Election Open Thread

111 Replies to “Election Open Thread”

1. I endorse Claudia Balducci for executive, we need a full term executive like now… NOW NOW NOW NOW NOW!!!

   I also endorse Wilson for Mayor, I don’t like Harrell’s ICE policies, I don’t think Harrell should last longer in that office, of course he’s a Democrat. But I don’t like his poor actions on Seattle. Let’s not forget the Trump Org is ruining the country, and we need JD Vance to be president and Donald Trump out of it, so they’re the cause of Harrell’s negative response in terms of mayor.

2. Vote Katie Wilson for bus lanes!

   1. Yes, please. Bruce Harrell needs to go. Vote Taylor in the next election for bus lanes along MLK and bypass rail for Rainier Valley.

   2. I had to vote against her. I don’t want to see the new waterfront overrun like 3rd avenue under Jenny Durkan. She strikes me of a just let nature take it’s course and allow all the steets to be overrun while cutting law enforcement. Just can’t trust her.

      1. Fox news brainrot type of comment.

      2. Lol 6-7 types of brainrot comments in gen sigma

3. Anyone have thoughts on Seattle school board?

   1. I think the Progressive Voters Guide has the right answers: https://www.progressivevotersguide.com/washington/2025/general/city/seattle#nseattleschoolboard

      I’m not a parent and so I don’t have direct experience with SPS, but folks online have been saying that the Stranger’s endorsement of Kathleen Smith over Sarah Clark was a major fumble.

   2. I tend to weigh the endorsements of the Seattle Education Association (the teachers union) much more heavily than the word salad of the Alcohol Control Board. (Though I also take the Control Board’s advice more than that of the auto sales daily.)

      The big transpo issue is that all the school bus drivers tend to get fired and rehired en masse when the majority on the school board flips.

4. I previous commented a few times about 271-1 Line being faster than 550 for my afternoon commuter from Bellevue to Seattle.

   This has taken a turn lately due to somehow worsen congestion at Mountlake Blvd ramp intersections. I’ve had several experiences that 271 got stuck at HOV ramp terminal at Mountlake for 20 minutes during a day without event or short-term closure in the area. I’ve had similar experience with ride on SR 520 a couple months ago when Revive I-5 lane reduction extended through the weekdays, but that went away after that was done.

   As a result, nowadays 550 is reliably faster than 271 transferring 1 Line.

   While getting stuck at Mountlake Lake, I noticed a few things:

   1). Because HOV lane through Mountlake TC is to the left of General-purpose ramps, it is more difficult for buses turning right to join traffic on Mountlake Blvd northbound because left lanes on Mountlake Blvd always seem to be busier and smaller cars from general purpose off-ramp to the right will jump to every lane they can as fast as they can. It would be ideal if there HOV lane signal turns green a few seconds earlier.

   2). Before HOV ramp enters Mountlake TC, HOV lane meets a stop-controlled intersection crossing SR a branch of 520 WB off-ramp to Capitol Hill. I am almost sure this intersection was designed with less volume than it is today because if you set a single-driving trip from Kirkland to UW, Google will tell you it is faster to use this ramp to E Lk Washington Blvd and then turn westbound-right to Mountlake Blvd northbound instead of using the more congested SR 520 WB off-ramp to UW. That creates more delay not only at HOV lanes but also generate more traffic at Mountlake Blvd NB through SR 520.

   3) Mountlake Blvd is a busy corridor with all lot of crossing. Its intersection with Hamlin St is super close to the SR 520 westbound ramp intersection. Nowadays big corridor signal are usually coordinated with some offset from intersection to intersection. It means that the there are a few seconds lag to evenly distribute queue. It appears to me that the offset between Hamlin Street and SR 520 ramps are not set properly. As a result when the signal turns green for westbound off-ramp, the Mountlake Blvd NB traffic has already filled up the entire block between Hamlin Street and SR 520 WB ramps and there is no more room for buses and cars from SR 520 WB.

   I submitted a complaint to WSDOT and then it was forwarded to SDOT because signals are operated by the city. I was surprised that they were not operated by WSDOT. Normally state DOT would take control of arterial signals at ramp terminal to optimize it for the benefit of freeway because of safety reason (avoid backup to freeway mainline).

   I feel like the current signal timing prioritizes local traffic through Mountlake over SR 520 exiting traffic and it is possible that they did this intentionally.
   With all these not going to be fixed by full completion of SR 520 Corridor improvement, ST 545 probably will remain competitive especially after Portage Bay Bridge is finished.

   1. I’ve run into the exact same issue. Only two or three vehicles from the HOV lane can fit into NB Montlake lane when the light turns green, and the bus gets stuck for 10-20 minutes at peak.

      Funnily enough, I sent an email to SDOT and was redirected to WSDOT. I did not follow up after that.

      1. This is what happens when agencies get punished for collaborating more often than they get rewarded – especially infrastructure agencies whose legal jurisdiction ends at property boundaries but whose decisions have impacts beyond those boundaries. Why should SDOT prioritize letting more cars off SR-520 and onto the already-congested Montlake Blvd? Why should WSDOT care what happens once drivers leave their highway? Meanwhile, it seems Metro doesn’t get much say except to thank WSDOT for a meager wedge of red paint to enable wider turns.

         1) Yes, SDOT should implement a “leading HOV interval” like a leading pedestrian interval to let HOV and buses onto northbound Montlake before the regular traffic lane.
         2) That’s quite an unfortunate emergent behavior from the navigation algorithms. I wonder if SDOT can meaningfully ask Google/Apple/etc. to avoid providing those directions.
         3) The problem here is that the Montlake Bridge will never get wider, any attempt to feed more than two lanes-worth of traffic each direction will be thwarted. South of SR-520, NB Montlake is fed Blvd is fundamentally bottlenecked by the four-lane Montlake Bridge. South of SR-520, NB Montlake is fed by two general traffic lanes from 24th Ave E which start as far south as Galer. I bet that if SDOT painted the NB curb lane red (it could even be peak-only) from E North St to, say, Lynn Street (and stuck an automatic enforcement camera on the signals at 24th and McGraw), that’d open up a lot of NB capacity from WB SR-520.

