Sound Transit 3 will be on the ballot this fall. It will spend $50 billion over the next 25 years and attract approximately 300,000 new riders. The question is, is this worth it.

ST3 has many projects, some of which are great value, such as a light rail line from Ballard to Downtown. The Ballard line would cost $4 billion and attract 135,000 daily riders. That makes for a 30 year subsidy of $2.77 per ride. But ST3 also has projects with very poor value, such as light rail from Lynnwood to Everett. The Everett line would also cost $4 billion, but it would only attract 39,000 riders. It would have a per rider subsidy of $12.92, about six times the fare. When you aggregate all the good, bad, and mediocre projects together, the per rider subsidy over 30 years is a decent $6.75.

If asked on a whole, I personally think ST3 is a good investment. The question, should we say no, is really asking, can we get better value. If we vote no, will we get something better? That is a hard question to answer.

There are two main reasons why there are poor projects in ST3. One is that people often don’t understand transit projects well, and make critical assumptions, such as, since this freeway is congested, there should be light rail parallel to the freeway so we can get out of congestion. But in reality, freeway running light rail often performs poorly. Sound Transit wants ST3 to pass, so they include projects which are popular even if they aren’t great value.

Another reason ST3 has poor projects is taxing districts and subarea equity. Sound Transit has a large tax district which includes Snohomish, King, and Kitsap counties. Early on, Sound Transit realized voters from different areas didn’t like the idea that they are being taxed to provide transit in someone else’s area. To fix this, Sound Transit drew some subareas and promised funds from a subarea would stay in a subarea. This is called subarea equity. The problem, is some subareas are much more walkable and much denser than other subareas. Transit is more effective in the dense walkable subareas. But because of subarea equity, Sound Transit has no choice but to spend billions in areas which aren’t really well suited to large scale transit.

ST3 is a highly votable set of projects. It may not be the most efficient use of funds, but a better ST3 is difficult to envision. If ST3 doesn’t pass, Seattle would have a hard time funding the good projects from Seattle. The same goes for Tacoma. Some of the decent projects truly are regional, so no area is likely to fund them. ST3 is basically an all or nothing deal, and overall it is not bad.

To answer the question, is ST3 worth it, I don’t know. ST3 is far from the most efficient use of voter funds. That being said, there are some very useful projects in ST3 which likely won’t be funded in the near future if ST3 doesn’t pass. Hopefully I’ll have made up my mind by the time the ballot arrives.