NO BENEFIT from it. It is graft plain and simple and so long as it continues I will do everything in my power to ensure that ST does not get one more dime.
31. There was no fixed number of miles of light rail promised. The Sane Transit vs. Sound Transit case made that clear. Actually Sound Move makes that clear - at least to anybody who can read (apparently a group that does not include the "Sane Transit" anti-transit wacko's).
32. #29, NO IT IS NOT.
In fact the financial discrepancy is even worse if you take into the FACT that none of their rail projects were/are completed when promised and then calculate, based upon the dollar value THEY placed upon having those services when they were trying to sell Sound Move. There is a dollar value associated with time and what not having a product in place and providing benefit has cost is billions in value, a cost that ST conveniently overlooks when they are touting their "success."
33. "There was no fixed number of miles of light rail promised." Not in so many words, BUT there was a map published and distributed which was used to sell the project. Go ahead and call me on that if you want to, I made and still have have a PDF file of that map along with most of the Sound Move literature. I knew it would come in handy someday, and it HAS come in quite handy. So take your semantic bullshit elsewhere.
34. From JDH: "I will do everything in my power to ensure that ST does not get one more dime" When you start up whatever it is you are planning on, tape it and post it on YouTube. We'll want to watch you using all that power you have.
35. Hey Doofus guess what, the media is not what it was in '96. In other words there are vehicles by which the truth can now get out and important questions will be asked.
36. ". . . there was a map published and distributed which was used to sell the project. . . . I made and still have have a PDF file of that map"
Like many eight-year-olds, JDH gets easily distracted by shiny, colorful objects.
37. It just keeps coming from ol' reliable JDH:
"the media is not what it was . . . the truth can now get out"
Yeah, that's the ticket. The PI and the Times are going to give you the truth about what the Sound Transit 2 ballot measure would mean when it comes to taxes. Suuuuure ----
My friend, Sound Transit OWNS the PI and the Times. That's why there has not been a single story, in either of them, during the past three years relating to the key aspects of ST's upcoming taxing and spending plans. Nada, zip, zilch.
For example, neither of the dailies has reported for years on ANY of the following topics: 1) how much ST plans on spending to complete Phase I, 2) how much more taxes ST plans on collecting to complete Phase I, or 3) when the sales tax rollback promised in Sound Move is scheduled to to take place.
Tell you what, JDH, you've got all this information about ST you say? You think you're smart? Why don't you try providing answers to those three questions I just posted. And provide links to supporting documents.
Go girlfriend - you can do it!
38. Actually I have located the files and they clearly show what Sound Move PROMISED as far as light rail is concerned. Now if you want to make the case that what was shown on the map was never meant to be taken as a representation of what Sound Move promised, have at it. All you will do is strengthen the perception that most pepople already have of ST as deceptive.
39. Should there be someone out there who has the ability to place the PDFs on a hosting site and provide a couple links so we can all have access to them, please send me an email.
40. Oh boy, seems like I also kept a copy of "Appendix A: Detailed Description of Facilities and Cost" as adopted May 31, 1996. O.K. smart ass now let's hear how there was no fixed number of miles of light rail promised.
41. JDH:
You can set up a website for free at "www.freewebs.com." You name it whatever you want. Then load up your .pdf's to there. Just provide the link to the page you created.
42. "now let's hear how there was no fixed number of miles of light rail promised"
Resolution 75, which the voters approved, gave discretion to ST to reduce the amount of light rail line described in Sound Move. That's why your simplistic focus on what the map looked like makes you look stupid now. Anywhoo, here are the three issues you should try to address:
1) how much ST plans on spending to complete Phase I, 2) how much more taxes ST plans on collecting to complete Phase I, or 3) when the sales tax rollback promised in Sound Move is scheduled to to take place.
If you can't find the resources to answer these posted on-line anywhere, just tell us what your estimates are, and what data sources you used to derive those three figures.
