History of Link light rail

Public transit in Seattle was first seriously considered in the Forward Thrust ballot measure placed on the ballot in 1968. The 1968 vote featured 13 different ballot measures, including options for only Seattle and for all of King County. The rapid transit ballot measure failed at the ballot box.Patrick McRoberts, [http://www.historylink.org/essays/output.cfm?file_id=2168 King County voters on Forward Thrust bonds approve stadium and aquarium and nix transit on February 13, 1968], HistoryLink, January 1, 1999. Accessed online July 19, 2008. Four of these measures, including the rapid transit measure, was placed on the ballot again in 1970, but all four failed a second time.HistoryLink Staff, [http://www.historylink.org/essays/output.cfm?file_id=3961 Voters reject rail transit plan and three other Forward Thrust bond proposals on May 19, 1970], HistoryLink, September 19, 2002, corrected April 15, 2003. Accessed online July 19, 2008. After the failed vote in 1970, the federal transit funding instead went to build the MARTA system in Atlanta.

Sound Transit was formed in 1993 as a Regional Transit Authority (RTA) spanning the urban areas of King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties.{{Cite news |last=Wodnik |first=Bob |date=May 29, 1993 |title=Transit plan for region is approved |page=1 |work=The Everett Herald |url=https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-daily-herald-transit-plan-for-region/144148461/ |via=Newspapers.com |accessdate=December 30, 2024}}{{Cite web |title=Regional Transit Authority (RTA) board convenes for first time on September 17, 1993. |url=https://historylink.org/File/20188 |access-date=December 30, 2024 |work=HistoryLink}} The first ballot measure in 1995 failed, and subsequently a smaller package was put before voters the following year.

In 1996, voters within the RTA approved increases in sales taxes and vehicle excise taxes to pay for a US$3.9 billion transit package that included $1.7 billion for a 25-mile light rail system. The system included a streetcar in Tacoma, Washington which would become the T Line, and another line from the University District in north Seattle to Sea-Tac Airport south of Seattle, originally planned to open in 2006.{{cite news |author=David Schaefer |date=November 8, 1996 |title=Voters Back Transit Plan On Fourth Try |publisher=The Seattle Times |url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=2358535&date=19961106&query=light+rail |accessdate=February 26, 2007}}

Sound Transit released an environmental impact study in 1998 which saw costs rise to US $2.2 billion, and which added three miles to the line by extending it to Northgate.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=2787123&date=19981204&query=Sound+Transit+Light+Rail | title=Big Plans For Light Rail -- Sound Transit Suggests 24-Mile Route From Seatac To Northgate | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=David Schaefer | date=December 4, 1998 | accessdate=February 24, 2007}}

The decision to have the line run at grade through the Rainier Valley was met with objections from some local residents, who formed a group called Save Our Valley, which advocated for the Link to run below ground like much of the rest of the route starting at Beacon Hill.{{cite news |author=Tom Brune |author2=Barbara A. Serrano |author3=Tan Vinh |date=January 27, 1999 |title=The Light-Rail Transit Plan -- On Wrong Track? -- Many People Who Live And Work Along Martin Luther King Jr. Way South Believe The Current Transit Plan Unfairly Favors Residents Of North Seattle |url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=2940938&date=19990127&query=Sound+Transit+light+rail |accessdate=February 26, 2007 |publisher=The Seattle Times}} Save Our Valley alleged in a lawsuit that the decision to go with a cheaper option with greater community impacts through their majority-minority neighborhood violated federal environmental, housing, and civil rights laws.{{Cite press release |date=October 2, 2001 |title=Federal judge dismisses final claim in SOV lawsuit |url=https://www.soundtransit.org/get-to-know-us/news-events/news-releases/federal-judge-dismisses-final-claim-sov-lawsuit |publisher=Sound Transit |access-date=December 30, 2024}} The lawsuit was dismissed in 2003, and planning proceeded for the original street level alignment.{{Cite web |title=SAVE OUR VALLEY v. SEPA (2003) |url=https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-9th-circuit/1484497.html |access-date=December 30, 2024 |website=Findlaw |language=en-US}}

Tukwila city leaders were also concerned that route bypassed the shopping district around Southcenter Mall.{{cite news |url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=2938495&date=19990113&query=Sound+Transit+light+rail | title=Hearings To Begin On Light-Rail Line | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Lisa Pemberton-Butler | date=January 13, 1999 | accessdate=February 27, 2007}}

