The Monorail Hearing in Central Seattle
Update: Take action at 2045 Seattle to Save Your Seattle Monorail
I went to the monorail hearing tonight in central Seattle at the Securities building on 4th Avenue and sat through about three and a half hours of people’s three minutes at a microphone.
When I got there, I pulled out an index card and wrote ‘Pro’, ‘Con’ and ‘Crackpot’ on it with the intention of seeing how many people showed up for each category. I don’t mean that final category to be anything insulting, but never having attended one of these things I just sort of figured some strange people would come out of the woodwork. (If you’ve seen Seattle public access, then you know exactly what I’m talking about.)
Then something amazing happened: about thirty minutes in, I crossed out crackpot and created a ‘can’t tell’ category because, quite simply, I saw no crackpots. I just saw people who needed to talk and argue and figure out what to do next.
A 3×5 Monorail Scorecard
The total at the end of the evening was, as you can see in the picture, 34 who want to continue to pursue the monorail, 27 who want the monorail to meet it’s death, and 11 that I just couldn’t tell where they wanted the project to go. Many of the people in the third category had some great input on the situation, but didn’t necessarily reveal what they thought we should do next. I am in no way presenting these numbers as any sort of proof of anything since who shows up to these meetings, has the patience to wait their turn and, ultimately, has the confidence to speak in front of a group of strangers leads to a pretty unique sample of public opinion. I just wrote them down so that I didn’t walk out of there saying to myself “I think people overwhelmingly agreed with me” when it’s clear the responses were much more nuanced than that.
The Speakers
I was a little disappointed that those who showed up to the previous night’s meeting also signed up at this meeting to say essentially the same thing. Obviously, we would all like more than three minutes to shares our thoughts, but 99 people signed up to speak tonight and a ton of them clearly couldn’t stick around long enough for their turn to emerge from the list. These are people who had the confidence to sign up, but didn’t get a chance to speak their mind. I hope at the final meeting tomorrow night, those who have already spoken will give others a chance.
It seemed like those with prepared statements and the best oratory had the least to say. They were generally the people who clearly had made up their minds years ago and nothing in recent events was going to sway them, whether they were monorail supporters who still couldn’t admit that the financing needed fixed or monorail opponents who wouldn’t get out of their cars if their life depended on it. It was the gut responses, the people who seemed compelled to just pour, the emotional ones that seemed less plotted and more organic that truly hit home for me whether they felt the project should live on or not.
I don’t believe the monorail is dead and tonight renewed my hope a great deal. I believe it did for the members of the council as well. There’s still enough support to explore and let the process go forward to see if we can find a way to shore up the financing. Hopefully in 5 years or so we’ll all look back and wonder why we fought so much.
Some testimony
Check out the video of people’s testimony. Exact times are listed below. If you only watch one, scan ahead to William at 2:36:05. This guy is hilarious and I can’t wait to check out his stand up act in the future. (William, if you aren’t actually a comedian, you might want to look into it.)
“It’s important to do something. You can’t just not do stuff and then expect some time in the future that you just talked and talked and talked and complained and did initiatives for it and we voted seven times for the monorail, then we voted to do the light rail instead, but then we went back to monorail, then we repealed the gas tax and then we added another gas tax on top of the one we repealed. I mean, I don’t understand. I’m just going to move to Chicago. So, when the Magnolia Social Club can figure it out and let me know what you want Seattle to look like in fifty years when you’re gone, you let me know.”
- William at 2:36:05
“If someone told me that they could honestly deliver me this line and design, build, operate and maintain it for 2.2 billion dollars, I’d take it so fast it’d break their wrist if I really thought they could do it.”
- Mark 15:00
“I am proud of the people in Seattle who kept voting this in and against all those forces that wanted to step in their faces and say ‘forget it, you’re not getting it and instead you’ll get the stadium in exchange’.
- Gil at 2:23:25
“I think I’m here representing a crowd that doesn’t really turn out at events like these and that’s the under thirty crowd because we don’t sit around and we don’t make stickers about things we don’t want to see. We just don’t have that kind of time.” (A reference to Mike the Mover who was out front handing out Anti-Monorail stickers.)
