Sound Transit – Page 5 – Seattle Transit Blog

News Roundup: $19.5 Billion from the General Fund

March 24, 2010March 24, 2010 by John Jensen

4283642775_f6a017f8fe — "Coming up to the Station," by flickr user natfoot.

Highways get $19.5 billion from the federal general fund with the recently-signed H.I.R.E. act.
Seattle councilmember Tom Rasmussen fights for trolley buses.
Seattle’s now-repealed head tax raised the same amount of revenue as SDOT’s current funding shortfall. Hmm.
Slog has an update on the neighborhood plan “controversy” we covered last month.
Publicola hosted a debate on the 520 bridge replacement.
A driver crosses the current 520 bridge at 135 miles per hour.
It’s against the law to “embrace” and drive. Perfectly legal to hug on transit, though.
Huge Ass City argues for building the street grid through Seattle Center.
Group (PDF) of pro-B3 Bellevue residents forms to advocate for responsible transit.
One Bus Away website adds new features.
Sound Transit bus ridership up ridership up 3%, in contrast to other local bus agencies who have lost riders. Sounder ridership down 11%.
Sound Transit 2010 Service Implementation Plan published. Projects 26,600 Link boardings in a matter of months, but apparently ST doubts its own estimates because of the recession and Link’s headway and fare policies. No word on if the projected boardings taking these factors into account are available.
Highways destroy cities, or at least decrease their population.

This is an open thread.

Viaduct, Other Debt Could Wrench McGinn’s Rail “Plan”

March 24, 2010March 24, 2010 by John Jensen

viaductchart2 — Legal constraints on city indebtness. Image from the PI.

Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn plans to bring a light rail measure to the ballot next year, but can the city afford it? According to the the city’s analysis, perhaps not. The PI reports that the city may be unable to create enough debt to finance an expensive light rail expansion:

The city has about $1 billion in unfunded capital needs outside the viaduct project. The city’s central staff analysts told the city council Monday that a large transit project such as light rail that costs between $1.5 and $2 billion would blow the debt limit, or at least wipe out room for anything else.

(…)

Noble said a Seattle light rail line possibly could be paid for through Sound Transit’s taxing authority or a Transportation Benefits District, under which the city could impose a sales tax increase or vehicle licensing fee. It would require voter approval and have to generate about $200 million per year, he said after Monday’s meeting.

Another potential problem is that the City Council is considering a Transportation Benefits District to help pay for viaduct-related costs.

Of course, if the light rail plan McGinn proposes is on the cheap (as McGinn hinted in the campaign, with allusions to Portland’s at-grade Max light rail) or if the city raises its relatively conservative debt limit, things could be different. It’s important to note that McGinn may need state legislation to help with this process, another risk toward passing a plan. But what kind of plan will McGinn be offering? From the report:

“He hasn’t gotten to the point of studying how that might happen, and whether it would go to a vote, or what the funding source would be,” McGinn spokesman Mark Matassa said. “At this point, it’s just something to be discussed.”

Which, if true, is a discouraging sign. A rail plan being presented to voters in November 2011 should be in planning stages right now as to have the details by this time next year. We hope the Mayor’s office is playing coy here. For what it’s worth, the basic structur e floating around town is Link-style light rail to West Seattle that connects at SoDo and a SLUT extension to Fremont and Ballard.

Bellevue City Council Sends Letter Supporting C9T

March 23, 2010 by John Jensen

The Seattle PI reports on the outcome of last night’s meeting:

The council voted 7-0 to send a letter to Sound Transit in support of the “C9T” option, which would tunnel beneath 110th Avenue Northeast before emerging at Northeast Sixth Street and jutting east to cross I-405 to a station at Overlake Hospital.

It appears the city council has plans to cover some of the additional costs associated with the tunnel option, which is about $285 million more expensive than Sound Transit budgeted for its preferred alternative — an at-grade couplet along 108th Avenue Northeast and 110th Avenue Northeast. The excess costs must be covered by the city.

There is still a funding gap which the city hasn’t identified how to fill, but is probably hoping Sound Transit brings some clever ideas to the table. In an open letter last month, we asked Sound Transit to consider putting Eastside commuter rail funds unlikely to be utilized toward East Link. That money is currently earmarked for I-405 bus service expansion, but many would agree that serving downtown Bellevue should be ST’s primary concern on the Eastside.