Beginning in early 1999, the light rail program was beset with problems that mired Sound Transit and local governments in political ire. In late February 1999, a financial analysis stated that building light rail out as far as Northgate might not be possible for over 12 years due to decreases in federal grant money and local tax shortfalls.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=2945777&date=19990223&query=Sound+Transit+light+rail | title=Light Rail To Northgate? Maybe Not For 12 Years -- Report Says Finances, Limited Taxing Authority Might Delay Expansion | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=David Schaefer | date=February 23, 1999 | accessdate=February 27, 2007}} A vote by the Sound Transit board on February 25, 1999, that made minor modifications to the route, did little to ease the concerns in Seattle's southern neighborhoods and northern suburbs.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=2946359&date=19990226&query=Sound+Transit+light+rail | title=Rail Route Creates Hard Feelings -- Northern Cities, Rainier Valley, Tukwila Feel Slighted | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=David Schaefer | date=February 26, 1999 | accessdate=February 27, 2007}} Increasing land values and changes to the route voted in by the board added hundreds of millions of dollars to the cost,{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=2964483&date=19990603&query=Sound+Transit+light+rail | title=Rising Costs For Light Rail May Require Further Cuts | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Kery Murakami | date=June 3, 1999 | accessdate=February 27, 2007}} requiring cuts to the plan to bring the project back to within budget.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=2969475&date=19990701&query=light+rail | title=Sound Transit Is $216 Million Short -- Project's Initial Phase May Be Scaled Back Further | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Kery Murakami | date=July 1, 1999 | accessdate=February 27, 2007}} The cuts were finalized in a November vote that deferred construction on two stations, to only partially build the station under Beacon Hill, and route modifications.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=2996198&date=19991119&query=%22light+rail%22 | title=A Milestone For Light Rail -- Regional Board Selects Station Sites, Alignment | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Alex Fryer | date=November 19, 1999 | accessdate=February 27, 2007}}

Differences between the University of Washington and Sound Transit over station locations, impacts from the route's running under several science buildings on the campus, and construction impact deferments threatened to delay the project and raise costs.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=4001808&date=20000128&query=%22light+rail%22 | title=All aboard? UW dickers on light rail | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Roberto Sanchez | date=January 28, 2000 | accessdate=February 27, 2007}} After months of negotiations, University leaders and Sound Transit reached agreement in April 2000 with Sound Transit agreeing to install dampeners on the rails that run under the science buildings, install air cushions to tables in the science buildings, and mitigate environmental impacts due to construction and traffic impacts from having the station on university grounds.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=4014028&date=20000406&query=%22light+rail%22 | title=UW rail tunnel gets boost | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Andrew Garber | date=April 6, 2000 | accessdate=February 27, 2007}} However, in November 2000, the Sound Transit board voted to defer construction on the tunnel to the university when the construction estimate came in $171 million over budget. This news prompted concerns that Sound Transit could lose out on $500 million in federal grants, but King County Executive Ron Sims said he had been in contact with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) officials who said the grant was still possible.{{cite news |url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=4053431&date=20001117&query=%22light+rail%22 | title=Price puts tunnel on hold | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Andrew Garber | date=November 17, 2000 | accessdate=February 27, 2007}} This announcement coincided with the resignation of light rail's chief, Paul Bay. Two weeks later, Lyndon Wilson Jr., the man credited with turning around Portland's MAX Light Rail project, was tapped as the systems interim director.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=TT0T2FLEV&date=20001129&query=Lyndon+Wilson+Sound+Transit | title=Sound Transit taps Portlander | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Cindy Zetts | date=November 29, 2000 | accessdate=February 28, 2007}}

Within days of Wilson's arrival, new estimates from Sound Transit staff increased the cost of the 21-mile project from $1.9 billion to $3.8 billion and added three years to the construction time. The report cited the frequent changes made to the route in order to appease community members, third parties, and the wishes of board members and the ambitious construction schedule as reasons for the cost increase.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=TTGI2KF2J&date=20001213&query=%22light+rail%22 | title=Light-rail cost soars $1 billion | publisher=The Seattle Times | date=December 13, 2000 | accessdate=February 28, 2007}} Just days later, Capitol Hill business and civic leaders withdrew their support from the project due to concerns that two years of construction needed to build the station on Capitol Hill would drive customers away from area businesses and force those businesses to close.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=TTNO2NPGA&date=20001221&query=%22light+rail%22 | title=Transit doubt runs deep on Capitol Hill | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Tim Boyer | date=December 21, 2000 | accessdate=February 28, 2007}}

