Friday Roundtable: Intercity Bus Routes

58 Replies to “Friday Roundtable: Intercity Bus Routes”

1. Transit Bandit had a great video on a proposed I-90 bus route: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Brl5EqACj2s

   Washington seems to rely heavily on private carriers like FlixBus. That’s maybe unavoidable given the cost of running regular bus service but it would be nice to have a more affordable/frequent option. Though looking at the report, farebox recovery is better than I expected, around 20-25% for the Dungeness and Gold lines in particular

   1. WSDOT could run nearly 100% farebox recovery on some intercity routes, but we don’t generally directly compete with Greyhound on profitable routes. Given how miserable Greyhound can be, I feel like this is a big missed opportunity for a state-run bus network.

      1. If it is profitable, then public sector probably shouldn’t run it unless the situation is although it is profitable, the margin of profit is too low to attract any private sector investment.

      2. There are other factors:

         Eg:

         Frequency: Oregon could rely only on Flix for Portland to Eugene service, but the frequency just wasn’t something that could be done profitably.

         Stability: Valley Retriever operated several routes out of Albany, but then the owner retired or something, with the service simply vanishing for a couple years.

         Locations: Belair Airporter is the only service on Sunday connecting Anacortes to anything, but their stop is a gas station that’s not that close to a lot of things.

      3. Is there a specific reason why you think the state shouldn’t run a profitable bus network? I think for the purposes of public transportation, it’s better to have a situation where a public entity runs a network with a minimum level of coverage and is funded to allow for more service on more profitable routes. It’s really not a different concept than local transit service. Without a public operator, it’s possible for the private sector to run a bad public transit network, even today. But the profit motive will always erode service, and a downward spiral is probably inevitable in the US in general.

         If Metro didn’t exist, it’s possible that a private operator could eke out a profit on only the most profitable routes. I imagine there are places where demand is high enough (Rainier, Uptown, etc.) that a private operator could still make it work. But the service would be unacceptably bad for anyone used to even the flawed transit Seattle has.

         I don’t see why intercity transit shouldn’t be organized around similar principles. I mean train travel sort of is, though Amtrak is it’s own unique crazy combination of government supported and profit-making enterprise. It’s obvious that it would be better with more sensible policy investments. The same is true of intercity buses

      4. If it is profitable, then public sector probably shouldn’t run it unless the situation is although it is profitable, the margin of profit is too low to attract any private sector investment.

         Which is obviously the case, given the lack of competition in the private bus market. It is essentially a monopoly in this state. Theoretically a company could start offering decent service but companies tend to focus on either the short term or huge profits. If you are interested in the short term you minimize costs (typically by laying off workers) even if it means smaller gross income. If you are interested in big profits, you don’t get into the bus market.

         blumdrew is right. It is common for transit agencies to make a profit on *part* of their system. They then use that money to help pay for less profitable parts. The ridership routes help pay for the coverage routes. This would be similar. blumdrew’s point is that the overall fare recovery would be pretty good, given some routes might actually make a profit (or close to it). If at the same time a private company tried to compete in the more profitable routes, so be it.

      5. Belair runs a bus from the Anacortes Ferry Terminal to Burlington every several hours. It’s designed to have timed transfers to their I-5 bus.

         It makes money for them apparently (though I was the only passenger the last time I used it). Imagine how much more traffic it would get if it were actually timed to the ferry, rather than giving passengers more than an hour to wait.

      6. If it is profitable, then public sector probably shouldn’t run it

         HZ, why not? Because some RWNJ will be butt-hurt that “pravit entuhprize” is being attacked? Or because “union waste”? [or, IOW, people are paid a living wage].

   2. We had an article on it in September.

      https://seattletransitblog.com/2025/02/09/sunday-movie-cross-snoqualmie-pass-bus-route/

2. The intercity bus situation is pretty rough in the US in general. Outside of major conurbations or places with a legacy of strong state support, it’s often a nominal trip or maybe two per day. Minnesota is a nice example of how to do it well though. They’ve been supporting operations on Jefferson Lines for decades now, and most parts of the state are connected. There’s even routes that bypass the Twin Cities (though you may be transferring in Brainerd).