- Laura at 2:08:40
And, yes, you can watch me nervously yammer away at 3:39:40.
Permanent Link
You did great - it’s obvious that you really love what the monorail could provide. I totally agree and wish that construction had already started on any of the cool projects proposed over the last decade — the park downtown or light rail or the monorail or whatever. There’s something to be said for civic boldness…
You come across rather eloquently in your blog so it’s nice to see some of your mental patient handwriting again. I can’t wait until I can get to a computer where I can watch the video.
Good to see this posted somewhere. I’ve only lived in downtown Seattle for a few months and have just begun to read about the monorail situation.
I wish only people WITH CARS that have lived in Seattle for 10 years or so (I’m a Seattle native) would have been allowed to vote on this. We’re the ones that are paying for (and may get stuck with) paying for this starry-eyed latte stand dream. If I didn’t have to pay for the damn thing I’d be all for it too.
Yes, Jay, I’m sure you’re right in that democracy would be much better if only those with the money to afford cars could participate. Tell you what, next election we’ll let you decide who can and can’t vote for what. I’ll get your crown and thrown ready.
Sarcasm aside, if you don’t want to pay the tax, you do have the option of moving to a part of Seattle where you don’t need a car and can take advantage of our fantastic bus system and your own two feet.
Yes, only people with cars voting from now on. Then we can have more stadiums, and repeal the taxes that paid for them, and have to go out there and mow the grass ourselves. Jackass.
Uh…didn’t the stadium get voted down, and it was built anyway? Now that’s democracy. In reading the possible alternative ways to pay for the monorail now I see that one of the options is to increase the car tab tax so a person with a vehicle valued at $20K can then pay $500 in monorail tax fees. Some talk show host was saying that for a young couple in their 30’s to both be paying the “old plan” monorail tax (yes, they have cars), their payment and lost interest could amount to over $300,000 up to the point the tax was removed. It’s that kind of value that makes living in Seattle such a pleasure. That and being called a Jackass for having an opinion.
I believe Grant called you a jackass not for having an opinion but for expressing that only a certain class of people should be allowed to vote. It’s tough to lend respect to that sort of elitism.
If we voted no on the stadium and got it anyway, shouldn’t four yes votes on the monorail definitely translate into us getting it?
I would like to see the tax base for this project expanded to include not just the motor vehicle tax, but I do not want to see the current tax eliminated or reduced. Once again, you can change your life to not be so car dependent and free yourself of all the personal costs and community costs that a vehicle entails.
I apologize for not being clear, and for appearing to be an elitist, which I am not. I ride my bike to work at least 3 times a week, which pollutes far less than busses.
In suggesting that only car owners should vote on VEHICLE MONORAIL SURCHARGE TAXES ONLY I was trying to show the link between one class (your words) of people (non car owners)forcing another group of people to pay for something that non car owners would not be paying for. Democracy? So if a group of 12 decide that a group of 10 should buy their lunch every day do you think that is fair? I don’t. In fact I’d go a step further actually. I think the funding for the monorail should come entirely from user fees. Then each trip from Ballard to West Seattle would cost the monorail user about $200. I can see no flaw in my thinking…..
In fact, here’s a reverse example of car owners paying for the monorail when non car owners do not: When the 520 bridge gets expanded, lets put toll booths on bike trails and not on the bridge deck.
To suggest that car drivers won’t benefit from this is untrue. Some will give up their own cars and begin using this new mass transit option. Many will enjoy the traffic relief provided by those who ride both the new monorail and bus routes Metro will be able to improve with the resources freed by the monorail coverage.
We all benefit from cleaner air and a lower dependance on oil. We all benefit from an economy not dragged down by rising gas prices. We all benefit by not supporting despotic oil rich nations on the other side of the world.
As gas prices continue to rise and get more and more crippling, those cities with healthy electric options will recover much faster than those without.
I commend you on riding a bike three times a week, but I’ll bet your portion of pollution from driving the other two days is much higher than my fraction amoung my fellow riders of bus pollution 5 days a week.
Probably true. No one can defend poluting the planet, but we all need to go to Burger King at 2:00am sometimes and the busses just don’t cut it then.