In January 2001, the Sound Transit board accepted a $500 million grant from the FTA even though the FTA had not completed the review of the project it started when the cost overruns were announced in December and had not offered Sound Transit the grant.{{What|date=August 2023}} The decision effectively locked Sound Transit into building a 7-mile route from Lander Street to the University of Washington.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=sound12m&date=20010112&query=%22light+rail%22 | title=Sound Transit votes to take $500 million | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Andrew Garber | date=January 12, 2001 | accessdate=February 28, 2007}} Days later, the chairman of the House Appropriations Transportation subcommittee, Representative Hal Rogers, sent a letter to Transportation Secretary Rodney Slater saying his committee could not approve the grant and requesting a review by the Inspector General. Despite this, Sound Transit was still optimistic that the grant would be approved later that week.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=sound18m&date=20010118&query=%22light+rail%22 | title=Congressman wants to delay light-rail money | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Andrew Garber | date=January 18, 2001 | accessdate=February 28, 2007}} Representative Jennifer Dunn, Washington's ranking House Republican, voiced her support for the independent audit, but stopped short of calling for the FTA to not approve the grant.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=sound19m&date=20010119&query=%22light+rail%22 | title=Dunn backs rail-project review | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Andrew Garber | date=January 19, 2001 | accessdate=February 28, 2007}} Despite these questions, on his last day as Transportation Secretary, Rodney Slater, signed the agreement granting Sound Transit $500 million in annual installments through 2006.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=sound20m&date=20010120&query=%22light+rail%22 | title=Half-billion allocated for Sound Transit | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Andrew Garber | date=January 20, 2001 | accessdate=February 28, 2007}} Shortly after obtaining the grant approval, Sound Transit's executive director, Bob White resigned, citing a need for new leadership to restore public confidence in the agency.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=webtransit23&date=20010123&query=%22light+rail%22 | title=Sound Transit executive director resigns | publisher=The Seattle Times | date=January 23, 2001 | accessdate=February 28, 2007}}

On March 9, Sound Transit's citizen oversight committee criticized the agency's optimistic assumptions about building costs, its reliance on receiving an additional $931 million in federal grants, and that the agency was in danger of repeating prior mistakes.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=sound09m&date=20010309&query=%22light+rail%22 | title=Its own watchdog bites Sound Transit; panel fears light-rail budget unrealistic | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Andrew Garber | date=March 9, 2001 | accessdate=February 28, 2007}} The next day, Hal Rogers summoned Sound Transit and its opponents to Washington, D.C. to testify in front of his subcommittee about the "problem" project.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=sound10m&date=20010310&query=%22light+rail%22 | title=Light rail labeled 'problem' project | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Andrew Garber | date=March 10, 2001 | accessdate=February 28, 2007}} By the end of March, Link light rail was in danger of losing its first installment of federal grant money as Rogers noted the project's local opposition, cost overruns, and reliance on federal money as troubling.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=sound30m&date=20010330&query=light+rail | title=Federal aid in jeopardy for light rail | author=Andrew Garber | publisher=The Seattle Times | date=March 30, 2001 | accessdate=April 21, 2007}}

In April, the Seattle City Council's support for the project began to falter when a proposal requesting a Sound Transit citizen panel to explore alternatives to light rail was proposed by Councilman Nick Licata. The proposal would have had little to no effect on Sound Transit's plans if it had passed in its proposed form, but by the time it passed the contents of the proposal had been replaced with language praising the agency and explaining the cost overruns as unavoidable and out of Sound Transit's control.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=sound04m&date=20010404&query=light+rail | title=Light rail survives attack: City Council rejects anti-Sound Transit move | author=Jim Brunner | publisher=The Seattle Times | date=April 4, 2001 | accessdate=April 21, 2007}} However, the next day the US Inspector General's office recommended that federal funding be suspended until the agency was able to provide a final estimate for the project. The Inspector General's report also estimated the cost of the project at $4.1 billion, meaning the cost of the project had increased by $2.5 billion in seven months.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=inspector05m0&date=20010405&query=light+rail | title=Suspension of light-rail funds urged | author=Andrew Garber | publisher=The Seattle Times | date=April 5, 2001 | accessdate=April 21, 2007}} The day after the Inspector General's report brought a suspension of the $75 million federal grant for the next year, Sound Transit learned that the $50 million grant from the current year was also in danger.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=sound06m&date=20010406&query=light+rail | title=Sound Transit troubles, Day 2 | author=Andrew Garber | publisher=The Seattle Times | date=April 6, 2001 | accessdate=April 21, 2007}}

