An extended interview with Terri Mestas, Sound Transit megaproject delivery chief

STB: Tell us a little bit about your background and experience and what drew you to the role at Sound Transit.

Mestas: I started off in the Washington D.C. area while working for my parents – I’m first generation; they were immigrants from Cuba and were able to open up a small architectural firm. They got into the 8(a) program and began their firm working on the federal side. So I grew up there and did every job imaginable: blueprint girl, answering the phones, etc. My first big project was the US Interests Section, Havana, Cuba, where I traveled back and forth for about six years. 

After working for them for some time, I decided I wanted to try my hand at a big firm so I went over to DMJM H&N, which was ultimately rebranded and acquired by AECOM. And that was working in the intelligence community, working in undisclosed locations, very sensitive environments, and also other locations around the globe. Because we were so successful,  AECOM asked me to open up an office, so I did that and built a SCIF and all those things that you need. From there, I went on to be the national markets sector leader for the company.

After that, AECOM asked me to work on an education pursuit in Los Angeles: the Los Angeles Community College District, which at the time had a $7 billion dollar bond. I did that for a few years and then went back to my federal roots and did a lot of work for NASA. During COVID, I worked for CalTech doing research and then went over to LAWA (Los Angeles World Airports), which has the largest capital program in the country at $30 billion dollars.

Then I got the phone call from [Sound Transit]. In all the previous roles, I’ve always been the person to go in and reform capital programs, which is a space I really enjoy. It’s kind of evolving a program or an organization to the next place it needs to be. So when I got this phone call and heard about this incredible program, I thought, this is somewhere I need to go. I left a lovely job at LAWA but this is where I need to be.

STB: How do you see your expertise with those previous capital projects and programs fitting into something like massive regional transit expansion?

Mestas: Having worked in so many different markets, I find that the challenges are all the same. It’s usually cost, schedule, quality – making sure the team is aligned in the right way to deliver the work, whether you’re in transit or another space.  I think that has led me to do all these different things, so I feel very comfortable in this space and my ability to impact this program in a positive way.

I also think I have the rare fortune of having worked for so many different agencies and types of markets that there are a lot of best practices that really lend themselves to different markets. People don’t really recognize that if you’re not working in all those different spaces. So I think there are a lot of tools I’m bringing to Sound Transit that might not have been explored before at the agency or maybe in the region.

STB: With limited time left for current acting CEO Joran Sparrman, have you thought about what kind of input you have in that search and what type of profile you think would be good for the next CEO of Sound Transit?

Mestas: I know that they’re in the very early stages of mapping out the process and taking the next steps. I would hope that I would have a role in that position and the capabilities it needs to have. I really hope it’s somebody who’s forward-looking and understands the region. Because the agency is going through this really pivotal reorganization, I think we’ll need somebody who embraces that but adds a lot of stability and continues a positive path to strengthen the organization, becoming more innovative and having some fun along the way.

STB: When you look at ST3 and beyond, what do you think are the strategic priorities for Sound Transit moving forward?

Mestas: I might be a little bit myopic in my answer but for me, it’s to execute and build these projects in the most efficient way that I can, minimizing the impact to communities. I know these are multi-year projects that really do impact communities so I’m very sensitive to that. I want to build things to provide the best experience. I do ride transit every day and so I’m living it too.

Because of my experience and my skills, I’m always looking at how we could do this better or how that should be different. I think we have a lot of opportunity to fine tune what we’re providing to the community and we could be innovative while we’re doing that. There are a lot of things coming out on the market, whether it be materials or how we build something to make it sustainable and resilient for the long term and not be too short-sighted. So I think resiliency is a big deal. 

I think building systems that are reliable is important. Again, being a rider, I’m there thinking about what’s going on. Reliability, resiliency, providing an enjoyable and safe experience – I’m thinking about how we construct things so they lend themselves to safety. Coming from the intelligence community, there’s a big lens of physical security. Also, adding that innovation piece into it, constructing things more efficiently, like off-site builds, using more precast, etc. Those are going to lend themselves to reduced impacts on our communities. With the speed of construction – and also thinking of construction as more of a kit-of-parts instead of making everything so unique – you get that kind of economy of scale and can naturally be more efficient. 

STB: As someone overseeing mega-project delivery, how do you see your role interfacing with those more on the operations side?