43. Basically what you are arguing is "what is right is what you can get away with." This has been the standard MO of ST since it's inception. Here are a couple of articles from the State's two leading MSM print sources. St has a history of deception second to none.
Court's message is voters beware
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/163295_sounded.html
Technically what voters were asked was to approve the taxes to build a system and to grant Sound Transit's governing board broad authority to decide how to best use the money. The full extent of that authority was referred to in ballot title "Resolution No. 75."
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001871912_sane05m.html
44. Resolution 75 was alluded to deep in the text, the fact is it was not spelled out it was referenced. Look you are not dealing with someone who is not familiar with what went on.
45. "Resolution 75, which the voters approved, gave discretion to ST to reduce the amount of light rail line described in Sound Move."
Yeah, that was the resolution which was mentioned vaguely in the voters literature but NEVER WAS PUBLISHED - you had to ask for it, and if King County's behavior in furnishing public information on request is any indicator, you'd have received it two years after the election.
That's the sort of stunt the product liability lawyers get rich on, but these were public agencies doing the shell game. Oh, it's all right then.
The bastards who used that sort of promotion well deserved tar and feathers, and still do, along with the local papers who eagerly abetted the scam by failing to 'view with concern' that dishonest resolution 75. Perhaps King County voters deserve the sleazy public agencies their elected officials create (notice how none of the Sound Transit Board are elected specifically for that function, but hide behind other offices). However, that's at least debatable, and based on ST's dishonest-from-day-1 public relations, the flames of hell will get mighty cheerful when the political creators of Sound Transit depart this earth.
46. From JDH - "Resolution 75 was alluded to deep in the text"
No. Resolution 75 was specifically referenced in the ballot title that was in the Voters Guide. These folks have posted a copy of the Voters Guide --
http://www.globaltelematics.com/pitf//voterpam.htm
But that's ancient history.
Show us you know something about the present situation. Here are the issues you should try to provide answers to:
1) how much ST plans on spending to complete Phase I,
2) how much more taxes ST plans on collecting to complete Phase I, and
3) when will the sales tax rollback promised in Sound Move likely take place?
If you can't find the resources to answer these posted on-line anywhere, just tell us what your estimates are, and what data sources you used to derive those three estimates.
47. Walters@#12:
First, what is this bus station on 520 you're talking about that buses can't access? I'm a daily 520 bus rider and haven't had any trouble.
Second, what tracks were built at the wrong width? I haven't heard of any.
48. Doofus Alert:
Have you actually bothered to look for ST's financial documents?
http://soundtransit.org/x1230.xml
They're right here.
49. Hi Ben! I just paged those . . . the answers to the three Doofus Alert questions are not there. Say, do you have a clue, Ben? I think ST has collected about $2.5 billion in taxes so far. What's your figure for that? Also, I hear ST is really secretive about how much more tax it plans on collecting to build out Phase I. It's been hard at building this stuff for ten years, so by now I'd expect ST would have a good estimate of how much more tax it would need to complete the Phase I system capital elements. How about that Ben, do you think you could come up with that number, and support it by referring to something that ST has published?
Thanks in advance for answering these questions, Ben.
50. Ben.
The tracks too narrow as in a tunnel that the buses are using. They the powers to be put in tracks in when they built the tunnel. Now they have to be torn up. I guess the busses will not use the tunnel for a while when they start that project.
The overall cost of Mass transit projects and the lack of work at adding more capacity to the road infrastructure is getting way out of hand.
To put it in perspective we have had very little work over the past 2 decades. Granted most of the road work has taken place since 2003 makes up over 95% of the new roads since the 80's. We have had Mass transit one project after another funded during that time frame. Many broken promises. The transportation planning group when they look at road work it seems that many of the plans are lowering capacity not increasing capacity.
Items that prove it is the VIADUCT plans. The tunnel idea would have spent billions of dollars and the overall capacity would have been about 80-85 current capacity of the viaduct. Plus many of the trucks leaving the Seattle Port would have been forced on I-5/I-90. Making that traffic worse.