   I’m more familiar with the situation in Oregon, but they’ve been facing a massive gap since Greyhound/Flix left the Portland-Boise corridor. And I believe that the Portland – California route mostly now bypasses the small cities in Southern OR too (Grants Pass, etc.). Washington is better situated in a way, since Spokane and even the Tri Cities are so much larger than any comparable city in Eastern OR. But the private operators are still sort of crappy.

   One of the biggest issues I’ve had riding intercity buses is just the absolute contempt that Greyhound/Flix has for passengers. Curbside stops with no signage, absolutely zero communication for multi-hour delays, unscheduled rest stops. You get the idea. There’s clearly a need for better intercity bus service, but it’s unfortunate that in WA and OR, this takes the form of minimally viable routes to some places with little or no service rather than a more coherent network (like MN). I get that it’s physically easier in Minnesota, but even in Western WA there’s clear missing connections (notably Aberdeen/Hoquiam/Grays Harbor).

   I’m essentially car free by choice and the lack of good intercity transit really limits my options. Like I want to go to Port Townsend, but I have to plan around Jefferson Transit not running on Sundays. I’d visit Leavenworth more if Greyhound wasn’t $60 one way for a twice a day trip. Getting to anywhere east of the Cascades is an ordeal. The set of hikes and backpacking trips I can do are so insanely limited it take a graduate degree in planning just to trip plan.

   Intercity buses aren’t very sexy, but they are important and there aren’t enough of them. I wish WSDOT was more proactive and dreamed a little bigger in providing intercity mobility.

   1. I agree. I would also argue that the huge amount of money required to build high speed rail just for Seattle-Portland would quite likely deliver more mobility just by adding more bus service.

      I also wish Intercity buses connected better to the region public transit system. For instance, a trip from Northgate to Vancouver, should not require a detour all the way to downtown Seattle. And, on the Vancouver side, there should be a connection to the SkyTrain before going all the way into the city center. In one egregious example, I rode an Amtrak thruway bus a few years ago to a place along the Canada line, but had a one-mile walk between the bus stop and the SkyTrain to avoid a long detour into downtown, in order to serve some random hotel instead. It was as if they designed the route back before the SkyTrain even existed, and never bothered to update it. These things need fixing.

      1. I agree that we should definitely improve our intercity bus service in various areas. I also agree that the super high speed rail plans are a waste of time and money. But I think we should invest in higher speed rail along the Portland/Seattle/Vancouver corridor. It really doesn’t take that much investment before it is significantly faster than a bus or car. Frequency is an issue and if it isn’t good enough, you can always complement it with buses. In the meantime though, we should be running buses there. There are also a lot of trips that would are unrealistic for higher speed rail, including ones that blumdrew mentioned.

      2. Yeah, intercity bus policy is a gaping hole everywhere (except Minnesota!). Better local transit connections are a huge aspect of this. I know since Flix has purchased Greyhound (for like less than the real estate of the stations), they’ve sold off a ton of stations. In at least some places, the old stations were a central transfer hub, but the new station is usually a curb or shack optimized for the highway network. I know this happened in Cincinnati, and I think it did in Columbus as well.

         Ideally, the local agency would rent a space to Greyhound at a city-owned station for a nominal fee, but Flix’s whole model is screwing the riders to save 1 cent on operating costs, so that hasn’t worked lately. I really think it’s long past time to have states (or even the feds) run an intergrated bus service. Recent cut backs to Amtrak Thruway (the only good intercity bus operator left it seems) will also be extremely damaging to riders.

