Rarely does this editorial board weigh in twice against a ballot measure, but an important development last week regarding Initiative 985 requires comment.
We’ve already stated our opposition to I-985, Tim Eyman’s Orwellian-named “Reduce Traffic Congestion” measure. Our principal objection is that it would undermine the effectiveness of HOV lanes by opening them to all traffic outside the “peak hours” of 6-9 a.m. and 3-6 p.m. Monday through Friday. It’s clear to anyone who commutes in these parts that “peak hours” extend well beyond those narrow windows these days. I-985 would take a congestion-reduction tool that’s actually working and make it less effective, providing a potentially powerful disincentive for commuters to take a bus or to carpool.
The new development is a letter written jointly last Thursday by officials from the Federal Transit Administration and the Federal Highway Administration, who warned that passage of I-985 could make the region ineligible for tens of millions of federal transportation dollars. The reason is that opening HOV lanes to single-occupant vehicles during times that they’re already congested would make backups worse and violate previous federal funding agreements.
The letter, sent in response to requests for clarification by King County and the state Department of Transportation, says changing HOV operations as proposed by I-985 “… has the potential to adversely affect traffic flow, traveler safety, and the surrounding environment.” (The latter, presumably, is because congested traffic makes air quality worse.)
The funding risk comes largely because of I-985’s definition of “peak hours.” The feds base transit funding in part on the existence of “fixed guideways,” and HOV lanes qualify because they offer a consistently efficient route for buses. To be counted as a fixed guideway, however, traffic in such lanes must maintain an average speed of at least 45 mph where the speed limit is 50 mph or greater. The danger is that if opening the HOV lanes to all traffic after, say, 9 a.m. or 6 p.m. slowed traffic too much, the region wouldn’t qualify for transit funding it can get now.
With funding for needed projects already in short supply, and demand for bus service growing to record levels, that’s a risk the region can’t afford to take.
In recent years, Eyman has come up with initiatives we’ve endorsed because they created good public policy. I-985, however, is terrible policy. That’s why a remarkably broad coalition, representing business, labor, environmentalists, law enforcement, education and various nonprofit groups, opposes it.
Federal transportation officials, without taking a position one way or another, have offered more good reasons for doing so.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
