Print
EmailNow, we all know Microsoft was a big – like $200,000 big – supporter of Sound Transit's 2007 measure to expand light rail around Puget Sound. But as Mike Lindblom at The Seattle Times reported on Monday, the Redmond tech giant only plans to give $10,000 to the supporters of Proposition 1, this year's Sound Transit measure.
Sorry, Sound Transit. You are out of luck.
So. Why isn't Microsoft spending big on transportation this year? Actually, they are – just not on Proposition 1. Seattle Times technology reporter Benjamin Romano reports the company plans to double its year-old shuttle system for transporting employees from the Redmond campus to communities around the region.
On Oct. 6, the company is launching service to nine more areas:-- Redmond Ridge -- Monroe -- Snohomish / Woodinville -- West Seattle -- Columbia City / Mount Baker -- Leschi / Madrona / Madison Park -- Maple Valley -- South Everett (extension of the current Mill Creek Express route) -- Kent/Tukwila-Renton (extension of the current Tukwila / Renton Express route)
The company is also modifying routes and schedules to Cottage Lake / Redmond and Duvall, and Ballard / Whittier Heights.
The expansion comes five months after the company added routes to North Seattle and the Eastside.
So far, 8,650 employees have used the service for a total of 380,000 rides, according to Microsoft.
While Microsoft takes its transportation troubles into its own hands, the low-budget Mass Transit Now campaign appears to be lacking the big business backers it had last year. Boeing hasn't made a contribution to the campaign, though it seems likely to be forthcoming. Will they follow Microsoft's lead? Will any local business giants get behind ST2? And with Microsoft normally the pace-setter for such contributions, does that mean other companies will give at correspondingly low levels?
None of this bodes well for a proposal headed towards its second run-in with Puget Sound voters. ST2 comes at a time when the economic jitters make rich bond issues harder to pass and when jammed buses are making voters eager for the quick relief of more buses rather than the slow timetable for "rapid" transit. But will that translate into "no" votes?
Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism by becoming a member of Crosscut.com today!
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feeds
Comments:
Posted Wed, Sep 24, 9:34 a.m. Inappropriate
Maybe Microsoft was supporting the roads part last year: Last year's proposition was different in that it included roads -- maybe that was the part Microsoft was trying to support.
It's worth noting that this year's proposition is currently polling much better than last year's was at this time, in spite of a worse economy. Maybe (and I know this would be a shock to many Crosscut writers) people are actually willing to pay $60/year to get good transit.
Posted Wed, Sep 24, 9:49 a.m. Inappropriate
I love this style of reporting.: Ah, "news" via question mark. Will giant pigeons rule the earth and become our new masters?
Posted Wed, Sep 24, 9:55 a.m. Inappropriate
Microsoft is Acknowledging ST's Failures: Sound Transit with its appointee-only board was an experiment in governance. The legislators in 1990 who approved the authorizing statutes had the highest hopes for it.
In the fullness of time ST has proven itself a colossal failure. We - and Microsoft is part of the "we" here - now know ST does far more harm than good.
The flaws are apparent. These taint everything about Sound Transit's management and operations: taxation without representation fosters abuses of the public trust, our state judiciary enables illegal conduct by ST because rich entities benefiting from that conduct could back successful challenges to the judges' seats, and the political appointees on ST's board are unaccountable to those they are taxing so they have no incentive either to operate efficiently or even stay within the law.
ST now is a powerful rogue entity entirely unconcerned with providing value to those it is hammering with regressive taxes.
What's the best way to proceed? First things first - do no more harm. The ballot measure ST's self-interested lawyers are putting before the region's voters in November must be rejected. Go all the way down your ballot and vote on the Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority's Proposition One.
At this point it bears mentioning that the local politicians who rely on ST's tax streams and who are pushing for this ballot measure are acting directly contrary to what Senator Obama says is the proper tax policy at this time. The national Democratic Party's economic policy leadership team insists tax cuts for the middle class are needed as we head into a big recession. Senator Obama was very clear about this yesterday:
The Illinois senator added that his proposed middle-class tax cuts remain "absolutely necessary" despite the economic turbulence. He said they would put money in the pockets of working families at a time when the economy might be worsening.
Yet here we have a handful of local politicians, primarily if not entirely Democrats, calling for a massive regressive tax increase on the middle AND lower economic classes. And that's despite the fact that we pay far more sales tax already than we should, by any metric.
Anybody want to argue Sen. Obama is wrong, and ST (with its self-interested financing team) is pushing a superior taxing policy with this huge sales tax increase targeting middle class families?
Posted Wed, Sep 24, 10:01 a.m. Inappropriate
SOUND TRANSIT FLUNKS WASL: SteveM. Maybe it's because Microsoft can do math, and you and Sound Transit flunk the WASL test.
22.9 Bil divided by 1.3 mil. household in the year 2023 (the year ST 2 is supposed to be finished), is $16,522 per household. Divide that by 15 years to get the trains running, is $1,101 per year -- no where close to Sound Transits fantasy claim of $69 per year.