A Peek at the Other Two East Link Stations

March 18, 2010March 18, 2010 by Sherwin Lee

i-90-rainier-ave-link-station — I-90/Rainier Avenue Link Station (from the Central District News)

In light of Bellevue routing and whatnot, East Link’s first two stations outbound from International District Station have been somewhat of an anomaly, at least up until now. The Central District News has some new information about the I-90/Rainier Ave. Station, which is currently a freeway stop. There will be platform entrances from 23rd Avenue on top of the Mt. Baker tunnel entrance, as well as an entry ramp to the Rainier Avenue bus stops below I-90. More below the jump.

Continue reading “A Peek at the Other Two East Link Stations”

News Roundup: Bike Edition

March 17, 2010March 26, 2010 by Adam Bejan Parast

This was a very big news week for bikes. This is an open thread.

Seattle Bike Expo had lots of fun things to see.
People for Bikes kicks off national campaign at the National Bike Summit in DC.
LaHood stands on a table to give impromptu speech. States that this is “the end of favoring motorized transportation”.
This is how to respectfully and safely share the road.
Sightline muses about the future of electric bicycle (part 1 of 5).
Lots of different takes on Google Map’s new “bike there” feature.
Securitas to patrol the DSTT, as they already do for Link; they are authorized and trained to intervene in incidents.
Governor Gregoire loves big expensive freeways.
Less congestion in Seattle 2007 vs. 1997; most other cities get worse. Guess what we didn’t do? Build lots of new roads.
The stronger Senate version of the cell phone legislation passes in the House, goes to Gregoire to sign.
The Stranger wants dirtier buses.
Sound Transit issues North Link RFP.
The “fundamental attribution error” in relation to transit.
Curtis vs. Jonny
Alleys are the place to be. Even Knute Berger jumps on the bandwagon.

Sound Transit: Looking at Changing Fare Structure

March 16, 2010March 17, 2010 by Adam Bejan Parast

ST Express Proposed Changes — Proposed changes to ST Express bus fare.

We were just informed that the Sound Transit board will discuss a “fare simplification/coordination and rate change” proposal at this Thursday’s board meeting Operations and Administration Committe. The initial draft of the fare proposal can be found here. Information about the meeting can be found here.

From my cursory skimming of the proposal the biggest news is not the fare changes themselves; as ST’s fare have only increased once since 1999 compared to four times with CT, Metro and PT. Rather the big news is the structural changes underlying them. ST Express bus service would see the largest structural changes, shifting from a Sound Transit subarea basis to a county basis.

The image above outlines the proposed changes to fare structure as well as price. I’m under the impression that this structural change is an effort to bring ST’s fare structure more in line with the county operated transit operators. In coordination with county agencies this could possibly leading to a harmonized although not necessarily unified fare structure.

The other change is to increase Link’s base fare by $0.25 cents and eliminating the distance-based portion of the fare for youth and senior/disabled. This will cut the number of possible link fares in half from 12 to 6 and bring youth and senior fares in line with Metro’s bus fares next year.

The Seattle Times will have a story with interviews tomorrow and I’m sure Martin will contribute more analysis in the coming days, especially since he wrote about fares here just a few days ago.

I’ll just leave you with a few thoughts. To me there are three competing objectives when designing fare structures; equity, ease of use, and system efficiency. Depending on the historical precedence and context of the transit system these competing objectives lead to different fare structures. Flat fares are easy to use but create large winners and losers and don’t manage demand well. Zone based systems are harder to understand, make the system more fair and more efficient. Distance based fares are complex, more fair and more or less lead to efficient use of the transit supply. In Seattle’s context equity and ease of use will be the two competing objectives that will shape any fare structure change. Stay tuned for more details in the coming days.

Bellevue City Council Backing C9T Downtown Tunnel

March 16, 2010March 16, 2010 by Sherwin Lee

c9t — The C9T alternative (click to enlarge)

In an interesting twist at last night’s study session, the Bellevue City Council supported sending a letter to Sound Transit that would put the C9T tunnel option as the primary preferred alternative. According to the Seattle Times, every councilmember in attendance supported the tunnel. Only Conrad Lee was absent, who, in my last interview with him, said that he backed Wallace’s ‘Vision Line.’ Whether he would have caved with even Wallace giving his support to C9T, it’s unknown.