         And Ross, I generally agree. But there are definitely challenges in speeding up Cascades service – especially if we want trains going over 79 MPH (which we should). WSDOT hasn’t really been inclined to pay up for CTC on the whole BNSF line, or even to fund enough of the minor projects to make a difference. I’d like to see the state set up a dedicated rail revenue source, but I’m not entirely sure on the specifics. In any case, the amount of investment to make Cascades a 2:30 trip to Portland every hour is probably less than the combined costs of the IBR + Puget Sound Gateway projects, so it really is just a matter of how to best spend existing funds.

      3. Yeah I don’t like the idea of building a 220mph standard high-speed rail from scratch when the existing service doesn’t even run more than 10 trains a day.

         For most Chinese HSR corridors (and this may also apply to many similar systems in other countries) had higher-speed passenger operation (100-125 mph) on fully grade-separated double-track right-of-way for a decade or two before a paralleled true HSR being built. So the demand wasn’t created just because HSR is built. It has been there and under-served for decades.

         I think what Cascades corridor should shoot for the next couple decades is something more frequent, more reliable, and better track quality that makes sure train can run at design speed.

      4. I think what Cascades corridor should shoot for the next couple decades is something more frequent, more reliable, and better track quality that makes sure train can run at design speed.

         Yes, like this: https://www.aawa.us/site/assets/files/7322/2006_washington_state_long-range_plan_for_amtrak_cascades.pdf.

      5. blumdrew, I don’t know where you are getting your “information” but EVERY MILE of BNSF trackage from KSS to the trackage rights on Portland Terminal for the last six or eight blocks in Portland is “Two-Main Track Traffic Control”. That is, trains in either direction may operate on either track at full authorized track speed, under control of the dispatching center in Fort Worth. The State has invested in a number of #20 and longer cross-overs that Amtrak Cascades trains can use at fifty miles an hour. Yes, they have to slow down from 79 (used to be 90 with the Talgos), but they can move through a cross-over in about thirty seconds and quickly resume track speed on the other track.

         What the State has not done, except in the Bypass, is pay for new trackage through congested places. A third track from the south end of the Nisqually Bridge to South Olympia, another from the junction to Aberdeen north of the station in Centralia and the top of Napavine Hill, and a third from the crossing of the Cowlitz up to Winlock would ensure that Cascades could run at track speed through the slowest sections of the Tacoma-Vancouver line.

      6. Tom,

         I’m not a railway signal expert, I meant to say the sort of signaling required for Class 7 (110 mph) track. I understood that to be centralized train control, but I’m not certain.

3. I was really enamored traveling to Australia and their ability to provide one cohesive, statewide transportation system. Both New South Wales (Sydney) and Victoria (Melbourne) have extensive intercity bus networks. The state manages branding, ticketing, and timetabling but operations are contracted out to private operators. As a rider, it was awesome to only have one person to interact with (the state) and well understood statewide policies. Plus, all the buses are timed against trains which made long distance travel easier to do. These intercity journeys feel like things you’re supposed to do.

   Traveling intercity in Washington can be a real mess if you have to chain together trips by different agencies with different policies (will the next bus wait if the ferry is delayed? what will I do for 2 hours while I wait for my next bus? how do I buy a ticket?).

   Australian Maps:
   – https://opendata.transport.nsw.gov.au/dataset/network-maps/resource/d1a9bdb6-1862-4a7d-a083-77d42b16d160
   – https://www.vline.com.au/getattachment/f8a1e2c3-5d60-4abe-b608-2bc18e9f8197/V-Line-Network-Map

4. Not even sure how UIUC writes the stop_times file in the GTFS for intercity bus. There is gotta be routes that crosses midnight and doesn’t end before 6am. In that case a 30-hr system is probably not enough.

5. The State seems to ignore the need for better Olympia connectivity. Amtrak misses Olympia by several miles. The nearest passenger air service is SeaTac. For a legislator or even a citizen, anyone without a car can’t arrive very easily so that they can participate.