Mestas: I’ve worked with operations for a long time in various roles. Getting their input early is key so at the end of a project, you’re always doing lessons learned. But there are also a lot of lessons learned as you begin to operate something and continuous lessons learned, so I want to make sure that we’re taking advantage of all of that input that they’re getting. I think there’s always a push-pull between the delivery folks and the operations folks. We’re trying to move fast and deliver. They’re trying to slow us down to make sure that we have all the right specs in place, but that’s a good balance to be had. It’s also a good push and pull that makes sure we’re making the right decisions. 

We are bringing on new technology: a platform and project management information system. The reason why that’s important is because on a program like this it’s kind of our single-source repository: it’s automated workflows; it’s how we’ll communicate to make sure people get information. We can track all of that so that as we’re moving fast we have transparency and people have the opportunity to jump in and provide comments. Making sure that we’re leveraging technology to enhance how we’re communicating and collaborating is a game changer.

STB: As you know, there have been construction quality issues on East Link, unstable soils on the Federal Way extension that’s led to some delays. Do you think that kind of this renewed emphasis on mega-project delivery could have potentially mitigated or staved off some of these issues?

Mestas: Yes, there are definitely things that we can do earlier on. I’ll just talk about the soils because I talk about this a lot. We have this wonderful planning period that takes several years. During that time, we have the ability to go out and do more site investigation. There’s a lot more technology to do geo-tech, to find out about sub-grade conditions.

We’re partnering with City Light right now to make a 4-D model of all the utilities that we can leverage. We’re beginning the pilot for our system which is going to allow us to also model the systems virtually, which will help on the quality side. So we can do things earlier to find out more. Are there going to be unforeseen conditions? Absolutely, that’s always going to be the case. But I think there’s some due diligence we could do early on. 

Going back to the kit-of-parts comment – when I first came on, they were like “the first in the world this” and “the first in the world that.” I thought, maybe let’s put a pause on the “first in the world” and build the things that have been tried and true. Anytime you build the first in the world of anything, it’s just inherently harder. We’re navigating an unknown territory so it means being a little bit more strategic and making sure we’re making the right decisions and not reinventing the wheel.

With quality, we talk about it a lot. The course by which you construct a project – those steps haven’t really changed radically over the years. If you look at some other industries, they have changed radically. There are some built-in quality tools and levers and processes that I think we just need to go back to. Maybe there are some things we need to make a little bit more robust; maybe there’s some technology we can add to it. But [we should be] going back to basics and doing those checks that have been utilized through the years and not waiting. I always think quality should be a proactive thing and not a reactive thing.

That also brings me to the way we procure and bring on our contractors early. I’m a big advocate for collaborative delivery, whether it’s GC/CM (General Contractor/Construction Manager) or Progressive Design-Build. But that allows you to bring on the contractor early. Those two delivery methods are different as far as the risk allocation for the contractor, but the contractor has a larger role in how something is constructed and how to achieve quality.

Those two things really need to come together early. I think there are a lot of things we can do to solve for that that we’re already putting into place. The 4D model I’m particularly excited about. We’ve already started to use it to simulate traffic impacts and how we’re gonna build something and model a certain area. So it’s gonna be a great tool.

STB: Do you think the agency relies a little bit too much on outside contractors versus in-house engineering? How do you see that dynamic?

Mestas: I think there’s a balance to be had. We do have a great group of engineers here. That said, it’s always great to bring in those subject matter experts who bring in a different lens or have a very specialized expertise. We are gonna go out with some new delivery models for professional services that will allow us to be a little bit more nimble so that we can respond more in real time to the needs of a project as opposed to going out with these giant procurements. They’ve been great and very valuable, but I think there’s an opportunity to be more targeted. 

I come from the federal space and there’s a vehicle called a MATOC, multiple award task order contract – it’s like an IDIQ contract, which is indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity. They’re both task order, like a bench contract. And we’re looking at creating benches: for design, for environmental and planning, and then one for our owners rep. That would be an award to an array of firms that can cover all the scope in those different areas. The idea would also be to award to small, medium, and large firms. So it’s a great tool to bring a lot of firms on and build capacity and get firms with more  experience in transit.

There is a capacity issue in the region – there’s so much work. But it also allows us a lot of nimbleness. Through the task order process we can get just the right support that we need and be a little bit more specific about it, as opposed to big contracts with a really large group of consultants, when there’s a little lack of clarity on who’s doing what.

STB: One of the findings from the TAG (Technical Advisory Group) was that two of the firms that worked on ST2 projects decided they didn’t want to bid on future projects. From your perspective, what would be a right approach to potentially make these firms reconsider their positions?