The new 520 bridge well the I have seen that the total capacity for traffic would be again 85 -110% of current capacity. The talk of a bus and rail only lane will only make traffic worse on the bridge. Again Billions of dollars spent with no real fix to the bottleneck that the 520 bridge has become.
Build roads increase capacity is a must. To get my vote for any new taxes. I will vote no on any project the connects Mass Transit with Road work. No matter how great an idea it may seem. I do not vote yes when the overall transportation bill is spending more for Mass transit to support less than 5% of the population and the 95% who use the roads and pays all the bills to support Mass Transit Operations get little or nothing in relief to traffic problems for the next decade or two.
Bottom line. The cost of Mass transit to keep it running eats up our tax dollars. Would you support increasing the rates to the real cost to run the bus system. Would you vote that not one tax dollar can be used to support Mass Transit Operational Cost and that the real cost be paid by those using it? I doubt it. Train from Everett to downtown Seattle. The tax payers cover over 90% of the operational cost. Those using it do not come close to paying the real cost to run the system. Who can afford $100/ day to use the train. Instead Tax dollars are diverted to pay for the expenses. That is why I can say with confidence that 95% of the taxpayers pay most of your bus fare or your train fare.
Overall the those who pay most of the taxes get little for what they provide financially to the infrastructure of the State. You may think Mass Transit is a right. I think of it as a White Elephant. Look up the term from a historical stance you will understand. Because in this area it is a White Elephant. And the Taxpayers are given this gift every year.
51. So fact checker, it's strange you choose to ignore this from #30 above:
1) ST operates Express Buss service ~4,500 service hours/year that runs a route which duplicates the light rail to within one block.
2) Elected Tacoma and Pierce County officials and upper management have financial connections to, relatives heavily invested in and close business associates and contributors with financial interests in many of the development projects you see going on in Tacoma.
3) These include condo projects which Elected Tacoma and Pierce County officials have already granted ten-year tax abatement to. Which means that a person living in a modest home in Tacoma's west side is already paying for the fire, police, garbage and every other service for freeloaders who are living in $500,000 to $1,300,000 condos.
4) Part of the SELLING POINT that the sellers use is that there are MULTIPLE LAYERS of FREE (yes John Ladenburg pushed the "fare box" through so Tacoma Link light rail that was originally slated to have a cost to the riders is now "free") public transportation at the doorsteps of these condos.
5) What this entire fiasco amounts to is a massive transfer of money, under the direction of John Ladenburg and the rest of the Elected Tacoma and Pierce County officials and upper management, from the tax paying public to the benefit of themselves and those closely connected to them.
It seems that proponents are all too quick to overlook the "implementation strategy" and follow the money trail and ask questions regarding such things as the Chairman's close association with people who benefit along the one corridor that has.... 1) had the farebox dispensed with 2) multiple layers of publicly funded REDUNDANT service 3) Buses opperating along this corridor with an average of ~1,5 boardings/allightings at 9th & Commerce 4) Riders to & from Lakewood and Gih harbor being trundled along this route which adds 40 minutes to their daily commute to drop off or pick up 1.5 riders and Tacoma/Seattle riders waiting three busses to get a seat when these service hours could augment that leg of the service. 5) Potential riders in unserved areas that pay into ST having NO service in their vicinity.
So let's hear it?
Then let's hear how you defend the Resolution 75 sneak attack that both of the very liberal Seattle papers could not even overlook without scathing editorials regarding the tactic.
52. http://www.earthstation1.com/WBCartoonFiles/WB_Wavs/work_to_.wav
For fact checker
53. David@50 writes:
"The tracks too narrow as in a tunnel that the buses are using. They the powers to be put in tracks in when they built the tunnel. Now they have to be torn up. I guess the busses will not use the tunnel for a while when they start that project."
The people who planned the tunnel originally deserve credit for thinking to put tracks in, but in hindsight they chose the wrong track design. The Metro website says technology changed a lot in the 20 years since the tunnel was designed. Does anyone know whether they should have anticipated the change or did they make a reasonable decision based on what they knew at the time? I don't know.
