Busses, not choo-choo trains. Lets use modern technology from the 21st not the 19th century.

No to Sound Transit. Time table is toooo long.
I want to see a resolution to the problem in the next 3-5 years, not 15 years !!!!

Now is not a good time for me to approve this and is it really a good time for others either? Just "who" votes for raising there taxes with the economy in such bad shape and everyday prices so high?
Even if this is finally, magically, the perfect plan. NO. Not now. Sheesh, are those guys on glue or what?

Besides, buses can hit the streets waaayyyyy sooner than trains and are more accesable. A covered bench waiting area for a bus is a bit cheaper than a train transfer station. Plus, I'm 55 and I want to see something done before I'm dead and trains won't do it in time.

Long term and near term planning is needed. Not investing in our future and our childrens future is foolish. I hope that our politician will step up to the bar and do what is needed. Buses would give us a near term solution and rail would give us a system that the traffic would not effect in the future. We should not be afraid of leaving our children better off then our grand parents left us.

Never again!
Not after the Mono rail project stole private property, failed, then sold then auctioned the lots at a profit.

Why would anybody in Pierce County support this proposal?? There is nothing in it for us. Why does the light rail expansion stop at the King County line?? We need to get the airport too.

Further congesting of I-90 across Lake Washington is not a progressive solution.

Sound Transit wants to TAKE existing I90 roadway, for this next phase. With an ever growing metro density, a "train" solution is only good if it ADDS a path to the city.

Buses however coexist with cars, and utilize roads paid for by cars. Why pay Billions for more congestion?

If I lived in an area where light rail was optional, I'd vote YES. However, I live in a rural South Thurston/North Lewis County area. We actually NEED trains, buses, or anything that would get us from here to there in a timely manner on a regular basis. I've been in Southern California, and it works very well. It's economical, with leisure time to get that last minute thing done with less stress than sitting in traffic, and then finding parking. Some light rail runs right along the same path of the freeway. The problem with building what you need now is the cost. However, now is better than later since the price will go up even more at a later date. If taxes are what people are concerned about...what about a slight fare increase in the beginning for all users (like a toll for bridges but for pennies instead of dollars)...it's better than burning your money on gas; at least you'd have something to show for it in the long run. Hey, Sound Transit...COME DOWN HERE!

History should not repeat itself...

Buses don't take people off the road; they only transfer them from one type of vehicle on the road to another. Buses may be cheaper and quicker to build, but they wear down quickly and take longer than driving to your destination (everyone passes them!) We made the mistake decades ago not building our rail system. If we don't start now, we'll be the only major city on the West Coast without a useable rail network.

Light rail can carry five times as many passengers as buses, travel faster, and don't get stuck in traffic. Most importantly, once a rail network is built, it is permanent and will be there for over a hundred years or more. If you give buses their own lane to bypass traffic, some idiot will decide to let cars buy their way on too at some point in the future – like the HOT lane on 167. Then nothing has been accomplished…except that the privileged and wealthy can rewrite the rules for themselves while you sit in traffic.

It is unfortunate when friends, family, and new neighbors travel to (or move to) this beautiful metropolis of four million residents only to discover that it is impractical to get by without a car. That’s good news for gas stations, car dealers, auto mechanics, tire stores, lube-oil shops, and a host of other retailers – but tragic for the environment, trade imbalance, and existing motorists using the congested roads. It is embarrassing to watch cities half Seattle's size build an exceptional rail network while the metropolis of Seattle struggles with gridlock.

This upcoming ballot provides the only option to a better rail system now. If we say "no", we'll waste more time and money while gas prices and traffic continue to climb. Meanwhile, other cities with effective light rail will grow and compete for employees and companies. Even if one never plans to use public transportation, the benefit will be shorter commutes and less gas used in gridlock – not to mention less money spent expanding an asphalt infrastructure we have relied on for far too long.

A couple of decades ago Seattle voters said "no" for the same reason some argue today – it will take too long and cost too much. If they had said ‘yes’ then, we wouldn’t be in this situation. At some point, someone has to make the decision – do we have that vision? This time we can make the right choice for ourselves, our children, and theirs too. It is time to correct the shortsightedness of the last generation. If the plan doesn't reach your neighborhood yet, it will serve as the backbone for a whole range of options going forward.

This is your chance – not only to vote ‘Yes’, but to encourage your friends, neighbors, and co-workers to do so as well. Or you can go on waiting – in traffic and the gas line…

(The author is 15 and has lived in Japan and England for 2 years and has experienced life without a car - relying on subways, buses and trains as a student and with family. It was amazing and quite liberating.)

