Alert readers may have noticed the new “ST3” item on the menu bar at the top of this page. It’s intended to be a single, simple URL ( for a useful reference to November’s ballot measure.

You’ll find our endorsement there, of course, but also answer basic question like “What is in the package?” and “How is it funded?” We’ll also try to add more about the “why:” how ST3 came to be the way it is.

If you’re reading this, not much of this information will be completely new to you. But our hope is that it will be a useful handle for you to share with friends and acquaintances who haven’t been following along as religiously as you.

8 Replies to “Announcing STB’S ST3 Page”

  1. just a heads up … in discussions w/people on the bus, etc … I’ve had people ask me if Regional Prop 1 is a competing project to ST3 …

    Might want to clarify that the official ballot measure is Regional Proposition 1 … and ST3 is just the colloquial name for it but that they’re one and the same

  2. Would like to see on this page a list of arguments (counter arguments) and stats/citations that address issues opponents often bring, such as the subsidization of transit vs. cars and percentage of people who currently use and will use the system. One go-to resource to refute grandpa.

  3. In this discussion, Pro-campaign’s firmest ground is both technical and mechanical, both facts and their results. Subjects with a lot tighter interpretation than philosophy, accounting, demographics, and politics.

    Our side also has advantages on details and every context for honest time, budget, and performance comparisons between transit projects here and elsewhere.

    But for the benefit of all sides of every succeeding transit election, I think that the ST3 campaign should advocate updating and reopening the Metro Transit Library to its former public use as a legitimate budget item. Its loss was major piece of Tim Eyman’s worst.

    Victory’s first order of business is to repair and rebuild targets of mindless destruction.

    Mark Dublin

  4. I’d add a link to the article where you discuss why our system costs more than Portland’s, with a heading like “why Seattle’s system costs so much more than Portland’s”

    1. Even better one, Donde, except offer at least several thousand places to choose from. All with either videos or YouTube links, and satellite maps. Same format for systems that cost more than Seattle’s.

      But Joe, whatever the media, from books and magazines to info online, it’s important to be able to “browse” Not like Internet Explorer, but like somebody who used to get straight-A’s on term papers without using a single assigned textbook.

      Which were generally edited to lowest common denominator, written far below that, and priced as if you were buying equal weight of gold.

      In other words, should be able to know what you need when you see it, rather than only what’s pre-assigned.


    2. There’s no real way to compare the costs of MAX vs Link without bringing the costs of MAX forward 30 years or so, and using the rate of inflation used to calculate the cost of building materials (consumer price index is irrelevant to this type of material). During the 1990s, the figure they used for MAX was 12%, and I don’t imagine this has gone down much.

      Link no longer looks quite so expensive if you do that.

Comments are closed.