Sometimes I think that using things like rising gas prices to help bolster a point of view is so leveraged. Rising gas prices is political. Not having Federal money to build monorails and Alaskan Way Tunnels and new 520 bridges is political as we spend billions each month on bombs. Politics steers everyone’s thinking as we’re slowly brainwashed into good little civic minded city dwellers and just eat up the rationalle that’s crammed down our throats. Seattle doesn’t need to spend billions on 14 miles of this thing. It’s wasteful spending. I would be 100% in support of an area wide elevated system if everyone in the expanded region had to pay a percentage of gross income. One big plan that would maybe take 30 years to build. But everyone would move away to get away from the cost burden. I think it’s just too late for Seattle and elevated trains. I’m not sure that urban high-density is doable in Seattle. We got too late a start and the geographic setting simply presents too many problems for doing things in a cost effective way. I think Seattle is like a goldfish in a certain size bowl.
Jay,
The world’s population as well as Seattle’s will continue to grow. The oil that we use to get around will become more scarce and expensive. We can deal with it gracefully and prepare our area with an electric system that will protect a convenient way of life and a growing healthy economy. It’s only too late when people find they can’t get around anymore such as when the cost of gas takes too much of a bite out of what you make from the job you drive to. We aren’t there yet, but it’s coming. The clock is ticking. To kill this plan now means many more years of delay, years that could mean the difference between transportation independence in time for the coming situation or one that is truly too late.
I agree the funding plan was not a good one, specifically that we would have been paying too much in interest. That said, I think the plan on the table is worth constructing and we simply need to find additional funding to make up for the MVET shortfall.
An area wide system generally isn’t built simultaniously in every area. It’s built one line at a time. It evolves as do the communities it impacts. This is line number one and I would ask you to bring your criticism to the table to help this city step forward to cleaner air, a cleaner concious and a more livable life with healthy elevated transit. Standing still will cost us so much more in the future.
Underneath the fabric of our car-oriented region is an older, denser, neighborhood-centered archaeology of the streetcar and interurban network.
Jay, you must have noticed it during all your time on bicycle. Crown Hill to West Seattle, the Green Line would leverage the remnants of retail hubs, lot size, and street shape. It doesn’t require reshaping or decades of development to obtain ridership. I do expect to see a reshift of population as people wanting to have the reliability of grade-separated transit move to homes and apartments near Green Line stations, though.
I support a region-wide system, but it doesn’t preclude the need for something in Seattle. Perhaps you noticed that there are no freeways to Ballard or West Seattle? For the same reason, there won’t be regional mass transit. They’re not on the way to anything. Monorail will be the first real alternative (other then driving your Bayliner to downtown) for these neighborhoods.
Possible future monorail lines would continue the trend, providing links to other neighborhoods. I just don’t get why everyone is so strung out on regionalism. Why should it be faster to get from Redmond to downtown Seattle than Ravenna to downtown? Creating a regional network may address some commuting needs (and allow more people to live in sprawly areas), but it doesn’t deal with *community* needs as people move through the bulk of intra-city trips.
I’ll go on a bit of a tangent. It amazes me that anyone thinks depending on cars is a legitimate possible solution. I keep watching parking lots disappear from my neighborhood as new buildings are put up, taking 20-40 spots away each time. Unmetered streets get meters. Meter and private lot rates go up. It’s just going to get more difficult and expensive to drive to the urban centers of Seattle (and the region for that matter). Let’s work on the alternatives now, instead of after our citizens (and tax base) moves to a place it’s easier to live.
I am also dumbfounded by people who think that our bus system just needs more buses and everything would be rosey. They go on and on about things like the flexibility of bus routing versus trains. Well, today my bus got caught up with a hundred cars trying to fight through construction lane reductions on 4th. It was so flexible that it was cut off by a half dozen cars and missed a light. By the time we made it through the mess, we were ten minutes behind schedule and just at the beginning of the route. By the time we left downtown there was absolutely no more space on the bus, 40 or 50 people were standing in the aisle. I am not exaggerating. At the next stop, 20 or 30 people were waiting to get on and were sadly rejected. Will this get solved with more buses? Sure, people will actually be able to get on a transit vehicle, but it still will be no more reliable, and still would join the traffic jam on 520 with the rest. (Yes, I realize this specific anecdote supports regional transit. That’s why I support it too. On a different day I’d have an intra-city story, perhaps about what a crappy experience it is to get from Fremont to downtown, running from block to block to try to catch the disconnected routes.)