         But then you’d have to convince Montlake NIMBYs to trade precious SOV space for buses, and we’d all know how that would go.

      2. jd

         That’s really funny that SDOT forwarded this to WSDOT.
         I am almost sure WSDOT is right that this is a SDOT signal. If it was a WSDOT signal, it wouldn’t be timed this way.

      3. Nathan,

         I think there is a simple solution for the second issue, which is banning westbound right from E Lk Washington Blvd to Mountlake Blvd NB. They can even seal off the lane at intersection turn that right lane in the middle of the block into an pick-up drop-off area for the transit center.

         With all the traffic on E Lk Washington Blvd, whoever actually coming from Mountlake neighbor can enter Mountlake Blvd NB using E Roanoke St. I don’t think Google will go that far to route the 520 WB traffic through the Mountlake neighborhood just to avoid that bad westbound right-turn ramp.

      4. Residents on Roanoke would probably complain about traffic from E Lk Wa. I would love to see that road closed to through traffic though; it would be great if the arboretum had less cut-through traffic.

      5. @jd — Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. At a minimum you would have to ban going straight, otherwise people would just use North Street as a cut-through (https://maps.app.goo.gl/KLAxHssBd3bmjwou9). So you force a left at Lake Washington Boulevard which is quite reasonable (since the only way to get there is from the freeway). But if you do that then drivers go via Roanoke (https://maps.app.goo.gl/SyvLVQ6AUwV2rEXB7). You could make Roanoke one-way eastbound at Lake Washington Boulevard (like Miller). That would mean a big detour for local residents coming from the East Side (https://maps.app.goo.gl/XaGDW4BRgBEsztMU7) but those type of changes are often popular with the locals. A driver trying to get to the UW via the East Side could still use this as an alternative but at some point it just becomes too much of a hassle (https://maps.app.goo.gl/EKP1umZrZwGnC4hs9) and Google stops telling them to go that way. But it may require a lot of work. It is like trying to plug up a leaky damn.

   2. the agencies should solve this issue. I hope they are on it.

   3. The new Montlake interchange layout seems to cram lots of movements in short distances, making the number of vehicles that can be stored at a red light pretty small. I’m not sure if signal timing changes can make things much better.

      I suspect that some engineer created a simulation of the area — but didn’t double-check the reasonableness of the anticipated traffic volumes. The volumes also likely changed when it opened as some drivers came back to it when construction finished.

      Sadly, bus drivers have to follow the path given to them and can’t try other ramps to get to their destinations. So their journey becomes a slog instead.

      1. The clear answer is to make it Bus-Only” instead of HOV. The HOV facility down at road level can remain usable by private cars, but make the exit Transit Only.

      2. “The clear answer is to make it Bus-Only” instead of HOV.”

         For an intersection leg that barely process 3-4 cars per green phase, I don’t think making it bus-only will do anything.
         It will only make the approaches competing with it more congested and squeeze more green time out of HOV or bus-only lane.

         The problem is how SDOT prioritizes different approach at the intersection and assign green time to each approach. Not the volume on HOV lane being too high.

      3. Yeah, it sounds like the bigger problem is the signal phase. It is pretty common to get it wrong and pretty easy to fix. As HZ suggested, just turn the light for the HOV lane green a second before the other one.

         I seen another issue. It is also bizarre that there are three lanes on Montlake Boulevard between the off-ramps and Hamlin and yet (so far as I can tell) none of them are BAT lanes. It seems like the curbside lane (heading north) should be a BAT lane. The BAT lane should run from Boyer to the bridge. Right now at Boyer, 24th goes from one (general purpose lane) to two. Instead the new lane would only be for buses. Most of that would be done by SDOT. You would still have those two lanes for cars trying to get on 520 (either direction). But even if you didn’t do all that you should at least have that one block (between the off-ramp and Hamlin) be a BAT lane. Then a bus would be able to get from the ramps right to the edge of the bridge in its own lane.

      4. 520 HOV buses turn directly into the left lane on Montlake.

         The green for the HOV exit and the Montlake exit happen at the same time. The leftmost lane is for the HOV exit; the middle and right lanes are for the Montlake exit. The issue is that during peak hours, Montlake backs up all the way to the HOV exit ramp and nobody can enter from the 520 exits.

         I would love to see a NB BAT lane from Boyer (or maybe even Galer). NB Montlake backs up very badly during Husky games.

      5. Ross

         I think 48 might be able to take advantage of it, but those 60-ft buses from SR 520 need to make a wide turn and won’t be able to use the rightest lane unless you suggest making left lane a BAT lane.

         The right lane on Montlake Blvd NB is actually the emptiest because everyone knows this lane won’t carry through the Montlake Bridge. This gives the general-purpose ramp more capacity to at least get past Hamlin. This lane could have been a great BAT lane with q-jump at Hamlin, but it is just very difficult for buses from Montlake TC to access it.

      6. 520 HOV buses turn directly into the left lane on Montlake.

         Yeah, I think that is part of the problem. It makes sense when you have three lanes of vehicles all turning onto the same road. But when there is a backup the HOV vehicles are stuck. The simplest option would be have the far left (northbound) lane of Mountlake Boulevard be the HOV lane. Thus the cars would follow the same pathway, but there would be space for buses (and HOV cars) at least until Shelby. It is unlikely it would back up that far. The only drawback is that you can’t have a bus stop between there and the other side of the bridge but that looks to be the case now anyway. For drivers this wouldn’t be very different. You still have two lanes all the way to the bridge. It is just that they are curbside instead of being in the middle. At Shelby a bus will merge. The only difference is the bus is on the left, not the right. You would probably get rid of the little pedestrian island (https://maps.app.goo.gl/XY9vNiLtritYeqQb9) and just make the sidewalk wider. The two right lanes would be angling towards the middle (the bridge). It would be a pretty simple project — it would just need approval/cooperation by WSDOT.