On April 9, 2001, Mayor Paul Schell sent a letter requesting that due to the challenges facing the northern segment of the route (South Lander Street to the University District), Sound Transit should focus on building the southern fourteen miles of the line.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=sound10m&date=20010410&query=light+rail | title=Schell: Put South End segment of light rail first | author=Andrew Garber |author2=Jim Brunners | publisher=The Seattle Times | date=April 10, 2001 | accessdate=April 21, 2007}} Schell's proposal was supported by mayoral election rival Greg Nickels and King County Commissioner Ron Sims, but Sims also suggested continuing the line beyond South Lander and into the Metro Bus Tunnel.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=sound11m&date=20010411&query=light+rail | title=Sims agrees: Start light rail in South End | author=Eric Pryne | publisher=The Seattle Times | date=April 11, 2001 | accessdate=April 21, 2007}} However, Councilman Nick Licata was of the opinion that Schell's proposal didn't go far enough because it did not consider scrapping light rail completely and focusing the money on carpool lanes and expanding the monorail.

Part of Schell's request was for the review board to find out if it would be possible to build the southern route without federal assistance, but within days Sound Transit's acting executive director said federal assistance would still be required, an opinion that was echoed by the acting light-rail director.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=sound12m&date=20010412&query=%22light+rail%22 | title=Federal help needed even if light rail starts south | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Andrew Garber | date=April 12, 2001 | accessdate=April 27, 2007}} The day after saying the southern route could not be built without federal money, Sound Transit stated that its current plans for light rail were no longer feasible due to a decrease in the amount of money it expected to get from the federal government, which caused at least a $190 million shortfall. However, Sound Transit had hope that with modifications to the route, stations, or the amount of tunneling, the full 21 miles could still be built.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=sound13m0&date=20010413&query=%22light+rail%22 | title=Light rail can't be built as planned | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Andrew Garber | date=April 13, 2001 | accessdate=April 27, 2007}} By the end of the month, Sound Transit staffers revealed that it was unlikely that the whole project could be completed before the end of the decade, but some of it could be completed.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=sound27m&date=20010427&query=%22light+rail%22 | title=Light rail can't be finished by 2009 | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Andrew Garber | date=April 27, 2001 | accessdate=April 27, 2007}}

A poll conducted by Elway Research for The Seattle Times and Northwest Cable News between April 28 and May 1 revealed that 40 percent of Puget Sound voters wanted to put a stop to a project, 37 percent wanted to build a smaller line with existing funds, and 14 percent were in favor of increasing taxes to pay for the full line. This contrasts with when Sound Move passed in 1996. At that time, 54 percent of Seattle residents favored stopping the project.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=transitpoll06m&date=20010506&query=%22light+rail%22 | title=Thin majority still backs some light rail | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Susan Gilmore | date=May 6, 2001 | accessdate=April 27, 2007}}

By late May 2001, Sound Transit's board began to seriously consider shortening the line, including what to do with the money allocated to light rail if it was scrapped.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=sound20m0&date=20010520&query=%22light+rail%22 | title=Light-rail talk grim: Time to cut losses? | author=Andrew Garber | publisher=The Seattle Times | date=May 20, 2001 | accessdate=June 10, 2007}} Support in the board began to form around four alternative plans, two of which included a tunnel through Capitol Hill that divided the board, with Ron Sims saying "Taking us to Capitol Hill is fatal to any light-rail project".{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=sound25m&date=20010525&query=%22light+rail%22 | title=Capitol Hill tunnel splits transit panel | author=Andrew Garber | publisher=The Seattle Times | date=May 25, 2001 | accessdate=June 10, 2007}} Sims would later join a group of current and former community leaders in sending a letter to the board urging them to develop a route through South Lake Union to avoid the tunnel through Capitol Hill.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=sound15m&date=20010615&query=%22light+rail%22 | title=Rail agency is urged to skip tunnel | author=Andrew Garber | publisher=The Seattle Times | date=June 15, 2001 | accessdate=June 10, 2007}}