In any case, you must not spend much time in Seattle. The tunnel has been closed for the past year and a half, and is scheduled to reopen to buses later this year.
54. "The people who planned the tunnel originally deserve credit for thinking to put tracks in, but in hindsight they chose the wrong track design."
Those are the same people who do the conceptual 'design' and issue the egregiously flawed cost estimates, based on the cartoons of that fantasy. It's no wonder that the cost estimates were so miserably understated, when the very hardware that the trains were to rely on could not be specified.
The perpetrators knew very well their cost numbers were wild guesses and vulnerable to big increases, hence their dishonest concealment of Resolution 75. Had it been spelled out in the voter's pamphlet or even their promotional literature, there was a small but significant chance that enough voters would object to the signing of its blank check to kill the project that so many lawyers, engineers, architects, labor unions and political spoils-distributors were counting on for their next 30 years salaries.
After all, the voters had already killed the first version of light rail because of its unacceptable capital cost, estimate or not. So Resolution 75 was the perfect solution - hide the reality of the blank check until the stupid voters had signed it, then show them the fine print. Again, corporations get severely busted for exactly that behavior, but since our crooked light rail sponsors are part of government, it's just fine for them to hoodwink us - "for our own good", and for their own aggrandizement.
55. Believe it or not, the main reason the wingnuts delude themselves is to create enemies. Their minds twist reality, form enemies, and that allows the hate to grow that they need to feel. Hate: the only sensation registering in their empty souls.
Here's an example from one such sick individual - "The perpetrators knew very well their cost numbers were wild guesses and vulnerable to big increases." Wrong on all counts. The truth is the projects are on time, and in the big scheme of things, under budget:
"Construction of Sound Transit's initial 14-mile light rail line, linking downtown Seattle and Tukwila, is running $200 million under its overall budget, but cost increases on parts of the project are causing concerns among agency officials."
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/267560_soundcosts21.html
The voters are getting more than was promised. That is the truth. The only ones still pounding their heads against the wall about this can't cite any facts or figures from the ACTUAL POLICIES that differ from the services being delivered.
It is refreshing that some of the deadenders still come around - they just end up highlighting the agency's progress.
56. Uh, David, the budget you highlight is at least one major revision behind the one that was VOTED on, and by the voted schedule the whole system is supposed to be carrying passengers today. Try looking out the window for trains.
57. There were no promises in Sound Move to complete Phase I by 2007. The plan contemplated that putting the system into place would take longer than ten years. Again, Insufficiently Sensible, you are out to lunch.
58. It's laughable reading the LEFTIST PINHEADED KLOWNS attempting to use the Sound Transit consistently moving target SCOPE & COST ESTIMATE SHELL-GAME to actually make us somehow believe that Sound Transit is a cost-effective organization.
Whenever projects like this repeatedly change in scope & cost estimates.....that is a problem in & of itself.
To attempt to somehow validate Sound Transit using this dizzying, spinning, ever-changing scope & cost estimates to somehow try to make anyone trust the management of this boondoggle organization is yet another reason why I call you LEFTIST PINHEADED KLOWNS!
59. "ever-changing scope & cost estimates"
You are mistaken, the policies have not changed. Post evidence if you think "changes" were made. I notice you do not try to support your specious argument with any facts from the ACTUAL POLICIES. Cite some authority, blowhard.
60. "ever changing scope and cost estimates" are a far more honest description of Sound Transit's behavior than the proposals they furnished to the voters in 1995 and 1996.
61. Empty rhetoric.
Next time try using FACTS to back up your claims.
No FACTS prove budget overruns at the agency.
62. Well, if capitalized FACTS are equaler to you than real facts, you might try these ones:
[Seattle Times FACT]: Sound Transit's low point came in late 2000, when the agency admitted its proposed 21-mile light-rail line from Seattle's University District to SeaTac was more than $1 billion over budget and three years behind schedule. The project was later scaled back to a 14-mile line from downtown Seattle to Tukwila. The citizen report criticizes Sound Transit staff for taking shortcuts in hopes of keeping the project on schedule, and for hiding its problems for months.