The bulk of last night’s discussion was mostly about cutting costs and looking for funding sources to pay for the tunnel. From the Seattle Times:

The cuts — worth $104 million to $150 million — included contributing back to the project additional sales-tax and business-tax revenues the city receives as a result of the light-rail project, helping to make city property along the route more affordable and streamlining permitting, Sarkozy said.

Wallace railed against Sound Transit’s “bloated” budget and brought up the condition that Surrey Downs must be protected at the Main Street portal. Yet despite all the discussion about “value” budgeting, we’ve already mentioned that a tunnel connection specific to the B segment (via 112th Ave) is vastly less expensive than one from B7, which the council controversially endorsed just last week. However, if the pro-B7 tunnel support is riding on alternative funding, then there is a rather thin line between support for a cheap tunnel and C14E.

You can re-watch the meeting in its entirety on the BTV website. The more important vote will come next week, when the council is expected to vote on the letter as drafted by city staff.

More Weekend Sounder Specials

March 15, 2010March 18, 2010 by Martin H. Duke

[UPDATE: To clear up some confusion in the comments, whatever net costs exist are borne by Sound Transit. As spokesman Bruce Gray explained:

The teams have never paid extra for this service. It’s part of our job to serve major events. Since the first Seahawks train, we’ve had great response to these services and have found it to be a great way to introduce Sound Transit to some who would never otherwise use transit.

Consider this a marketing or PR cost if you like.]

Sound Transit is expanding their special sporting event service on Sounder to cover all weekend day games of both the Mariners and the Sounders this year.

As I’ve observed before, sporting event service is a nice combo for rail transit: expensive parking, high congestion that traps most buses, focused arrival and departure times, and an opportunity to serve a constituency that may not have the occasion to use your service otherwise.

A Modest Fare Proposal

March 13, 2010March 12, 2010 by Martin H. Duke

The last fare thread had a lot of complaining about differential fares between agencies. And although ORCA is intended to smooth over that complexity, in ideal world similar service would cost the same on each agency.

Judging from the comments, people seem to think this is really important. An interesting way to judge the actual priority people are willing to give an issue is to trade it off against other priorities. As it so happens, people hate fare increases, and given widespread budget crises there’s no way agencies are cutting fares. So here’s a thought experiment that gives everyone the fare parity they value so highly, while also raising some cash for transit:

Everyone adopts the Sound Transit fare zone map, with a new fare zone created for Snohomish County outside the ST district. Other outlying areas can be absorbed into the adjacent fare zones.
The unified fare system adopts the highest fares at each level. For adults at peak times, that’s $2.25 1-zone, $3.50 2-zone, and $4.50 3-zone. Off-peak, it’s $2.00/$2.50/$3.00.
If you like, raise Link fares 80 cents and .5 cents a mile to match Sounder. Use the same structure for the SLUT and Tacoma Link.
Form a regional fare board to approve all future fare changes.

Longtime readers know that I don’t wring my hands much over fare increases to plug the budget gap, because a large part of the burden is actually borne by employers and the federal government. What reservations I do have would be swept away by a more systematic way to get reduced fare passes in the hands of people who need them. On the other hand, I’m not convinced the reduced complexity would really be worth the ridership declines you’d create.

News Roundup: City Government Ethics

March 10, 2010March 10, 2010 by Martin H. Duke

Some laws may have been broken in crafting Bellevue’s letter endorsing option B7.
Legislature passes a bill limiting contributions in local races, which would have come in handy during last year’s Bellevue City Council race.
Sound Transit tax shortfall now $3.1 billion through 2023; thanks to conservative planning, still no cuts imminent.
Should I walk or take the bus? Now on the iPhone; Google Maps to add cycling directions today.
County will not reopen discussion on the routing of RapidRide C; major reroutes for West Seattle buses when the 1st Ave S onramp closes.
Project management on the U-Link tunnels.
Seattle’s traffic ninth worst in US. The methodology for these studies is always shaky, and of course the solution can always be spun as more roads, more transit, or better land use. Or, we could just destroy local jobs and raise gas prices.
Teen in White Center unconscious after an altercation on the bus.
Julie Muhlstein of the Herald laments the loss of Sunday service and throws up her hands, rather than pointing the finger where it belongs.
Tacoma Streetcar initiative may be dead due to legal technicalities, but a streetcar movement is born in Lake City.
WSDOT to install earthquake warning systems on the viaduct; just tear the thing down already.
More ads on light rail please!
Intercity Transit turning a landfill into a park-and-ride.
Closed bus stops on Capitol Hill.
The health benefits of moving away from car dependence aren’t emphasized enough.
New Sound Transit Board committees.
During the Olympics, Vancouver’s transit moves 1.6m per day. Photos here.