In June, it was announced that two key staff members would be leaving the project: interim director Lyndon Wilson, and chief engineer Bill Houppermans. Two current staffers were chosen as interim replacements.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=sound06m&date=20010606&query=%22light+rail%22 | title=Sound Transit losing two of its key people | author=Andrew Garber | publisher=The Seattle Times | date=June 6, 2001 | accessdate=June 10, 2007}} The board decided to instruct staffers to focus their attention on building the southern segment of the line in late June and to provide alternatives to choose from by September.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=sound29m0&date=20010629&query=%22light+rail%22 | title=Sound Transit looks south for its first line | author=Jim Brunner | publisher=The Seattle Times | date=June 29, 2001 | accessdate=June 10, 2007}} Supporters of the plan noted that by building the southern segment, Sound Transit would be showing that they were able to get infrastructure built and that once it was built, money and support would follow. Critics said that focusing on the southern segment the line wouldn't attract as many riders and that major population and job centers would not be serviced.

The decision to shorten the line from 21 miles to 14 miles marked a turning point for the embattled project. While the path to completion would not be trouble-free, Sound Transit would at least make progress towards starting construction.

Sound Transit received some good news in July 2001 when a federal court judge dismissed a lawsuit brought by Rainier Valley residents who were opposed to the at-grade alignment through their neighborhood, alleging environmental, housing, and racial discrimination.{{cite news |author=Andrew Garber |date=July 17, 2001 |title=Light-rail suit cut down: Judge tosses out most claims made by Rainier Valley group |url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=rail17m&date=20010717&query=light+rail |accessdate=July 3, 2007 |publisher=The Seattle Times}}{{cite news |author=Janet I. Tu |date=August 10, 2001 |title=Rainier Valley group drops claim against Sound Transit |url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=soundtransit10m&date=20010810&query=light+rail |accessdate=July 3, 2007 |publisher=The Seattle Times}}

Light rail would soon have competition to provide mass transit to Seattle. All three of the major candidates for mayor of Seattle in 2001 endorsed a monorail project despite no details being known about the project.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=monorail28m0&date=20010828&query=light+rail | title=Major mayoral hopefuls climb aboard monorail | author=Andrew Garber | publisher=The Seattle Times | date=August 28, 2001 | accessdate=July 3, 2007}} According to the head of the University of Washington's Transportation Research Center, "Maybe the best thing going for monorail is that it's not light rail." However, while the Seattle Monorail Project would ultimately pass a referendum in 2002, it too would be plagued by many of the same cost overruns and delays that afflicted Link Light Rail and in 2005, Seattle residents voted against a new plan and killed the monorail project.{{cite news|url=http://www.routefifty.com/2016/03/seattle-u-link-sound-transit-infrastructure/126863/ |title=With Seattle's Long-Awaited Transit Expansion Now Reality, It's Full Steam Ahead |first=Michael |last=Grass|date= March 23, 2016 |work=Route Fifty|publisher=Atlantic Media|access-date= April 12, 2016}}

In September 2001, the Sound Transit Board announced that they had enough money to fund a 14-mile route, later to be called Central Link, that began in Downtown Seattle at the Washington State Convention and Trade Center, proceeded through Downtown in the Metro Transit Tunnel, then through Rainier Valley and Tukwila before ending one mile short of Sea-Tac Airport.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=transit13m&date=20010913&query=Light+Rail | title=Sound Transit says it can build 14-mile line; light rail stops short of airport | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Susan Kelleher | date=September 13, 2001 | accessdate=July 14, 2007}} The decision to stop this "starter" line a mile short of the airport would later be criticized by light rails opponents,{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=sound28m&date=20010928&query=%22Light+Rail%22 | title=Shorter light-rail line OK'd | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Andrew Garber | date=September 28, 2001 | accessdate=July 14, 2007}} but the explanation provided by Sound Transit was that it was that the designs were not completed for a planned remodel of Sea-Tac and that they only had $12 million to extend the line when the projected cost to do so was between $350 million and $500 million.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=sound26m&date=20010926&query=Light+Rail | title=Light rail lite goes to vote tomorrow; 1st leg would link Seattle, Tukwila | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Andrew Garber | date=September 26, 2001 | accessdate=July 14, 2007}} An audit by Deloitte & Touche discovered that while Sound Transit was much better than before, it still ran a risk of cost overruns by not having better procedures to control scope creep.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=sound27m&date=20010927&query=%22Light+Rail%22 | title=Sound Transit's budget warning | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Andrew Garber | date=September 27, 2001 | accessdate=July 15, 2007}}