Mestas: I’m going to be talking a lot about being the owner of choice. Going back to my comment on regional capacity to respond to all the work that we have, that WSDOT has, that the Port has – we want to be the owner of choice to not only make sure firms are coming back, but that we’re even attracting more firms so we can get a lot of good competition and better pricing. I’ve spent a lot of time meeting with the AGC (Associated General Contractors) to understand what’s been going well, what have been some of the challenges, and what we can do to be better partners.

There’s been a lot of productive feedback given, so we’ve formed a series of subcommittees on a variety of different topics with the contractor community. We’re working through those together to figure out what space Sound Transit has to make some adjustments. But I think the biggest thing we’re looking for is really establishing a partnership of trust and transparency.

It creates a lot of complexity to a project when there’s delays and decision-making, so I think there are some really basic things we can do. We’ve done a lot of training with Design Build Institute of America – they offer not only technical training but some soft skills training on how to behave in a collaborative delivery method. Preparing ourselves – I call it ST3 readiness – is getting in that mode and working with our contractor community.

When I first started here a few months ago, some contractors said “hey, I don’t think we’re going to pursue the work.” I do talk to them frequently and now they say “I think we are going to pursue the work.” People are excited about the changes that we’re starting to actually make. Looking at how we’re going to procure using Progressive Design-Build (PDB) – we had a workshop on West Seattle where we invited 22 different contractor firms to come and just to talk through the project and get ideas from them on how we could construct it in a more efficient way.

That type of collaboration is really appreciated and those conversations will bring people back. We’re doing PDB on OMF (Operations and Maintenance Facility) South. We did an RFI on OMF South a couple of years ago and only got two responses. We just did one again and we got 15 responses. So to me that’s the tide changing and people are excited about the new way that we’re going to do work.

STB: With ST3 you’re reaching into all parts of the region and working with lots of different municipalities. How would you navigate a lot of those various complex relationships? For example, how do you expedite permitting for jurisdictions who may use that as a tool to slow things down?

Mestas: A couple things here. Firstly, we now have a betterment policy, which I’m really hoping is a positive tool for us to be able to make the right decisions. They’re more impactful during construction when we’re suddenly in a situation where we need to do this betterment or else it’s going to really impact the project schedule. The goal is that through the policy there’s better definition on what we’re able to do.

When I was at LAWA, we did an MOU (memorandum of understanding) with all the city departments on how we were going to work together. I recently sent that to the City of Seattle – the key is early collaboration. If we can agree to start early over-the-shoulder reviews, talk about the scope together early, understand their interpretation of scope, what potential betterments there could be at that early stage before we get into construction, that is key.

Creating a framework, whether it’s through an MOU or an LOA (letter of agreement), allows us to work together early but also that there’s escalation so we can get resolution and move on. Starting to have those conversations now will be productive for everybody. 

STB: How do you see your relationship with the Board? Specifically, how would you potentially mitigate the risk of the Board micromanaging decisions when it comes to project delivery? Do you see that as a risk and how would you deal with that? 

Mestas: My interactions with the Board have been very positive. This is a really smart group of individuals who are so committed to this program, and I say that with all sincerity. I’m a data person: I really value information and hard data. I think coming to them with specifics and, as accurately as we can, with data that will at least give them a clear understanding of where things stand and where things are bad. And always coming to them with a solution of a path forward will help them not to want to go in and help us fix it. In other words, when you present a problem to somebody and there really isn’t a solution, they kind of want to help and go into fix-it mode.

The good news is we have a lot of experts here. We’re bringing on a lot of new hires. We just hired Brad Owen, who was with LA Metro for 14 years. So in summary: information, bringing solutions, having a lot of experts – I hope that instills confidence with everybody that we’re working with. We’re showing [the Board] what we’re doing so they don’t have to dive in and try to steer the boat. 

STB: To wrap things up for fun, a lot of folks in transit advocacy like to think about rail automation. This is obviously common in closed environments, like airport people movers, but there’s a great success story to the north in Vancouver. Is that something that has been explored or is even feasible here?

Mestas: I love to think that we’re gonna come to that vein of efficiency again. There’s something interesting there on how we can streamline [our systems] even more so that things are automated. I worked on the People Mover over at LAWA, which is on track to finish by the time the Olympics comes around but I haven’t explored it here, to be honest. It’s a great kind of next step to look at as we imagine the future. There is an opening here for a chief strategy officer. When that person comes on board it would be exciting to work with them just to do that visioning, think about what that future looks like, etc. I don’t have an answer [beyond that] but it’s an incredible horizon. I think that’ll be something that’s explored.