   I think there is a case to be made that better transportation to and from state hearings, meetings and jobs in Olympia. And it’s bigger than just access; it’s about participating in a democracy.

   I would suggest starting by creating a Capitol Transportation Center close to the building. It needs restrooms and indoor waiting. It could double as a visitors center with daytime information.

   The intercity services and appropriate subsidies can then be considered and implemented. At a minimum, service to connect to Federal Way Link is needed (intermediate stops can be added as appropriate). That mere service would put a majority of the state population within a double transfer transit ride to the Capitol (with the Link leg at high frequency).

   From there, connectivity to other parts of the state could be considered.

   1. I guess there are probably tons of super commutes that involves Olympia or any state capitols in the US.

      1. There are several state capitols that were historically served by intercity routes, especially in the Northeast and in Illinois. And there’s a reason why DC’s rail system and station was put where it was relative to the US Capitol.

         Even newer transit extension projects like light rail lines in St Paul and Sacramento we built to connect capitols to intercity transit. And New Mexico’s RailRunner is there partly if not primarily to get to state government functions in Santa Fe.

         Many states get that serving state capitols is important. Many original rail lines laid out in the 1800’s went near capitols. But even newer transit projects and services tie in their capitols better.

         Here’s a link to Green Mountain Express in Vermont:

         https://ridegmt.com/86-montpelier-link-express/

      2. Lol we don’t even have an example of HOV 3 besides the 520 bridge which doesn’t count.

         People there are honest and already paying to cross the bridge. Which cheaters wouldn’t do.

         If you put HOV 3 on I-5 or I-405, I absolutely assure you there will be very little improvement. The only people punished are actual 2 person carpools.

         The traffic is entirely because people jump from the general purpose lanes at 10 mph, forcing everyone on the HOV to slow down from them. In fact, that’s the main cause of traffic in most lanes but that’s exacerbated on the HOV lane.

   2. Olympia is a great example of where a system like the one Nick described above would be so much better. The train doesn’t really serve Olympia. It serves “Olympia-Lacey”, which is in the middle of nowhere. This would be fine if there was a bus waiting for you. You might actually be better off running a bus from Olympia to Dupont or even Lakewood, as they add more HOV lanes. But as it is, there is a poor mix of service that isn’t timed very well.

      1. From what I’ve seen, the HOV lanes don’t really work that well there. They just get plugged up with more SOV.

      2. HOV-3 works really well. HOV-2 is not as good. HOT is typically HOV-3.

      3. HOV 2 works fine too, it’s just almost everyone on it is cheating.

         These days the police have been pulling a lot of people over near Renton and Bellevue, so the HOV lane has been functioning a lot better. Still many cheaters though.

         If the lanes were probably separated I think it’d go better. Some people get tired of the traffic and jump in and get out, slowing down the lanes suddenly… Even if less vehicles are on the lane in general.

      4. I’ve been driving up to S Bellevue these days to use the train. Way better than parking at TIBS to get to North Seattle. The distance is almost the same too. I also just hate the 101/102 at this rate. I would Stride once it opens if it went to S Bellevue… I don’t want to transfer to the 111 just for that.

      5. One thing to remember here is that, when the government has a monopoly on service, you can force people traveling the dominant trips to endure a slower ride in order to provide coverage to towns along the way, but in a competitive marketplace, that doesn’t work – the bus company that runs the nonstop trips will always have the competitive advantage for the Seattle->Portland trips, leaving the milk-run bus company with only the smaller group of people traveling to in-between cities.

         It’s not clear that Olympia is big enough for a private company to justify serving on its own, if it costs them more Seattle->Portland riders than they’d gain from Olympia riders. If cities like Olympia want bus service to Seattle and Portland, it probably needs to be subsidized by the state.

      6. I don’t think it’s so much cheating as a lot of cars naturally have two people on them even if they aren’t really carpools. Every Uber ride qualifies, as does every parent taking a kid to school, every couple going out for dinner. That’s a lot of trips.