      7. @HZ — I changed my mind. I would put the HOV lane to the left (see my last comment).

         I would still have a BAT lane on 24th but it wouldn’t be so smooth for the 48. There would be a BAT lane all the way to the bus stop next to the ramp (https://maps.app.goo.gl/9MhcKWoqDSQVY6dB6). Then the bus enters general purpose traffic and works its way to the HOV lane (if it needs to). Maybe a “skip-ahead” light for the bus would be warranted.

      8. HZ, if only four vehicles can make it through the light, but only BUSES are allowed to do so, how can you think that they won’t benefit?

         I haven’t observed the light pattern, but I can certainly see how the directly adjacent general traffic off-ramp could interfere. But, again, if private vehicles are not permitted to drive on the block-long stretch between the loop ramp crossing for cars headed toward 23rd Southbound or Lake Washington Boulevard, why would they not be able to make the turn? Presumably the entire width of northbound Montlake is stopped, so just have the bus turn into the center lane. If there are not cars in front of it, because they had to turn left at the loop ramp intersection, the bus is guaranteed to be able to go.

         Yes, private HOV’s have to make an irritating “detour” and go through two more lights on Lake Washington Boulevard, but they are presumably already “ahead” by having taken the HOV lane across the bridge.

         Make that one block bus only westbound.

      9. I agree on the bus jump for the 48. Have a BAT lane from Roanoke to the stop just south of the HOV ramp. Most of time a car that’s ahead of the bus will clear the intersection making a free right onto the eastbound HOV facility, so a triggered bus-jump would let the 48 move over to the center bus lane to Shelby.

         Now whether this is doable depends a lot on tonight’s election results.

      10. Tom

          If you go there and observe the traffic, you would understand why I don’t think it is an issue of lane restriction. It has a fairly long green phase (definitely more than 20 seconds) but it barely process 4 cars the entire time because montlake Blvd NB backs up all the way to this intersection and the Montlake NB green at Hamlin is coordinated with Montlake NB through at SR 520 WB ramp. So when the ramp signal turns green, traffic is not moving.

          You can make the argument that making it bus-only can save buses some delay, but I think the key issue here is not the few HOV3+ vehicles that are competing with buses, but difficulty for any vehicle to enter Montlake Blvd from HOV lane during green phase. The paralleled general-purpose lane actually processes more vehicle per lane than HOV lane does.
          I think this has to change. As long as the GP lane turning westbound right has equal per-lane flowrate as HOV lane, the intersection delay will be a lot more tolerable.

          If that’s still not enough, then it’s time to bring up your bus-only idea.

      11. I think the key issue here is not the few HOV3+ vehicles that are competing with buses, but difficulty for any vehicle to enter Montlake Blvd from HOV lane during green phase.

          That makes sense to me. There is no place for the bus to go. It doesn’t matter if it is in the front of the line or three cars behind. If I understand your original comment, HZ, what happens is that drivers who exit the general purpose lanes will change into that outside lane if there is a gap. As a result, the bus can’t use that space. So it isn’t really that cars going straight on Montlake Boulevard are “blocking the box” it is that as soon as the light turns green and there is a small gap, the other cars grab it. Giving the HOV lane a bit of a head start would allow it to grab those spots. Makes sense to me.

          That being said, I think it would be better if the leftmost northbound lane on Mountlake Boulevard was HOV-3 only from the exit ramp to the bridge. There are several advantages to this:

          1) You allow carpools and vanpools to use the ramp.
          2) You keep the phase on the traffic signals the same.
          3) Fewer lane changes as the cars are turning.
          4) Restricts the lane from cars that are already on Montlake Boulevard (heading north from 24th).
          5) When the bridge is up, it is more likely that it can enter Montlake Boulevard as it only competes with HOV-3 vehicles. By entering Montlake Boulevard early it can avoid the traffic.

          That last point probably needs a bit of explanation. Allow me to measure vehicles by distance. Two hundred feet of vehicles could consist of a couple buses and several cars. So, imagine that the bridge goes up and soon after, the lanes are filled. A few minutes later, the bridge goes down. During that time, 500 feet of HOV vehicles arrived from 520, headed to the UW. But they couldn’t go anywhere. They are stuck on the ramp. Now that traffic is flowing, they can head to the bridge but they have to wait their turn. It may take several cycles for the ramp to clear itself out. In contrast, if we added an HOV lane, those 500 feet of vehicles would already be on Montlake Boulevard. They would have to merge (between Shelby and the bridge) but the vehicles have to merge now anyway. That just seems like the ideal solution.

          What’s more, if sets us up for future enhancements. I was assuming a normal merge at Shelby. But I could also see a special HOV light for that lane. When the bridge goes down and they allow cars to go across, you turn that signal on for several seconds to clean that lane out. Then the other cars go.

          Of course if they Tom’s approach on top of that then it works even better. But Tom’s approach alone wouldn’t improve things as much as adding the HOV lane.

          I realize an HOV lane on the road is weird. We are used to bus lanes, BAT lanes and maybe HOV ramps but that’s it. But it isn’t that hard to understand.

      12. I should add that there is another aspect of my proposal and that is the 48. This isn’t so obviously beneficial but I think it is still positive. The bus has to run curbside to serve that stop before the ramps. Right now it can continue in that lane and eventually pick up the BAT lane between Hamlin and Shelby. But it is probably pretty rare that it actually takes advantage of that. If traffic is backed up, it can’t access it. It is worth noting that the 48 has to turn left after the bridge. Thus at best it takes advantage of that one block of BAT lane and then moves over two lanes. That is still better than nothing but not great. It is also worth noting that the bus used to stop there. It no longer does.

          If the lane is moved to the left it wouldn’t be great unless they did additional work. The bus would have to move over two lanes to take advantage of it (before merging again before the bridge). But again, that is better than nothing and would probably still be better than the current setup.