This is an open thread.

Bellevue Picks B7 as “Preliminary” Preferred Alternative

March 8, 2010March 9, 2010 by Sherwin Lee

[UPDATE 3/9 Adam Parast] Here are some informational links about Freedom of Information Laws, of which the Open Public Meetings Act is included. In this situation the sticker is usually about wether an “action” was taken. Details about what is considered an action is about half way down in the second link.

[BREAKING] The Bellevue City Council just voted to send a letter to Sound Transit stating B7 as the “preliminary preferred alternative.” From my understanding, a vote of 4-3 was taken in favor of a motion that would have amended the letter to read that “the majority of the council favors B7 as the locally preliminary preferred alternative.” There was some debate over the wording of that sentence, as Councilmember Balducci wanted to ensure that the preferred alternative was only “preliminary,” due to the fact that the Final EIS has not yet been issued by Sound Transit. Councilmember Lee wanted the sentence to merely state “locally preferred alternative,” showing a clear split in the council.

A second vote was taken to for a motion to actually send the letter, which I understand was also 4-3. We’ll have more information as soon as it comes.

[Update 11:47pm] Michael Marchand, who we endorsed for Bellevue City Council last year, contacted me with some more specifics about the meeting. The three votes against the language for B7 were cast by councilmembers Balducci, Degginger, and Chelminiak, as expected. However, the three votes against sending the letter happened to be cast by councilmembers Lee, Wallace, and Robertson, all having openly supported B7.

I was also informed that were questionable goings-on earlier:

The fireworks really started when the discussion came about the letter and council learned that there were five letter(s) in play and that the amended Wallace letter that was being circulated among councilmembers may have constituted a Open Meetings Act violation. Based on Robertson’s testimony of how she worked on the letter with Wallace, Lee and Davidson, Chelminiak was quite certain that the OMA was violated in this instance and voiced that in Council.

Bellevue City Council Meeting Right Now

March 8, 2010March 8, 2010 by Martin H. Duke

As this posts, the Bellevue City Council is in the midst of another “extended study session,” including another council/staff discussion on East Link. You can stream it here.

If you attended you can share your report and impressions in the comments.

[Update from Sherwin: 9:07pm] You can also follow along on the Government Access Channel, which is Channel 21 for Comcast subscribers. The council is currently deliberating the contents of the letter they wish to draft to Sound Transit. We don’t expect any major decisions tonight, but if anything happens, we’ll provide an update.

[Update from Sherwin: 9:42pm] The council has just voted 4-3 in favor of a motion that says B7 is preferred in the letter. This is the wording as it is: “The majority of the council now favors B7 as the locally preliminary preferred alternative.” From what I understand, Balducci asserted that it must say “preliminary” as the Final EIS has not been issued by ST yet. More to come.

Mercer Island Link Workshop

March 6, 2010March 6, 2010 by Martin H. Duke

If you’re interested in the Mercer Island Link station layout, be sure to attend Sound Transit’s community workshop on the subject this Tuesday, March 9th, from 5-7:30pm with the presentation starting at 6. It’ll be at the Mercer View Community Center (8236 SE 24th St.)

Learn about the East Link light rail system and view in-progress preliminary engineering drawings

Share your thoughts about the Mercer Island station layout

Tell us more about your community and how East Link can best serve you and Mercer Island.

To beat a dead horse for a moment, Mercer Island residents might let ST know whether or not they want direct Link service to the Downtown Bellevue core, as well as a line that serves the South Bellevue P&R, thus preventing I-90 commuters from having to use the Mercer Island Park & Ride to access Link by car.