      7. Nope I get a good peak in many of the cars. Not a single passenger inside. Can’t see clearly through too many, but the requirement should be a legal passenger in the front. Kids don’t count unless they’re old enough to be up front.

      8. A lot of the pickups are definitely cheating unless they got someone in the trunk.

         1. I saw a ton of this when I was commuting on 520 (yay 2 line!) – westbound in the afternoon, depending on the day, between 60-70% of cars in the HOV lane on the bridge only had the driver visible, and on one day the first 17 cars I counted (and 23 of 24) had only one visible person. This is somewhat anecdotal of course but when driving at 5-10 mph it’s not too hard to see that, and I sincerely doubt that everyone had a kid in the back that I couldn’t see.

            Aside from the cheating factor, of course everyone doing this slowed the 520 bus routes down as well, since they also use that lane.

      9. North of Tacoma, the HOV lanes seem to work better, but between Lakewood and Lacy specifically, Intercity Transit 600 spends a lot of time stuck in traffic with a bunch of SOV traffic. Granted, the HOV lanes haven’t been there long.

      10. It’s not clear that Olympia is big enough for a private company to justify serving on its own,

          Even BoltBus stopped in Olympia after a while of express Portland-Seattle trips. It might not generate that much ridership, but it’s also really easy to serve from I-5. Granted, their stop was a gas station just off the freeway south of town, but you can’t expect miracles.

          Today, Flix goes to downtown Olympia.

          Twin Transit used to have a route that went to downtown Olympia from the Centralia Amtrak station, but today it operates from the park and ride lot several miles west of downtown. For a brief period Amtrak plus that route was the fastest way to get to Olympia from the south.

      11. “HOV-3 works really well. HOV-2 is not as good. HOT is typically HOV-3.”

          HOV lane in Lacey is useless on a busy Saturday morning when tons of groups go on road trips. I was on that lane once and found out it was as busy as GP lanes. It appeared that every car seem to have 2-3 people on board on the weekend. In that case, just opening it as GP lane is more efficient.

      12. “From what I’ve seen, the HOV lanes don’t really work that well there. They just get plugged up with more SOV.”

          “North of Tacoma, the HOV lanes seem to work better, but between Lakewood and Lacy specifically,”

          Yeah I feel the same way.

          My theory is that because that particular section is not very concentrated with urban commute traffic. There are probably higher percentage of long distance trips that cannot be affected by HOV policy. Only commute behavior can be impacted by this kind of policy.
          The demand is solid for a third lane seems solid and not many of them can be managed away or into carpool trips.
          So in that sense WSDOT probably should have made that lane as general-purpose lane, but widening doesn’t seem correct on these days.

      13. Greyhound express always took an unscheduled break between Seattle and Portland when I rode it, so it might as well do that at Olympia station rather than in the middle of nowhere around Centralia.

      14. HOV lanes are not active on weekends.

      15. HOV lanes are not active on weekends.

          Some are, some aren’t.

          HOV 2 works fine too, it’s just almost everyone on it is cheating.

          Someone is far more likely to cheat with HOV-3 than HOV-2. The penalty is the same but the reward is so much bigger. No, the problem with HOV-2 is that there are a lot of people who just happen to have two people in the car. Enough that it clogs it up. It still moves faster than the regular lanes but not nearly as well as HOV-3. (Obviously there are cases where HOV-2 is sufficient and HOV-3 would be overkill.)

      16. HOV lane in Lacey is useless on a busy Saturday morning when tons of groups go on road trips.

          I didn’t realize they already had HOV lanes in Lacey. If there are gaps this can create problems. You go through one HOV section just fine but then as soon as it ends everyone moves into that lane (typically the fast lane). Then they move out of the fast lane at the last second, creating more congestion.

      17. Sorry, posted in the wrong spot above

          Lol we don’t even have an example of HOV 3 besides the 520 bridge which doesn’t count.