          There are also things they could do to make it better. Assume for a second that there is a BAT lane along 24th right up to that bus stop. That means there is only one general purpose lane going straight. It is worth noting that there is already a bus lane between East Lake Washington Boulevard and the ramps (https://maps.app.goo.gl/Gu3E4geDy34wmMLB7). But with only one general purpose lane going straight, that bus lane can be moved to the left and the sidewalk can be made bigger. That means that instead of the bus changing lanes twice it only has to change lanes once. I don’t think a “skip-ahead” light would even be needed.

      13. Ross,

          You understand my original comment correctly.
          It is difficult for 40/60-ft bus to do aggressive merge there while it is relatively easy for smaller passenger vehicles to join queue on Montlake Blvd especially for those cars from general-purpose ramp because the ramp is located to the right and have full access to the rightest lane.

          The real bottleneck to this traffic issue is the section of Montlake Blvd northbound from south of Montlake Bridge to NE Pacific. It is congested at all directions. Clearly there is no way to unclog that, so SDOT just have to decide among traffic from SR 520 EB, 24th Ave E, and SR 520 WB (HOV3+ and GP), which approach can be held more.

      14. @Ross Bleakney

          From what I’ve seen it’s mostly people going north up Montlake that are blocking the leftmost lane. There are some drivers who merge into the leftmost lane from the regular freeway exit, but the lane is often so full they can only merge if they force their way in.

          Retiming the lights would probably help there, but a separate issue is that the 48 gets stuck NB during peak. I’ve seen people get off at Newton or Shelby and walk to beat the bus.

      15. most bus routes want to reach the left turn lane for NE Pacific Place but one, Route 255 want to stay right to reach its boutique stop on the right side of Montlake Boulevard NE.

      16. It sounds like making the far left lane a HOV lane would solve the problem. A handful of drivers (most of them coming off the freeway) would use it but otherwise there would be plenty of space in that lane.

          a separate issue is that the 48 gets stuck NB during peak. I’ve seen people get off at Newton or Shelby and walk to beat the bus.

          I thought the bus stop at Shelby went away. That would make it difficult for the 48 to use the HOV lane (to the left). Otherwise the general traffic congestion is an argument for it. That one-block HOV lane (between Hamlin and Shelby) isn’t doing much good. Might as well move it to the left, especially since the 48 is going to turn left anyway.

          In any event, that is an argument for adding a BAT lane for northbound 24th all the way to the bus stop on Montlake Boulevard next to the ramps. Then the bus has to cut over to the far left lane (if it wants to be in its own lane) but that doesn’t look that bad.

          most bus routes want to reach the left turn lane for NE Pacific Place but one, Route 255 want to stay right to reach its boutique stop on the right side of Montlake Boulevard NE.

          Yeah, but they still go to the far left lane initially. All the buses from 520 do. So it really isn’t that different. Right now the bus moves into that left lane. Then they stay in that left lane as long as they want. Maybe they move to the right when there are three lanes. Maybe they wait until the rightmost lane merges with the middle one. Either way they eventually move over. There is no hurry since the bus stop is well past Pacific. If this change was made it would start out the same. Like all the buses it would be in that far left lane. One minor difference is that it is the left that lane merges with the middle lane (since there are only two lanes going over the bridge and neither one is HOV). But after that happens the bus moves into the right lane.

      17. As I said, I agree with Ross about the left-hand bus or HOV lane north of the ramp. And maybe there are not enough private HOV’s using the center ramp to be a problem for the buses. However, allocating the lane to “HOV only” would be much less effective than “Bus Only”, because there won’t be any monitoring of a two block “HOV lane”. The “nimble” cars from the GP off-ramp will continue to jump into it with impunity. Look at all the cars that use the “Bus Only” lane on Pacific west ofthe Montlake intersection. No, it’s not stuffed with HOV violators, but there are at least two or three every light cycle.

          And actually, if it’s “HOV” it has to be “HOVL” (“High Occupancy Vehicles and Left Turns”) because of the turn bay at Hamlin, at least for the first block. It would be clearer to make it a “BAT(L)” lane, because people understand “Bus and Turns Only” by now.

          Making the lane bus and turns only also gives one very big advantage to the overall system: it smooths the merge north of Shelby, and pushes the congestion it causes back south of the Montlake Boulevard crossing of SR520 and onto the off-ramp. Add a “No Turn on Red” from the General Traffic on-ramp, if it doesn’t already have one, and you have the recipe for an overall smoother flowing system.

      18. If I made the ramp bus-only then I would certainly make the lane bus-only. That would be much simpler for everyone. But with the ramp being HOV, making the lane bus-only would cause issues. The non-bus HOVs would have to merge into the middle lane. If that lane is blocked then a bus might be blocked behind them. It seems simpler to paint the street red and mark it HOV-3-left-turn-only. Yes, that is a complicated sign. But most people see the red lane and stay away. It is still a simpler sign than the ones on Third Avenue (Wait, what time is it? What exactly constitutes “through traffic” anyway?). In this case it is much simpler. The handful that are actually turning left will of course use the left lane (even though it is painted red). It is much easier to catch violators since all you have to do is put a cop (or camera) at Hamlin and see if they turn left. Unlike a lot of BAT lanes (e. g. 15th NW by the Safeway) there is no excuse to be in that left lane unless you are trying to access Hamlin. So it isn’t as ideal as a bus-lane but it is still bound to be pretty good.

   4. “Montlake”, not “Mountlake”. There is a “Mountlake Terrace” town in southern Snohomish County which has a now largely-unused freeway bus station, so if you confuse the names, the meaning of your post becomes less clear.

      1. Thanks for correction. I never noticed the spelling difference between the two tbh

      2. It doesn’t help when auto-correct changes the spelling for you — sometimes changing the correct one to the wrong one.

   5. “I feel like the current signal timing prioritizes local traffic through Mountlake over SR 520 exiting traffic and it is possible that they did this intentionally.”

      Montlake Blvd. has buses too, so any change in signal timing that helps one bus route hurts the other. There’s not a clear and obvious reason why the 255 and 542 deserve better signal treatment than the 43 and 48.

