The stated rationale for governance reform is that Sound Transit is an unaccountable agency, out there mismanaging our funds with no oversight.

Well, the latest state audit of ST came out, and for the 6th time out of 7, the audit has been completely free of negative “findings”. Moreover, the agency was commended for its “culture of continuous improvement”.

Governance reform advocates demand a directly elected board, like we the Port of Seattle. You may recall that the Port’s last audit, uh, didn’t go so well.

Of course, what this is really about is murdering light rail in its crib, before rolling trains boost its popularity. Attacks on Sound Transit’s management are merely a fig leaf that plays on the public’s memory of the agency’s initial failures. While those failures matter, it’s unclear why one would reform an agency that is now a model of probity.

2 Replies to “Why governance reform?”

  1. I think they just want ot politicize the position of board chair, so they can get Tim Eyman typeso on the board.

Comments are closed.