If you can't be smart, at least be honest!
ps, in the year 2023, we'll still owe a ton of money on all the 30 year bonds that have been issued in our good name.
Posted Wed, Sep 24, 10:17 a.m. Inappropriate
vanpools and shuttle buses aren't mass transit: Maybe our intrepid UW Daily writer considers his Moped a form of mass transit?
The foundation of Clarkie's argument is a false assumption: the 2007 Prop 1 measure wasn't Sound Transit's; it was the product of a state desperate to fund highways via the RTID.
Microsoft and BigBiz gave big bucks last year because their backwards views on transportation inform them that more freeways = Priority #1.
Of course Microsoft Corp isn't thrilled with a transit-only tax package. They just built a 5,000 car parking garage. As in free parking.
It will take the big, old dinosaurs a while to figure out this is an unsustainable model.
Posted Wed, Sep 24, 10:36 a.m. Inappropriate
RE: SOUND TRANSIT FLUNKS WASL: LRT? knows full well that ST has posted their financial plans, and cost per household data. It's $69 per average person per year. The manchild math these clowns engage in is just plain Rovian propaganda: anti-transit ideologues know they're lying through their teeth. But the ends justify the means when yer a foaming psycho fighting the evils of light rail.
While LRT? relies on disinformation to satisfy his long-running personal grudge, Darnell Coles is still crushing sour monorail grapes.
If you want to get a feel for how unstable and obsessed Darnell Coles is in real life, go to the Seattle PI's local transit forum, and check out Darnell's alter-ego "BH" ranting on about Nazi Luftwaffe transit cops. And a lawsuit he lost years ago, denting his fragile ego forever.
If it wasn't personal grudges driving anti-rail kooks, they might come up with some stronger arguments.
Posted Wed, Sep 24, 11:17 a.m. Inappropriate
RE: SOUND TRANSIT FLUNKS WASL: Yeah, we're all a bunch of pissed off Nazi's just trying to screw up our city. I'm sure if ST posted numbers in a study, then we should all take that to the bank -- Oops, I forgot, the bankers aren't too good at keeping the books either.
The point is this. Dollars are a limited resource. Dollars wasted on a hugely expensive rail system are not available for more important uses. Building a rail line that costs the equivalent of a new Safeco Field every mile along the route is not a good use of my hard earned tax dollar.
Show me a plan that pencils out, and you get my vote. It's really that simple.
Posted Wed, Sep 24, 11:29 a.m. Inappropriate
It's great Microsoft's expanding the Connector service...: ... but how about getting their agencies to provide something similar, since v-dash and a-dash "CSGs" aren't eligible to use the service? I don't know the latest figures, but a lot of the people out in Redmond aren't legally employees of Microsoft and so can't participate in such programs without raising the specter of Vizcaino.
Posted Wed, Sep 24, 12:26 p.m. Inappropriate
RE: SOUND TRANSIT FLUNKS WASL: Darnell Coles is still crushing sour monorail grapes.
You have me confused with somebody else, probably a lawyer from Foster Pepper. They are the ones who wanted the monorail:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wednesday, February 05, 2003 - 12:00 a.m. Pacific
Fulfilling the vision of the Seattle monorail
By Judith Runstad, Steve Williamson and Rodney Brown
Special to The Times
IN 18 months, the Seattle Monorail Project will break ground on its new 14-mile Green Line. It will be the first leg of a system that will provide 69,000 trips a day from Ballard and West Seattle to downtown, tying together some of the city's most important destinations, such as KeyArena, Belltown, downtown, the Pike Place Market, King Street Station, Safeco Field and Seahawks Stadium.
Monorail construction will generate more than 2,100 jobs per year for five years and the project will create a cost-effective alternative to traffic congestion.
The vote on the Seattle Monorail Project was a close vote. But now all of us, inside and outside of government, have a shared responsibility to work to overcome public cynicism about our government's ability to perform. It is time for all of us to prove to our voters that we are worthy stewards of their trust.
Much is riding on the success of the Seattle Monorail Project, and its success depends on the actions of its staff and board, the City Council and the state Legislature. We are writing to urge that we each do our part to keep the project on time and within budget. If we all work together, we can avoid the pitfalls of the past.
• We urge the Legislature to clarify the monorail's authorizing legislation to do what the voters approved.
Seattle's measure imposed a tax and states that the monorail must honor any outstanding financial obligations should voters choose to stop the project in the future. The Legislature is being asked to make the authorizing language consistent and close the tax-evasion loophole for those residents who try to avoid paying taxes by registering their cars outside the city. These minor changes could save taxpayers $100 million to $400 million in interest costs over the life of the bonds.
. . .
Those who want the public to support other transportation initiatives must understand that the public will be reluctant to vote for additional transportation investments if the project does not succeed. It will move people, create jobs and support our environment. And it will do it in a way that is uniquely Seattle.
In December 2007, the first section of the Green Line will be in full service. We all share the challenge to step up to fulfill the vision of the best possible monorail system for our city. We are all responsible for the success of the monorail.
Judith Runstad co-chairs the Washington Competitiveness Council and is of counsel to Foster, Pepper & Shefelman.
~~~~