      One idea that might help some…my experience is that the backup issues are the worst when the light at Hamlin turns red, limiting queuing space ahead of the bridge. Perhaps during peak hours, left turns from southbound Montlake to Hamlin could be prohibited, allowing the light for northbound Montlake to stay green the entire time. (Hamlin, itself, is one-way, so no cars can turn out of there). Note that such a move would have no impact on pedestrians, as this intersection already prohibits pedestrian crossing.

      1. How would folks coming from the north get to Hamlin and Shelby east of Montlake Blvd? There is no left allowed at Shelby because it’s one-way westbound. Yes, there aren’t THAT many people that make that turn, but there must be some because it’s fairly popular professor housing I believe.

         I guess they could cross 520 and loop around, but it would not be popular.

   6. I also have experienced the pain of siting on the HOV ramp in Montlake for 20 minutes. A couple times, I have gotten off at the freeway station and walked to the link station faster than the bus got there. Also, anecdotally, 7 out of the 10 cars ahead of my bus did not actually have 3 people in them. So if we can’t enforce HOV, then then I agree that the ramp, or at least the block with the bus stops, should be bus-only.

   7. The poor performance of the HOV lane was entirely predictable. It’s got so many compromises, both the conflict with general purpose traffic turning south on the lid, and the compromised righthand turn onto Montlake.

      At least you have the 550. It’s the route 255 riders and people in Kirkland and S.Kirkland who really got shafted. Yet another reason that ST is maintaining the 545 instead of losing those riders like Metro has lost most of the route 255 ridership.

      1. “It’s the route 255 riders and people in Kirkland and S.Kirkland who really got shafted. Yet another reason that ST is maintaining the 545 instead of losing those riders like Metro has lost most of the route 255 ridership.”

         You left out the part about 520 construction disrupting the 255 many times, pandemic reductions that led to 30-minute Link transfers for a few years, and the driver shortage causing 255 frequency reductions and last-minute cancellations. Those are all factors in why the 255 lost ridership and Kirkland became more isolated from Seattle. The 545 faces nothing like that. And Redmond will have a one-seat ride on Link to downtown Seattle, running three times more often than the 545 weekends and evenings.

         The 550 also took a lot of hits. It was yanked out of the DSTT, the Rainier freeway station was closed for construction and is now gone, the South Bellevue P&R was closed for years for construction, the Mercer Island P&R may have been reduced too, and it lost some peak frequency. So those were all factors in its loss of ridership, similar to the 255 though not as bad.

   8. The 270 will be even slower. But anyways we get the 2 Line so the only losers are those who live in Lake Hills…yippee…

      1. Ahem, I go to Lake Hills once or twice a month to visit an elderly relative. The 226 extension last September makes it easier to get to 164th from Seattle. The 245 is frequent weekdays on 156th. The 271/270 is not a viable option for much of Lake Hills because it’s too far west and south, and I’ve never thought of it as a Lake Hills route.

         Guess who else lives in Lake Hills as I found out over the past week week in the news? Claudia Balducci.

      2. I don’t think the 270 will be significantly slower unless you count the time spent actually picking up riders along the way. It will undoubtedly be a lot more cost effective. I would expect the ridership per service hour to go up between Downtown Bellevue and the UW (but it will be hard to tell because the Issaquah section is going away). The only way you could save a lot of time is if you ran express (via 405 and 520). But even ST Express buses don’t run express. The 550 is extremely well suited for that. A bus could leave the Bellevue TC, get on 405 via the HOV ramps and then stay on the the HOV ramps all the way to Seattle. Back when the transit tunnel was a bus tunnel that would have been blazing fast. But they instead served riders on Bellevue Way. In this case the bus is going from serving a handful of riders in the middle of nowhere to several apartments along Bellevue Way. Not only is it a straight shot but it will pick up a lot more riders.

5. the agencies should solve this issue. I hope they are on it. The East Link Connections networks will make the issue worse by reducing service and increasing waits on the translake bus service; Route 270 will have 15/15 headway while Route 271 has had 10/15 headway since 2010; further, the initial ST notion is to delete Route 556.

   1. “the initial ST notion is to delete Route 556”

      In the ST Express restructure proposal, the Issaquah-Bellevue 554 in earlier proposals is renumbered to 556. The Bellevue-UDistrict portion is still deleted.

   2. ST is suggesting that it will take Link 33 minutes to go from Downtown Bellevue to UW station. Route 554 appears to take only 18 in the schedules but it sounds like it’s actually taking longer. Still that’s a big difference.

      On the other hand, 2 Line will have a 8-10 minute frequency. It also serves many stations/ destinations that STX does not directly serve.

      It will be interesting how the age-old transit tradeoff between travel speed and frequency (time spent waiting for a bus) plays out once the cross-lake Link service begins. .

      ST probably needs a bit more field testing before publishing a final 2 Line schedule. I would think that the speed at which trains can cross the lake may or may not be a problem, and I wonder how one train going past another train on the bridge will affect things. I think we are all hoping that it’s a non-issue.

      1. The transfer point would be at South Bellevue. It should be significantly faster to transfer to Link there.

6. I feel cautiously optimistic about Mamdani becoming mayor of New York.

   When I lived in New York City, Cuomo was governor, and he was overall pretty terrible on transit. He was always ready to shift money out of transit toward other priorities. He chose mediocre people to run the transit agency. The reliability and speed of the subway got noticeably worse while he was in charge. He did nothing at all about housing, which has been horrifically bad there for a long time.

   Mamdani’s “free buses” promise is bad. But at the same time, he has been saying the right things about bus lanes, and I get the sense he genuinely cares about improving transit there. This is not a sense I get in many New York City politicians – they benefit from a quasiofficial scheme that gives them free parking anywhere they please, and it is rare for any of them to use transit. He has also been saying the right things about building more housing. (Mostly! A rent freeze is not a productive idea.)

   On the other hand, the transit in New York is run by a state agency, and the governor and state legislature have more power over that agency than the mayor does. I don’t think free buses are happening. I’m pretty sure the state government will not allow a rent freeze. So I think his bad ideas will be vetoed by the state. His good ideas – bus lanes and upzoning – might go somewhere.

