by David Schaefer
Seattle Times staff reporter
On one hand there were Jane Johnson, a budget analyst and economics instructor who rides the bus just about everywhere, and Ralph Naess, who drives daily from his home in West Seattle to his job in North Bend.
On the other were Wes Sims, a daily commuter between the University of Washington and Mukilteo, and Chris Hansvick, a Kent resident and psychology professor at Pacific Lutheran University.
Yesterday, they sat down together to explore their questions about the proposed, $6.7 billion rail-and-bus system to be voted on Tuesday by residents of King, Pierce and Snohomish counties.
Johnson and Naess were chosen because they were leaning toward voting against the Regional Transit Authority (RTA) proposal, Sims and Hansvick because they were leaning toward supporting it.
Their discussion was part of the Front Porch Forum, a joint reporting project among The Seattle Times and National Public Radio affiliates KUOW-FM and KPLU-FM.
They fired questions to Mike Vaska, Seattle attorney and a key supporter of the RTA plan, and Richard Morrill, UW geography professor and noted RTA opponent.
Sims, who uses the bus for at least part of his daily commute, said he likes the idea of rail transit but is worried the plan before voters on Tuesday is too expensive.
Johnson, who lives in Wedgwood, is a dedicated bus rider. "Anybody who wants to ride transit can do so," she said. "Tell me where you want to go, and I'll tell you how to put the bus route together."
But Johnson said she's not convinced the proposed light rail will do anything for her, or will be attractive enough to change people from auto commuters to transit riders.
"I'm a little concerned about whether my current bus route will be impacted," Johnson said. "I am very satisfied now. I can get door to door in half an hour. I don't see how that can be improved by rail, and I don't want to lose what I've got right now."
Naess, a naturalist for the Seattle Water Department, said he favors improved bus service, too. Already, he said, express buses are slowed because they have to travel in car-pool lanes which become too crowded for quick travel.
But rather than rail, he said he'd favor "a real aggressive approach to a bus system."
But Hansvick, who commutes from Kent to Tacoma, said even her daily drive has gotten worse in recent years.
"I'm not the only one who commutes down to Tacoma," she said, adding that she likes the idea that a rail system would allow people to commute quickly in both directions.
Sims said he can drive between his home and job in as little in 35 minutes on a good day but often spends as many as three hours a day on the road.
"In another 10 years," he said, "a trip to Seattle is going to be an all-day event."
Morrill, a geographer noted for his work on political redistricting, has long opposed big-ticket transit solutions, beginning with the subway proposal that was defeated as part of the Forward Thrust bonds in 1968 and 1970.
"They think there is a glamorous, high-tech solution," Morrill said of the RTA proposal. "It is a delusion. The real problem is modifying people's behavior - a way to get people to use their cars less often."
But Vaska said the region needs a rail system to accommodate future growth because bus systems would not be able to handle the increases in traffic.
"We need to add capacity to move people," he said, adding that new freeways would cost more than a rail system and still wouldn't be able to handle the traffic.
He reassured Johnson that the proposal would include improved bus service.
"The bus hours don't go away," Vaska said. "They get reallocated from suburb to suburb. And the long-haul (bus) trips will be served by rail at twice the efficiency."
Morrill, the geographer, and Sims, a computer-services manager, differed over the role transit plans in influencing future land-use patterns.
"Whatever goes in place is going to be the driving dynamic that shapes this region," Sims argued. "People will get closer to the transit for more convenience."
But Morrill said that whether development occurs near transit stations depends on factors other than transit.
By the end of their 90 minutes together, all four participants said they were more favorably disposed toward the RTA plan than when they'd entered the radio studio.
"I'm more reassured," Hansvick said. `"'ll vote yes."
"I was always philosophically in favor," Naess said. "I'm getting closer. I am moving toward voting yes."
"I'm in favor of public transit," Johnson said. "But I am not sure this is the plan. Can I really go for the big bucks here?
And added Sims: "I support a dedicated pathway. We can't afford not to do it. But if we spend $6.7 billion, we ought to cover all of the area."