Sound Transit urged not to join ballot for tax vote on roads

By Eric Pryne
Seattle Times staff reporter

E-mail this article Print this article Search archive

Several environmental and pro-transit groups yesterday urged Sound Transit to reject a partnership with the Regional Transportation Investment District that could put a three-county, roads-and-transit package on the ballot this November.

The regional district, which is required by state law to spend most of its money on roads, has asked the Sound Transit board to consider a "joint ballot" this fall. Some regional-district board members and business leaders believe more transit in the package — in particular, additions to Sound Transit's Seattle light-rail line — could increase the likelihood of voter approval.

But environmentalists who addressed the Sound Transit board yesterday said the deal is too risky for that agency.

"It is in Sound Transit's best interest to wait," said Michelle Goerdel of Eastside Transportation Choices.

"It just seems like a very difficult, complex puzzle," said Richard Borkowski, president of pro-rail People for Modern Transit, "and all the pieces don't fit together."

The Sound Transit board is scheduled to make a decision April 8.

Metropolitan King County Councilwoman Julia Patterson, D-SeaTac, who sits on both the Sound Transit and regional-district boards, favors a joint ballot. "I do feel Sound Transit would help RTID immensely," she said. "It takes away the argument that the package isn't balanced."

She said environmentalists oppose the joint ballot because they sense the region's appetite for new taxes is limited, "and they don't want to see any taxing capacity used to build roads."

Earlier this month, the regional-district board tentatively approved a $12.4 billion tax package that includes a 0.3 percentage-point sales-tax increase, a $75 annual vehicle license fee, a 0.3 percent motor vehicle excise tax and a 2.8 cents-per-gallon regional gas tax.

If the Sound Transit board approves, one-third of the sales-tax increase, or 0.1 percentage point, would come from Sound Transit's unused taxing authority. It would be spent on "high-capacity" transit projects, primarily to extend light rail north from downtown Seattle.
 
Despite that, environmentalists say the package is too roads-heavy.

Yesterday, Peter Hurley of the Transportation Choices Coalition told the Sound Transit board that an "arranged marriage" with the regional district, known as RTID, is a risky move that could endanger future transit proposals.

Hurley questioned whether the package would provide enough money to complete a light-rail extension to Northgate. He also questioned whether Sound Transit's engineering plans and cost estimates for that project are far enough along for the ballot.

Cost overruns later could damage Sound Transit's credibility, he suggested.

Sound Transit has begun planning for the next phase of transit projects to submit to voters, perhaps in 2006. Jessyn Schor, transportation advocate for the Washington Public Interest Research Group (WashPIRG), said a joint ballot might undermine that.

Patterson accused the environmentalists of trying to undermine the regional district. If Sound Transit doesn't participate and light rail isn't included, she said, "they will have the green light to severely criticize the RTID package."

It would be more difficult for them to oppose a package that includes rail, she added.

Patterson had said earlier this month that if Sound Transit decided against a partnership, the regional district probably wouldn't put anything on the November ballot. Yesterday, she backed away from that.

It may be better to try and risk losing than not try at all, she said.

Eric Pryne: 206-464-2231 or epryne@seattletimes.com

Copyright © 2004 The Seattle Times Company