While there is a desire to solve our transit problems immediately, putting more dollars into a quick expansion of the existing road infrastructure is a poor bandage at best. It will exacerbate gridlock during construction and fail to keep up with continued growth in the meantime. There is not adequate space for more roads and affordable parking anyway...
.
Light rail and/or subway moves substantially more people in less time. It can leverage electricity or alternative energy sources yet to be developed and exploited. Buses are only a quick solution if they run on fossil fuels - electric buses require infrastructure largely not in place. And though it probably won't stop at your curb, rail will serve as the backbone to the overall transit package as it is in many major population centers worldwide.
.
While light rail is the right decision going forward, there are several steps that can be taken immediately to alleviate congestion now. This includes reducing gridlock as personal vehicles travel out of town on weekends, thru-traffic snarling I-5 and I-405 in Seattle and Tacoma weekdays, and the daily commute to and from our urban centers.
.
1. Departing Seattle, Tacoma or Everett on a Friday afternoon for a weekend in any direction is gruelling - featuring extensive ferry lines or rolling slowdowns that stretch for miles. Imagine a roll-on/roll-off car train service that could zip you to an intermediate destination such as Portland, Ellensburg, or Vancouver, BC. And for those heading across the Sound, to the San Juan Islands, or even Canada, a barge service for overflow vehicles at peak times while passengers enjoy the comfort of the ferry in transit - far better than a 6-hour wait in an asphalt parking lot. Roll-on/Roll-off service could be expanded along I-90 between Northbend and Cle Elum during winter months when pass conditions are dire. It could go as far as Spokane too during peak weekends, providing safe and affordable options and helping to integrate this population center.
.
2. Long-haul vehicles and those in the North- or South-end who must transit through Seattle to reach their destination reluctantly particpate in the frantic crush of vehicles converging on downtown Seattle. Far better would be a lane dedicated to bypassing the many, closely-spaced exits between Lynnwood and Southcenter. Congestion pricing might help to discourage passage of long-haul trucks during peak times, but might not address the many personal vehicles.
.
3. To address the remaining congestion during peak times in all urban centers, not just Seattle, incentives to utilize vanpools should be expanded immediatley. This includes employer subsidies or offsets, property tax incentives, and preferential parking. Expanded bus service is also critical to allow earlier and later travel during weekdays.
.
To complete the infrastructure for a viable transit system, private-sector services such as luggage delivery, large-purchase delivery, and incidental rideshare need to be affordable and convenient. Examples of these can be found in many metropolitan areas. When combined with a light rail backbone and expanded bus/rideshare network, many households find they can get by with fewer vehicles - and more fuel efficient ones at that! Shared-use vehicles or rentals can address special situations as they arise - still at substantial savings over ongoing vehicle payments, repairs, maintainence, insurance, and licensing.
.
It is time to do the right thing. But we don't have to limit ourselves to the option presented. The Northwest could easily leapfrog other West Coast communities and lead by example - despite a late start.

I have lived on a bike for several years...I have lived in Paris (not vacation, work) and have lived in several other cities where mass transit works, where bikes work, and Seattle is neither.

EIGHTEEN BILLION DOLLARS (PLUS FINANCING CHARGES!!!)

C-O-R-R-U-P-T-I-O-N--I want to know who is getting all of my gas tax money.

Wasn't that supposed to pay for the new 520 bridge?

If we vote yes on this, it will be just like the original Sound Transit vote in 1996 (on which I voted yes, unfortunately) but Sound Transit has not delivered what was promised, but it cost more, does not go as far, is years behind schedule and will never help anyone who is not trying to go from downtown Seattle to the airport.

I live in Bothell and work in Redmond. This Summmer, I am temporarily working downtown and every single day I park in a parking lot next to the person at King County who is employed to help people find a better way to work using the bus system...that is correct...she does not use the buses herself because it doesn't work for her and this new $18,000,000,000.00 (multiply that by two for actual Seattle mafia transit numbers) will not help.

How much money is going to go to environmental consultants? [...for them to declare that the concrete in Seattle will be replaced by newer concrete and the environmental impact will be zero...]

Hills. Rain. Bikes don't get the kids to soccer practice (or the cones, or the bag of balls) and it sucks bringing home the week's groceries in the rain on a bike

I feel that many people are severely missing the point here. Sound Transit does not exist to get your little kiddies to soccer practice, it does not promise to make visiting every neighbor and friend in the Puget Sound area accessible by mass transit. We need to take this personal shortsightedness out of the picture and focus on why mass transit is so desperately needed in this region.

Buses are part of the solution, but not THE solution. If you have not noticed, buses share roads with cars. Does this help congestion? Taking a bus during rush hour saves NO time, making it more attractive to just jump in your personal vehicle. How does this solve any problems? They are late 90% of the time due to this, and still rely on fossil fuels. We will always need busses in some capacity to cover gaps in mass transit coverage, but I challenge Washingtonians to look beyond them and see the merits of a true region-wide transit system. A system with Light Rail and increased Sounder Trains at its core.