Bellevue Friday Forum

March 4, 2010 by Martin H. Duke

If somehow you haven’t heard enough about the Bellevue Link alignment, Transportation Choices is hosting a forum Friday in Bellevue with some knowledgeable and/or influential figures:

Panelists:
Don Billen, East Link Project Manager, Sound Transit
Trinity Parker, Government and Community Relations, Sound Transit
Bernard Van de Kamp, City of Bellevue
Patrick Bannon, Downtown Bellevue Association
WHEN: Friday, March 5, 12 – 1:30 pm
WHERE: Bradford Center, 752 108th Avenue NE, Bellevue

More Space at Brickyard P&R

March 4, 2010March 3, 2010 by Martin H. Duke

The Brickyard P&R, which in 2008 was at 105% capacity and in the top 10 in utilization, is opening 200 more spaces this week, nearly doubling its capacity to 442 vehicles. This will be a relief to the residents of this area, filled with low-density, unwalkable, cul-de-sac oriented development, as it gives them good access to 10 Metro and Sound Transit routes, including expresses to Seattle and Bellevue. The $2.1m cost was covered by WSDOT’s Regional Mobility Grant program.

First Ad on Link Spotted

March 4, 2010March 2, 2010 by Oran Viriyincy

Apartments ad — Looking to Rent? Light Rail Stops Here!

Presenting the first advertisement on Link light rail. It is an ad for III Marks Apartments next to Tukwila International Boulevard Station. I like the station symbol included, as it gets people thinking about locations relative to Link stations (and transit lines, in general).

Last November, Clear Channel Outdoor was awarded a contract from Sound Transit to manage all revenue-generating advertising for the agency. This likely explains the absence of ads in the first few months of service of Link. Even after November, there’s a dearth of advertising on Link. The economy obviously affects ad sales but there must be some other reasons why we haven’t seen more ads. I’ve joked that we should have some ads for the blog on the train. Is it a policy to only allow businesses along the line to advertise on Link? Neither Sound Transit nor Clear Channel Outdoor have responded to a request for more information.

Bellevue City Council Deadlocked Again

March 2, 2010March 2, 2010 by Sherwin Lee

greenbaum-home-furnishings — Greenbaum Home Furnishings, the site of a proposed B7 Wilburton P&R, would be condemned. Image from Google Streetview.

For those who expected the Bellevue city council to finally come to consensus on a ‘B’ segment decision last night, it didn’t happen. The large expectations were that the council was to pick up on a vote, where it left off last Monday. From internal sources, rumor was that Mayor Davidson was intending to do just that until the word reached his ear about the damage a vote could do to choosing a tunnel for the ‘C’ segment. This was further coupled with a mass of discontent from B3 supporters. Either way, progress was limited yet again in last night’s study session.

A recap of the meeting is below the jump.

Continue reading “Bellevue City Council Deadlocked Again”

Be There: Bellevue Could Vote for B7 Monday Night

February 27, 2010February 28, 2010 by John Jensen

brochure mercer slough — A Mercer Slough flyer from years ago. Image from HistoryLink.org.

The Bellevue City Council could make a very bad decision Monday night, choosing to change its preferred alignment from the superior B3 alignment to the environmentally-questionable B7 alignment that skips the South Bellevue Park & Ride, instantly losing thousands of daily riders for East Link.

Transportation Choices Coalition has the details:

The City Council meets on Monday, March 1st to potentially reconsider its decision to serve the South Bellevue Park and Ride with a light rail stop. Last year, the City Council picked an alignment (B3) that would bring a light rail stop to this popular Park and Ride. The city council — with its two newly elected councilmembers — is considering switching its preference to an alignment (B7) that bypasses the South Bellevue Park and Ride, runs along the freeway and would serve the much smaller Wilburton Park and Ride, potentially leaving hundreds of transit riders in the lurch.

Show up on Monday and urge the council to keep light rail service to the South Bellevue Park and Ride.

WHAT: Bellevue City Council meeting to discuss the light rail alignment in South Bellevue
WHEN: Monday March 1 at 6:00pm. Public comments are taken at the beginning.
WHERE: Bellevue City Hall, 450 110th Ave. NE (one block from the Bellevue Transit Center)

Action on the B segment may be taken as early as 6pm, so please try to be there at or before then. Comments are scheduled for 8pm, but a stronger showing at six will be more influential. The meeting will be in conference room 1E-113, next to the council chamber.