[That's the down payment illustrating the misrepresentation of the 1996 voter information, and the dishonesty of the agency in facing the FACTS - ed. "Ever-changing scope and cost estimates" is spot on. Further installments of FACToids may be provided from time to time, but any arguments not based on 1996 voter information shall be void].
63. Voters were not promised 21 miles of light rail line. Read Resolution 75, and read the Sound Transit vs. Sane Transit case. Voters were promised what the agency could build within the budget. Since 2000 the agency has brought the project within budget AND added to the length of the light rail that story describes.
The voters are getting exactly what they were promised. Plus, we will be getting light rail to the airport, which the story neglects to mention. And the projects are coming in under budget (with the exception of the SeaTac LRT station).
But nice try. Now go back to trying to invent facts for why we invaded Iraq.
64. ST is the most audited agency in the history of this state. If there were all these blown budgets you keep posting about, people a lot more savvy than you would have found them. ST is audited annually by a big four auditing firm and by the State Auditor's Office. Internal auditing teams and committees (including the Central Link Oversight Committee) make sure expenditures are appropriate. The independent Citizens Oversight Panel reports regularly. Even the feds monitor the agency's financial data (the DOT inspectors who examine ST's performance to verify compliance for the purposes of the New Starts grants programs). The audits are clean, guy.
Now go back in your den, put on your tinfoil hat, and close the shades. The "gummint" really is out to get you.
65. "The voters are getting exactly what they were promised."
Considering that hardly any voters even knew of, let alone had access to the despicable Resolution 75, that's delusional, or just gross propaganda. And you insist on 'readjusting' the time frame to post-2000 - a luxury the bamboozled voters of 1996 did not enjoy.
"the agency admitted its proposed 21-mile light-rail line from Seattle's University District to SeaTac was more than $1 billion over budget and three years behind schedule. The project was later scaled back to a 14-mile line from downtown Seattle to Tukwila."
Your cozy mass-transportation politburo may have enjoyed a political victory, but moral it wasn't.
66. Identify what was "despicable" about Resolution 75, jerkoff.
67. Migawd! He called me a jerkoff. I guess that means he won the debate. Heavy argument, man, don't spend your winnings all in one place.
68. fact checker certainly has hutspah!
One would think attempting to rationalize a few examples of ST possibly doing the right thing would be enough of a challege.
Yet this KLOWN attempts a "Blanket Defense"...ST has done absolutely NO WRONG!!
Bad Try === No Sale
69. The ten-year construction period estimate turned out to be incorrect. Construction will take much longer. The agency was "wrong" about that, as you put it. But ST is up front when it makes a mistake, unlike the "Mission Accomplished" administration.
70. "ST is up front when it makes a mistake"
Yeah, that's why the 2000 citizen report criticized Sound Transit staff for taking shortcuts in hopes of keeping the project on schedule, and FOR HIDING ITS PROBLEMS FOR MONTHS.
And blank-check Resolution 75 was despicable for its concealment from the voters in the fine print of offstage documents. Its creators should have been sent up for fraud.
Heh. That one was too easy.
71. Why the heck is fact sucker so enamored of "light rail to the airport?" How many trips does the average person make to the airport in their lifetime? A half dozen per year possibly.
For God's sake I could have a helicopter pick me up at home and deliver me to the airport for less than the stupid assed little toy train is going to personally set me back.
72. #71 sums up my opinion on it. Billions of dollars so that some people who happen to live near the rail station can take it to the airport a few times per year. What commuter coming up to Seattle from Federal Way, Fife, Puyallup, Kent, and Tacoma is going to drive all the way to Sea-Tac, park and then catch the train the rest of the way? If that happens and it actually takes a significant number of commuters off of the road then great. But until that happens I won't be voting for ST2.