   1. Mamdami may not be able to deliver on free buses, but assuming the mayor controls the city streets, he can deliver on “fast” by adding bus lanes, bus signal priority, etc. A more conservative candidates, by contrast, is going to put more weight towards cars and car parking whenever there are tradeoffs regarding street space.

      1. Yeah I think it is better if the city can identify a budget that is equivalent to the today’s revenue, but instead of using that to make transit free, they reinvest that amount to transit system to improve service. Either way, I really hope he did change his mind about free-buses.

         Rumor says he is the kind of person who is open to change his mind once more details are presented to him, but I just don’t know how many people voted for him because of the free-bus promise and whether the compromise to that agenda will come back to haunt him in a way that he has to deliver this even if he no longer believes in it anymore.

      2. Yeah, I agree on all your points. I don’t know much about him but he seemed quite reasonable on the Daily Show. I can see the appeal. He is charismatic, young and articulate. He made the point that you don’t have to agree with him on all his ideas. I would have researched him more if I was a voter but it is highly likely I would have voted for him (especially in the general — Cuomo can rot in hell as far as I’m concerned). I liked that he said “you may only agree on 8 of 11 of my proposals” (or whatever the number was). This is not a line you use if you are trying to spark a revolution. He also emphasized the difference between Tokyo and New York (they build a lot more free-market housing). In other words, he wants to liberalize the zoning code so that developers can build a lot more places to live. That is not exactly a socialist mindset. He is practical.

         Anyway, it is likely he will pursue free buses but it also quite possible that it ends up being a test program that fails. They go with a fare system that is easier for poor people to handle as well as faster buses. Improve the transit system and you will likely help a lot more low-income people than you would if you just went with free fares.

      3. The thing I find telling about the “free buses” pitch is that it’s not being called “free transit”. Trains carry a huge proportion of NYC ridership.

         Could it be that NYC offers free bus shuttles for short-distance routes while subway fares remain intact? I haven’t researched the proposal details but I could see something like the City of LA’s Dash buses being created as an overlay free system. That would honor the campaign promise of “free buses” while not going fully in on citywide free fares.

         Regardless, Mamdani will not be able to unilaterally declare free citywide transit like he’s a dictator. The idea will involve lots of evaluation and review by different boards.

      4. Could it be that NYC offers free bus shuttles for short-distance routes while subway fares remain intact?

         The subway fares are going to remain intact either way. I could see some of the buses being free but separating them out by distance would be weird. What buses are short enough to be free and what buses aren’t? To get an idea of the scope there are bus maps for each borough. This is the one for the Queens: https://www.mta.info/map/5371. It is a huge system that carries over a million riders a day.

      5. Here is a map of LA DOT’s (City of Los Angeles) Dash system:

         https://ladot.lacity.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sysmap_dash.pdf

         It’s certainly not comprehensive. The base fare is 50 cents. LA restored the fare earlier this year after about 5 years of fare-free operations.

         The base LA MTA (not a City department) fare is $1.75. LA still operates longer routes, similar to what is offered in Queens as shown in the map that Ross references.

      6. That is not comprehensive but that is a lot more coverage than a lot of free shuttles. Typically they only run on a single corridor and are more tourist-oriented. I rode one in Downtown Oakland once for a wedding. It is quite convenient for tourists (they don’t have to worry about how to pay). The L. A. ones have more coverage, but that is not at all what Mamdami wants. I think it is far more likely that fares drop to a dollar as a compromise (or there is a low-income fare) rather than a bunch of free shuttles.

   2. Christopher Cramer,

      What part of “rent freeze” and “free buses” did you not understand?

      Are you calling Mamdani a fake? Because as a candidate he promised those things over and over. I say he needs to stand and deliver. Because if Mamdani can’t deliver, you can flush all those “Democratic Socialist” dreams down the toilet.

      When a candidate says “free buses” you really think voters should settle for better bus lanes? Upzoning isn’t a rent freeze.

      1. I understood it perfectly. But in New York City, transit and rent are decided by state agencies, according to state law. The mayor has some input, but not as much as the governor.

7. First day returns show Harrell ahead by seven points. It’s likely that he has been re-elected. The KC Executive race is very close with Zahilay ahead.

   1. “Likely” is a stretch. I think it will end up being quite close.

      1. Did some number crunching. In the last three off-year general elections (2019, 2021, and 2023), every “Progressive” candidate in Seattle recovered somewhere between 7 to 12 points between first drop and final tally. In this year’s primary, Wilson’s initial lead of ~1.5 points grew by about 7 points during counting. It’s possible that she doesn’t quite close the gap as Harrell hit the attack ads hard in the last few days, but I think it’s going to depend a lot on turnout.

   2. In the primary, Wilson opened with 46.2 and ended with 50.7. It will likely be very close.

      I expect Zahilay to pull comfortably ahead in the coming days.

   3. Harrell dropped from 45 to 41 percent in the primary between the initial and final tallies.

      Harrell dropped about 6.5 points between the initial and final tallies against Gonzalez in the 2021 runoff.

      I don’t think we will know for a few days at least. If Wilson pulls this out it won’t be known until at least the end of this week if not next week. But if Harrell only drops slightly after the daily tallies this week, he’s probably in.

      Even though our mailboxes are full of Wilson flyers, Gonzalez was probably a better known brand before the election. Since many of the last day voters may not have voted in the primary and their ballots are often ones not counted today, name recognition does matter. On the other hand, Wilson did cross the 51 percent threshold in the primary. It could go any way.

      1. The first night drop consists of base voters and people with strong convictions who usually turn their ballots in early. Tonight’s drop will represent the votes of the persuadable voters–the people who had mixed feelings and needed to do some research or could be persuaded by campaign ads. The trends established tonight (race getting closer or separating) will continue through the rest of the vote counting. The question is: are there enough uncounted votes to shift the final results?

      2. “Tonight’s drop will represent the votes of the persuadable voters–the people who had mixed feelings and needed to do some research or could be persuaded by campaign ads.”