Our own Sherwin has written a great article on the Bellevue City News blog on how many residents in south Bellevue support the B3 alignment. We ran an op-ed earlier this week against the B7 alignment. And in an open letter earlier this month to the city council, we shared our thoughts on segment B in South Bellevue:

[…] The South Bellevue P&R is a critical transit access point and must be served by East Link, since ST Express route 550 will no longer exist once light rail begins service. However, even the modified B7 has environmental concerns that leaders should consider carefully. We are confident the legal, financial, and environmental obstacles of crossing environmentally-sensitive wetlands will prove that B3S is the more practical and affordable alignment. […]

The final decision on the alignment comes down to the Sound Transit Board. Many on the board have expressed their desire to see regional light rail built in the best way possible; a good route will enhance the chances of future expansions of Link passing the ballot in the future and bringing light rail to communities that boardmembers represent, the thinking goes. Make no doubt: skipping the South Bellevue Park & Ride will hurt East Link deeply. The Sound Transit Board should overrule the Bellevue City Council if the council decides to be unconstructive rather than find an acceptable compromise.

Tacoma joins Rail Transit Space Race

February 26, 2010April 26, 2010 by Guest Contributor

by CHRIS KARNES

Tacoma Link - Tacoma Dome Station (Photo by Dave Honan)

On Wednesday, the “Build the Streetcar” campaign and the Tacoma City Attorney met to discuss draft ballot language for their citizen’s initiative to extend Tacoma Link. This move signals a go-ahead for a 180-day, 4,000 signature petition drive. This development comes after five years of attempting to use traditional political processes to move the project forward – previously covered on the STB (Tacoma Streetcar on the Slow Path).

The “Build the Streetcar Act” would authorize a 0.2% increase in the sales tax in the City of Tacoma to fund an extension of Tacoma Link from its northern terminus in the city’s Theater District to Tacoma Community College (utilizing a Transportation Benefit District – more on that later). The extension would cover a distance of 8.8 km (5.5 miles), with stops at the Stadium District, Tacoma General Hospital and along 6^th Avenue – Tacoma’s most popular transit corridor. The approximately $100 million in funds raised would be added to the ~$80 million in ST2 funds, which voters approved in November 2008. It would require that they City dedicate a staff person as a Transit Director who would be tasked with leading a coordinated effort with Pierce Transit and Sound Transit to make the project shovel ready by November 2011.

Other components of the initiative include creation of a citizen Transit Commission, which would be tasked with overseeing progress on the streetcar extension, while crafting a thirty year transit plan for the city – mirroring current City efforts in Tacoma to improve bike-ped mobility over the next decade.

Initiative petitions will be available at the latest on Monday, March 1st. The campaign kickoff is slated for late March.

More information to available at BuildTheStreetcar.com

Bad Legislation, Good Legislation

February 25, 2010February 25, 2010 by Ben Schiendelman

First, the bad news. We’ve discussed SB 6570 in the recent past. A state bill, it would allow private transit operators, such as Microsoft’s Connector service or airport shuttles, to use transit-only facilities, including such facilities as BAT lanes, flyer stops and transitways. Our Puget Sound transit agencies have responded in a letter to the chairs of Senate and House Transportation, calling out efficiency problems, costs, and safety issues that would be caused by the bill. Potential delays in HOV lanes, for instance, could cause agencies millions in additional operating costs.

The Federal Transit Administration has also weighed in on the issue, pointing out that projects receiving federal funds require a case by case evaluation to be opened to private transit operators, as opposed to the state bill’s blanket exception. The FTA says clearly: “such a use would appear to conflict with FTA’s rules where those transit facilities and highway lanes … were funded with FTA grants.” The state bill has an exception for state projects that receive federal funds, but this wouldn’t cover agency, city or county facilities, as the FTA points out – and Sound Transit, especially, builds a lot of HOV access ramps.

As we stated before, it doesn’t appear that legislators voting for this bill are considering its impacts, or legal obligations regarding receipt of federal funds. Senate Transportation clearly did not exercise due diligence before passing this bill out of committee, and we hope House Transportation does not make the same mistake.

Fortunately, there’s also good news out of Olympia. The state’s regional mobility grant program for transit, recently stripped of funding in the Senate, has seen $14 million replaced in a House Transportation amendment expected on HB 2838, the House Transportation funding bill, which passed out of committee yesterday. Representatives Mary Lou Dickerson (36th) and Marko Liias (21st) led this effort, and reportedly it passed unanimously. These grants have gone to a number of urban transit agencies in the past, generally to fund congestion reduction capital projects, and it’s good to see House Transportation sticking up for transit funding.