          People there are honest and already paying to cross the bridge. Which cheaters wouldn’t do.

          If you put HOV 3 on I-5 or I-405, I absolutely assure you there will be very little improvement. The only people punished are actual 2 person carpools.

          The traffic is entirely because people jump from the general purpose lanes at 10 mph, forcing everyone on the HOV to slow down from them. In fact, that’s the main cause of traffic in most lanes but that’s exacerbated on the HOV lane.

      18. we don’t even have an example of HOV 3 besides the 520 bridge which doesn’t count.

          People there are honest and already paying to cross the bridge. Which cheaters wouldn’t do.

          Wait, what??? Toll payers are somehow more honest, upstanding people? That is absurd. They pay the toll to save time. That’s it. The same thing is true with people who use the HOV lanes when they shouldn’t. They are saving time while risking a hefty fine.

          Oh, and you must remember what 520 was like before the tolls, right? Traffic was terrible on the regular lanes. Traffic was free flowing in the HOV-3 lanes, just as it is today. So clearly it has nothing to do with the tolls.

          There really aren’t that many violators. The data is old, but WSDOT estimates between 1% and 7%. The main difference between HOV-3 and HOV-2 is that there are a lot more people who qualify for HOV-2. It is has been that way for decades.

          Look at the report from 2023. If all you needed was better enforcement they would stop there. But obviously that isn’t the case. They consider options like HOT or HOV-3. But HOT is basically HOT/HOV-3. That’s the point. If you have two people in the car, you have to pay a toll. But if you have three people you don’t. There are still cheaters with HOT lanes. It is by far the easiest way to cheat. Just get yourself a flexpass. Then flip it to “carpool” mode when you think you won’t get caught. If you see a cop, flip it to “toll”. You don’t have to change lanes. You might even be able to talk your way out of it (“Sorry officer, I normally drive with a couple extra people in the car but I forgot to switch it over to toll mode”). There are definitely people doing this. But not enough that it matters. HOT lanes flow a lot better than our HOV-2 lanes. Whether they are toll lanes or not, HOV-3 lanes flow a lot better than HOT-2 lanes.

          1. Ross, old comment I’m replying to, and anecdotal, but visually HOV violators on 520 are considerably higher than 1-7% at peak (yes, you can’t normally see into the back so I suppose everyone at rush hour for some reason could have kids back there, but I doubt it). When I commuted on 520 prior to the 2 Line opening, in the afternoon it was a relatively easy thing to look at the cars zooming by in the HOV lane and easily a majority of them had only one visible person – the driver. On one day the first 17 were apparently driver-only. (hey, what else are you going to do but count passengers when you’re creeping along at 5 mph?) ;-)

             Of course, this was worst when the traffic was worst, so if the WSDOT numbers are for 24/7 it would be considerably less and might even be close to that number. Not too many cheaters at 2am. When it matters, though, there are.

6. The map is not correct on “The Wheat Line” routing, assuming that the text is. It states clearly that the line is to go via Moses Lake, which is almost fifty miles east of Moses Lake, but the map shows the Wheat Line on US 395, Weird.

   1. The Wheat Line is not on the WSDOT map. I think the line you are referring to is a Flix Bus route. The Wheat Line will travel between Moses Lake and Pasco via Othello.

      1. You’re right that the light yellow line is indeed Flix. The map apparently does not include The Wheat Line. However, the box above clearly states that it will run from Spokane to Pasco via Moses Lake (and as you say Othello).

         That is a much better line from a State coverage perspective. It seems that there will be State-supported service betwen North Bend and Ellensburg or somewhere around Cle Elum that a bus already serves from Ellensburg. That leaves only Ellensburg-Moses Lake as a gap in Seattle-Spokane service, albeit very choppy Seattle-Spokane service.

   2. Should be “50 miles west of Lind”

7. The 203 is possibly one of the coolest routes they added. Not sure if the ridership is good, but it’s so useful for anyone who lives in that area.