         I think there’s more to it than that. Many times, I’ve had ballots where it’s clear from the beginning how I’m going to vote on the most high-profile races, but need to do some more research on a couple of down ballot candidates before finalizing my ballot. There are also lots of people that just flat-out procrastinate.

         The presidential primary is a rare exception to this because there is 1) nothing else on the ballot and 2) the media narrative providing an extra incentive to get your vote in early, as the initial ballot drop is what’s reported by media, so for purposes of building momentum for future states, it’s that number, not the final number, that really matters (even though the final number is what ultimately counts for delegate allocation).

8. I’ve updated the post with results as they stood after 8pm today. In Seattle, late voters trend progressive.

   1. The Urbanist’s slate is sweeping Seattle elections except for Mayor, where Harrell (53.32%) is leading Wilson (46.18%), a ~7-point margin. With about 118k votes counted and around 100-110k ballots still expected, Wilson would need ~55% of the remaining votes to win, which is probably not as close as her campaign would have liked, but not that long of a shot for a progressive challenger in Seattle.

      The race for King County Executive is extremely close, with Zahilay (50.07%) leading Balducci (48.44%).

      1. I still doubt Balducci is going to win even though I endorse her, she’s a weak candidate against strong Zahilay, anyways I might run for an office in the future.

      2. I meant I doubt Balducci is going to win, typo.

         [Ed. Corrected.]

      3. I looked up the daily accounts of the 2021 King County Executive results. Constantine began at 57% the first day but fell to 55% at the end against Joe Nguyen. I don’t know how comparisons would play out with the current candidates.

         I’d suggest waiting for two more days of results to see how the tallies are trending.

      4. I’ll be sure to vote for Scooby Doo and the Goblin King for King County Council in 2028 🫡

      5. Okay Delta, don’t forget to vote Taylor M (real name) in 2028 for King County Council.

      6. The next day tabulations just got released.

         Both Harrell and Zahilay’s leads have both increased about 0.5% compared to last night.

         https://kingcounty.gov/en/dept/elections/results/2025/november-general

         https://election-results-01.kingcounty.gov/results.pdf

         It may be a single day anomaly, but if it’s a trend that continues another day or two it will be reasonable to assume that these are the winners.

      7. @Al S

         The swing toward Harrell was to be expected, per David Kroman of the Seattle Times:

         https://bsky.app/profile/kromandavid.bsky.social/post/3m4wbudw4tc2k

      8. Good to know, jd. It sounds like same day drops have yet to begin counting.

         Judging from past Mayoral turnout in 2017 and various estimates that the state reports, it looks like about 2/3 of the ballots are now counted. That means that Wilson would seemingly need a 16 point advantage in uncounted ballots at this point.

         I guess we should see what totals and trends appear on Friday.

      9. According to King County Elections data, about 30,000 ballots were retrieved from drop boxes on Tuesday and another 10,000 ballots were received by mail on Tuesday. All of those ballots are still going through signature verification today and won’t be tabulated until Thursday at the earliest. But with Harrell winning almost 57% of the votes tabulated today. it looks like the persuadable voters are heavily favoring “4 More Years”.

      10. To build upon the GuyonBeaconHill report of 40K more ballots just received, the State Elections web site reports 347K in King County now counted with 102K remaining. 347/(357+102+40) is 69 percent.

          I’m thinking that there still may be more uncounted ballots left than that. Turnout in 2017 was 49 percent and turnout in 2021 was 55 percent for Seattle city. It’s only tabulated at 28 percent currently (today) according to the election’s webpage.

      11. For now, ballot returns are showing as 254k in Seattle and 139k counted so far

          https://kingcounty.gov/en/dept/elections/results/ballot-return-statistics/2025/november-general

      12. Thanks for the link, jd. That page wasn’t loading on my iPhone so I found the info on my desktop this evening.

          It appears that Wilson will need a margin of 10=11% of the remaining vote to win (rather than 16%) as of today. There are probably 1-2% of the remaining ballots that are either write-ins or blanks for this race.

      13. Oh, at this point (day 2) in 2021 , Harrell had a 44K lead against Gonzalez and he won by 46K. Harrell has an 11K lead now in 2025.

          I don’t think citywide mayor races will see big swings in daily tallies like some past council district races. I wouldn’t rule out a Wilson win, but it looks a rather unlikely.

      14. @Al S

          I would put it at around Wilson 60-40 or 50-50. The uncounted ballots are overwhelmingly from districts that voted Wilson in the primary. She needs around 53-55% of the remaining votes. We’ll probably know more after the drop today.

          For voter turnout, see page 5; for ballot returns by location, see page 8; filter by City of Seattle:

          https://kingcounty.gov/en/dept/elections/results/ballot-return-statistics/2025/november-general

9. The most critical thing for Sound Transit is for Balducci to remain on the ST Board. If she loses, she’ll still be on the county council so eligible for the board. It would then be Zahilay’s choice whether to reappoint her. This may have to be our next advocacy push. Balducci is the one boardmember who best understands passengers’ needs (such as short train-to-train transfers downtown) and has the best unique proposals. If we lose her on the board, there’s less hope for a sensible outcome in the ST3 realignment or the best operational choices.

   1. I have gotten the sense that Zahilay and Balducci see themselves as friendly rivals, not enemies. I expect that if Zahilay wins, he will reappoint Balducci.

      1. Technically Balducci could even be elected ST Board Chair, no? If I were Zahilay, I would seriously consider backing her for that position. I don’t think being ST Board Chair is a very fun job right now. Let someone else take the heat and he can focus on other issues while still being the most influential member of the board.

         I wonder who he will appoint. Rob Saka really wants a seat haha

10. Conrad Lee is gone in Bellevue. I am surprised, and very happy about that. Probably not enough to have an actual pro-transit council, but it’s an improvement.