Step back for a moment and look around our country. Study the mass transit options available in Chicago, a prime example of integrating trains, light rail, and buses. San Francisco has BART, L.A. has subways and commuter rail. Why do we in Seattle keep voting AGAINST non-bus mass transit when there are so many examples of its success in the US?? A new light rail network may not benefit you much at first, but we must start somewhere. I would like the timeline to be shorter than 10-15 years as well, but we must be reasonable here. Light Rail lines, stations, and overpasses take a long time to build. This is not a quick process, but we are investing in a long term solution. I-5 through downtown has nowhere to expand, so for those who think adding bus-only lanes is the solution, I suggest you think twice.

If you live in Seattle/Puget Sound, you hopefully do so because you love the Emerald City and everything the region has to offer. Let's be the generation of Puget Soundians who finally stepped up to begin solving our transit and congestion issues.

I live in the Puget Sound area, because I love the area - NOT Seattle. There are many more of us who do NOT commute into Seattle at all. As for buses - in my commute from South Pierce to North Thurston counties I see ZERO buses every day. I would gladly take a bus if it were available.

For everyone who loves the train, if it is such a success why doesn't it travel on weekends? Not just for some Mariner games, but all weekend long? I would visit and shop in downtown Seattle if the train ran outside of commute times.

Something is not quite right with Sound Transit.

Well, the reality is that mass transit systems tend to be used to solve problems in highly congested areas, city centers, such as SEATTLE. Cars are great out in the middle of nowhere, but cause huge headaches in city centers. This is why Light Rail in Seattle is needed NOW. I too wish the Sounder trains ran on weekends (I ran into the same problem during my brief residence near LA), but the reality is that ST needs more money to do so. I guess I just do not see the point in continuing to oppose mass transit options. I think $69/person/year is well worth a shot at building a great, long-term solution.

So, if everyone votes no on this. What will happen is no transit improvement will happen and I-5's Federal Way commute plus the 520 bridge will continued to be jammed. Secondly, for all who want more buses, why not create an initiative for a separate tax increase to support more bus service? Sounder service is not used on weekends due to no demand in response to Dan. Infrastructure takes time to build so invest in it now or wait until it is more expensive. If we want to get near being a livable city, it is time to put another transit option that can operate at high frequencies and distribute bus service elsewhere perhaps! .05 per 10 buck purchase on sales tax is very little, but the people also need to take apart in planning! If you want congestion and more highway maintenance, then vote no and keep burning gas, vote yes if you want another choice in transit!

Didn't we already go threw the same thing with Sound Transit last November? Ron Sims was right to say that we need to expand bus service over trains. Public buses are way cheaper to operate and maintain than trains. Just look at all the other city's and they'll tell you how broke there going just trying to pay for there public commuter train service.

No to Sound transit's plan..what plan exactly?
I live in Pierce county, but have been in the MD/DC area for almost 2 years due to military activation. WA state and Sound Transit need a smart, efficient and inexpensive plan to move forward with transportation needs throughout the area that we can all benefit from. Maybe someone from both the State and Sound Transit should take some ideas from different major cities such as San Francisco, Portland, as well as the Silver Spring MD/DC area where I am currently stationed. This area has multiple bus stations that are co-located with or close to most the METRO rail stations. I can go to Reagan airport for less than $3.00 on the METRO (45 minutes)or drive it for an hour on a good day at non-rush hours. Corruption and poor management also need to be replaced in WA State. Sound Transit & WA state need a real "taxpayer" plan before they place measures on the ballot or build more under-used HOV lanes. Maybe those HOV lanes would have been better as light rail lines. San Jose CA built one in the last decade along a highway there.

How does a half a billion dollars per mile sound to you? And it would do nothing for congestion. Let’s talk about our current transportation system. Did you know that Seattle Transit is part of Metro and that under an agreement Seattle gets the least amount of bus service of any of the Metro Service areas? To add more bus service, we have to pay extra (like the “Bridging the Gap Levy”). But we can build more trolleys and have Metro run it. This forces us into more expensive transit options.

The Mercer Street fix that the City is proposing is very costly and also does not alleviate congestion. Traffic already backs up onto I-5 and is extremely dangerous. I spoke about this very issue with the King County Police Officer’s Guild when I went to an endorsement interview (I did get their endorsement by the way).

Let’s talk about the Viaduct. Four years ago the State themselves said that the Viaduct was very important to the City of Seattle and that we needed to have it—what has changed—it is still a lifeline and over 100,000 vehicles a day use it. If it cannot be retrofit, we need to rebuild it so that the capacity is at least the same and that vehicles can travel at the same rate of speed (if not greater). I went to the latest stakeholders meeting, on this subject, and several of their plans have loading up I-5 even further and a surface street solution, as one of my opponents is suggesting, is just not going to do the job!

I do want to see some light rail but we need to take care of congestion now. The “congestion by design” the lawmakers have been pushing just stinks!

King County has a budget shortfall at $86.5 million for 2009; Washington State has a budget shortfall of $2.7 billion; and who knows what the shortfall is for the City of Seattle. We have had a booming economy for the last several years and the State had a windfall in taxes and they spent all of that money plus $3 billion more. The problem isn’t the tax base—it is that Olympia has an out of control spending problem!