There is a point where we need to dedicate space in our system just for transit. I’m not convinced it’s significantly cheaper to use buses than light rail or monorail for that - or that space set aside for buses wouldn’t be stolen by greedy SOV drivers (see the HOT lane farce).
We need mass transit in Seattle now, and we need it for the future.
BTW, to Paul at the top, light rail construction has begun. Visit the area east of Safeco Field, or visit MLK to see it in progress.
It’s all true.
It’s cool that on this issue of the monorail and Seattle’s transit future almost every position anyone takes carries lots of truth. It would be fair for every commute from each corner of the area to take the same amount of time to get to the city’s core. It would be great if everyone’s transportation choice was non-polluting. I just know that there is no free lunch. Even if this project or the viaduct project or the 520 bridge job were free to taxpayers the level of construction disruption would be terrible. I know…I’m short sighted.
A year ago I tried to figure out how to get from my North Seattle home to Redmond at times to match my work via transit or car pool. But there wasn’t anyone going my way and the transit took 2 transfers and lots of time. If I should have taken this “lacking” of mass transit as my personal indicator to begin my campaign toward every mass transit project that came along I missed it, because as example with the Monorail it’s not going to serve me AT THIS TIME. That’s I guess why there is such a split on these mega projects in the area.
If fuel prices reacted to supply and demand, and the city (all cities) were primarilly electric, what do you think would happen to fuel prices? And just because Seattle happens to have relatively cheap hydro generation now does not mean that as soon as it’s being more aggressively consumed that it’s prices won’t go up too…as we BUY power from generation facilities that use oil and coal or nukes to produce it. So for all the green people that are so excited about an electric system of transportation…it ain’t. It’s electric VIA coal and fossil and nukes. Maybe it’s not polluting in your back yard… it’s global. There is no free lunch. When I was 12 my dad wanted “us” to build an electric mini-bike, which I thought was really cool. It had acid in the battery that would burn through clothes and needed recharging often.
Jay,
Getting us to healthy, sustainable transportation is a journey, not a single solution that we will have overnight. We have to take this problem one step at a time, making the healthiest most sustainable choices available to us. We have a contract on the table that gives us line one. Hopefully, the monorail board will find better finances so that we can have it paid in something closer to 35 years, rather than the 50 plus on the table. We’ll have that line running in five years and then will be able to discuss other areas, including north Seattle. I realize this doesn’t impact your neighborhood directly, but it will impact the general traffic on the street and it certainly impacts the future viability of the city you live in.
Jay, you seems rational and well reasoned and it’s been fun debating with you. I would ask that you help in this effort to change people’s minds about the current contract. When the viaduct comes down, this line will very much be needed but in order to have it in time we must begin construction now, not five or more years from now.
Christian, you wrote “I would ask that you help in this effort to change people?Äôs minds about the current contract.”
Hmmm…let me think….NO. The Monorail is down for the count this time and for all the right reasons. It’s current plan isn’t what the people voted for which is two tracks everywhere and it was to be paid off in a very few years. AND not the least of which is that I voted against it every chance I got. Now, even after it goes down in flames AND I did my constitutional best to keep this huge mistake from actually happening in the beginning I’ll still be paying for all the hype for something like 3 more years via the car tabs tax. Now that’s success if you ask me. If I thought that I’d be paying 4 years worth of taxes for ABSOLUTELY NOTHING I might have considered more agressively out of the city of my youth.
…agressively MOVING out…sorry!
As I’ve stated before Jay, you always have the option of not paying that tax by not having a vehicle which has a long list of other benefits as well both to you and the community. Capitol Hill is one of the best neighborhoods for car free living to say the least. Those years of paying the publicly-approved tax can very much be for something if we approve this contract.