11. David Kroman reported via BlueSky that this afternoon’s updated will only add about 30k ballots to the count, so it’s unlikely the Seattle Mayoral race will be decided this week.

    https://bsky.app/profile/kromandavid.bsky.social/post/3m4ymkzsu6s2z

    1. Replies speculate King County’s process is unusually slow due to a significant increase in ballot box drop usage on Election Day versus mail-in. In 2023, about 55% of ballots were returned via drop box; this year, that’s reached nearly 68%, over half of which were returned on Election Day.

       It appears turnout is expected to hit 55%. My guess is that early indications of low turnout (from low rates of early returns) were due to folks procrastinating on bringing their ballots to a drop box instead of returning it through the mail.

       1. Results updated at 3:37pm.

          Total ballots counted in King County up to 429k; Zahilay continues to pull ahead from Balducci.

          Ballots counted in Seattle up to 175k (+36k); Wilson is still behind Harrell but the gap has slightly narrowed. ~100-110k Seattle ballots left to count, reportedly King County has yet gotten very far into counting the Election Day ballots.

    2. The update appears to be 37K more ballots from inside Seattle. Harrell’s lead shrank from 11,200 to 9,900.

       With an estimated 100K ballots left to be counted, the trends still favor Harrell. Friday’s drop will be telling. It’s hard to guess how the final ballots will swing. That drop will likely be over 1/3 of the remaining ballots so Wilson would seem to need to gain at least 2,500 net votes on Harrell to merely stay competitive (compared to just 1,300 in today’s drop). If Wilson can cut the margin by over 4,000 votes tomorrow, she might eke out a win.

12. Results for the count today (11/6) are out. Katie took 51.8% of the count today. 36,035 ballots were counted in Seattle; Katie took 18,655 and Bruce took 17,380. The gap shrunk from 8 points to 6 points.

    Katie needs to take roughly 56-58% of the remaining votes to win.

13. Results for the count today (11/7) are out. Of 55,952 ballots counted in Seattle, Katie took 30,780 to Bruce’s 25,172. That’s 55%, or +5,608 ballots for Katie.

    The gap has shrunk from 9,908 to 4,300 ballots.

    233k of 279k ballots have been counted. Katie needs ~55% of the remaining ballots to win.

    I’d say this is a likely Katie victory. I’d put her odds at 60-40 or 70-30.

    1. Agreed.

    2. It’s an impressive gain for Wilson!

       The trends appear to me to be possibly headed to a recount. Even if Wilson pulls ahead on Monday it still appears to be very close.

       The difference may come down to blank ballots and write-ins. I could see a hand recount looking at these to see if the machines skipped seeing some votes.

14. Balducci has conceded.

    1. You beat me to it by 1 minute.

       The campaign to keep Balducci on the ST board begins.

    2. I noticed that as well. Frankly it was a bit closer than I expected. Great race, really. Both candidates not only kept it civil but agreed on most issues.

15. Last update until Monday afternoon: another ~57k votes counted in Seattle, almost all from last-minute Election Day drops. Many estimated Wilson would need to take ~55% of remaining votes to win; she won 54.85% of votes in the latest batch.

    Wilson is now at 48.86%; Harrell at 50.74%, closing the gap from Wednesday night’s 8.15% to 1.87%. In other terms, Wilson was down by 11,183 votes on Wednesday afternoon; that gap is down to 4,300 votes. With approximately 45k votes left to count, Monday’s drop will be a nail-biter with Tuesday (Veteran’s Day) being a federal holiday.

    Side note: of Seattle’s 277,966 counted ballots, 3,412 (1.23%) did not cast a vote in the Mayoral race.

    1. Side note: of Seattle’s 277,966 counted ballots, 3,412 (1.23%) did not cast a vote in the Mayoral race.

       Wow. I wonder how many of those were intentional. We may be entering “hanging chad” territory. There are also disputed ballots. I think it is quite likely that both campaigns will pursue voters who forget to sign the ballot or whose signature doesn’t match (according to those checking). It seems like this will go into extra innings.

       1. My guess is that it’s a mix of folks who genuinely didn’t like either candidate, or simply forgot to actually fill in the bubble before they sealed their envelope and dropped it in the box.

16. How is Zahilay on Metro? Does he have any particular strengths, weaknesses, or things we should press him on?

    1. I think he has been pretty vague. Both candidates support transit — that is clear. But Balducci has been looking at transit issues a lot more (and not just ST).

    2. The only thing I can remember him saying about transit was that underserved communities (or something like that… the impression I got was that he meant minorities) should get more of it. I never saw anything detailed from him. He seems too disinterested in it to make any big changes. Which might be fine.

    3. We’ll have to see if he understands passengers’ needs. Does he use transit or has he ever used it? It’s one thing to say get more transit into minority communities. But does that transit meet their biggest mobility needs? For instance, if a route has 15 minute daytime and 30 minute evening, will he prioritize filling in 15-minute evening service so that people can get around in the evening as easily as they can in the daytime? Will he get more routes going through downtown Renton rather than just terminating there, so that fewer people have to go through the transfer bottleneck there?

       1. He’s on the Sound Transit Board. He used to be on the county council transportation committee. Might be worth checking the meeting minutes to see if he did or said anything notable there.

       2. Zahilay comes off as generally supportive but not particularly interested in transit to me. He doesn’t bring it up and gives pretty generic answers when asked. A few examples are below.

          https://kingcounty.gov/en/dept/council/governance-leadership/county-council/councilmembers-districts/girmay-zahilay/about

          https://www.electgirmay.com/accomplishments

          https://www.theurbanist.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Girmay-Zahilay-Urbanist-Questionnaire-Responses-for-Publication.pdf

17. Wilson in the lead by 91 votes. wow!

    1. Yep. Great rundown by The Stranger (https://www.thestranger.com/news/2025/11/10/80318796/the-monday-ballot-drop-is-here). It’s not over until the fat lady sings but she is clearing her throat.

    2. With 1,703 challenged ballots out there and probably a good number of mail-in ballots trickling in, there’s truly no predicting the outcome at this point. King County is also reporting about 13,000 ballots left to count, but it’s unclear whether these are from Seattle or elsewhere.

       Has there ever been a Seattle Mayoral election this close before?

Comments are closed.