   Wish they had more routes like that in SE King County. Instead the routes here are complicated cobwebs that go slower than 15 mph with no real connections.

   1. “The 203 is possibly one of the coolest routes they added.”

      I think the 222 is cooler, it’s such a kooky route that does multiple jobs at once. It finally gave Cottage Lake and Avondale Rd north of 116th bus service and the Woodinville Library was nearly impossible to access without a car (which I just went the other day if it weren’t for the 222). It also covers Education Hill very weirdly, goes into the heart of Redmond, and then runs along the coast of Lake Washington to Redmond Technology. The 222 creates multiple one seat rides via a long route and it’s probably the Metro route with the farthest layover from it’s terminal (Woodinville P&R).

      1. Yeah it’s useful but the routing isn’t very direct.

   2. I’ve ridden the 203 end to end once and nearly end to end another time since it’s started. Both times, I was basically the only person using the bus, but in fairness my first ride was at 10 PM right after it started running, and the second was a rainy Sunday afternoon at like 3 PM.

      I think it’s a good bus, and one that’s probably a lot better now that the full 2 Line is open. It’s about the same time on the 203 – 2 Line at S Bellevue to Redmond as it via the 554 to MI. Plus, it’s a good intra Issaquah connection. Now they just need to take my advice and add a stop at the Big Tree Ridge trail head :-)

      1. Yeah probably too many NIMBYs who wouldn’t dare use a bus. If I lived there, I’d love to use. No reason to use my car for many trips.

8. WSDOT is underfunded. They have to prioritize road projects that get their bosses reelected. Bus service isn’t even on the horizon. Recrown the Stampede Pass Tunnel. Work on grain barge traffic on the Columbia. Fix bridges that have or will shortly fall down. Then maybe work with BNSF on Cascade rail.

   1. Yeah, I’m for lower speed limits on I-5 to reduce the number of road fatalities, decrease speeding, and have people use transit so driving can look bad! Also make every HOV lane on every highway in the state tolled!

   2. “WSDOT is underfunded. They have to prioritize road projects that get their bosses reelected.”

      In a loose sense, their “bosses” get
      to say to their bosses (i.e. constituents) – “See what I’ve done for you!?.. I brought that road “improvement “ (i.e. extra lane capacity with a limited lifespan [on average, 5 years congestion relief per lane]) to our district!!
      (So get off my back about those gas tax increases I helped pass without a public referendum [except for the CCA tax, which voters had the chance to repeal 2 years ago, but chose to keep in place])

      1. without a public referendum

         Well you just lost 80% of the respect I had for you, which was substantial. The Legislature HAS THE RESPONSIBILITY to fund state services without the cheapo, chickenshit route of “a public referendum”. They have done the right thing by raising gasoline taxes; in fact, they should do more of it.

      2. Really?

         Why don’t highway projects have to go through the same public scrutiny as Sound Transit?

         How many people even know how far behind schedule and how much over-budget widening I-405 is?

         You do know that the I-405 Corridor Program Master Plan FEIS was completed by the end of 2001 with the estimated cost of $6 Billion for the extra 4 lanes and major interchange improvements?

         Why aren’t the full corridor improvements completed yet?
         What’s the total cost going to be?

         Where’s the outrage?

         Why does my gas tax need to be raised (now with an annual inflation adjustment each year built in) without any guardrails such as sub area equity?

         If I want improvements in non-SOV infrastructure then I have to vote, via public referendum, to increase taxes in addition to what I seem to be required to pay for highway infrastructure.

         No explanation to the public of costs vs. benefits, nor the duration of said benefits.

         Highway Infrastructure Gets a Pass

         If it’s good for the goose,it’s good for the gander.
         No Public Referendum for transit, then.

         The State Has The Responsibility to fund it at whatever taxing level the region needs.

         If ‘respect has been lost’, then it appears I’ve made my point.

Comments are closed.