On September 25, the Sound Transit Board finally voted to approve the new, shorter, 14-mile line with an estimated cost of $2.1 billion, clearing the way for construction to begin as early as the summer of 2002. While concerns were raised that the project was wasting money, others noted that it was time to get construction started. The line was officially approved on November 29, but some opponents threatened lawsuits to stop construction.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=sound30m0&date=20011130&query=%22Light+Rail%22 | title= Sound Transit adopts 14-mile route; light-rail construction could start in summer | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Eric Pryne | date=November 30, 2001 | accessdate=July 15, 2007}}

At the end of 2001 and beginning of 2002, the project encountered more conflict. After having most of their lawsuit dismissed by a federal judge in mid-July and then dropping the remainder in August, the Rainier Valley community group filed an appeal on December 26, stating the judge had incorrectly ruled when dismissing the discrimination claims.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=valley27m0&date=20011227&query=%22Light+Rail%22 | title=Rail-line foes file appeal of ruling | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Eric Pryne | date=December 27, 2001 | accessdate=July 15, 2007}} Tim Eyman, a political activist known in Washington for filing anti-tax initiatives and referendums, filed an initiative that would remove an excise tax on car tabs that goes to transit,{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=eyman08m&date=20020108&query=%22light+rail%22 | title= Revised I-776 launched | publisher=The Seattle news | date=January 8, 2002 | accessdate=July 15, 2007}} while another group of opponents threatened a referendum to block light rail from using the Downtown bus tunnel.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=tunnel09m&date=20020109&query=%22Light+Rail%22 | title= Rail foes threaten to try referendum | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Eric Pryne | date=January 9, 2002 | accessdate=July 15, 2007}} The result of the initiative, if passed, would remove $67 million of funding from Sound Transit's $270 million annual income. Yet another group questioned the legality of the shortened line, urged Sound Transit to have another public vote, and threatened legal action if Sound Transit did not listen to its urging.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=rail05m&date=20020205&query=%22Light+Rail%22 | title= Light-rail foes open new battle | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Eric Pryne | date=February 5, 2002 | accessdate=July 15, 2007}} Sound Transit declined the request citing that they would be required to pay for both their court costs and their opponents, bonds were not needed for another two years, and the legal proceedings would tie Sound Transit's hands politically.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=sane01m&date=20020301&query=%22Light+Rail%22 | title= Rail foes push for court ruling, but Sound Transit declines to test its own legality | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Eric Pryne | date=March 1, 2002 | accessdate=July 15, 2007}}

In late January 2002, Sound Transit began working to repair their image in the nation's capital and paid a visit to federal officials to show that the project had left behind its problems from the previous year.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=soundweb23&date=20020123&query=%22Light+Rail%22 | title= Sound Transit officials, Seattle mayor visit nation's capital | publisher=The Seattle Times | date=January 23, 2002 | accessdate=July 15, 2007}}

Ron Sims, Sound Transit's chairman, announced that it may be possible to extend the line to the University of Washington without raising taxes as long as route modifications to the route saved enough money, they were able to get help from the federal government, and their financial plans were changed to allow more borrowing.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=sound02m&date=20020302&query=%22Light+Rail%22 | title= Sims: Light rail might reach U District without new taxes | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Eric Pryne | date=March 2, 2002 | accessdate=July 15, 2007}} The route to the University had previously been narrowed down to two options both with tunnels under Lake Washington Ship Canal, one under Montlake Cut and another near University Bridge.{{cite news | url=http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=sound15m&date=20020215&query=%22Light+Rail%22 | title=Light-rail route options in north narrowed to two | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Eric Pryne | date=February 15, 2002 | accessdate=July 15, 2007}}

In March 2002, Sound Transit began the process of acquiring land in the Rainier Valley, including all of 64 properties and parts of 232 others.{{cite news | url=https://archive.seattletimes.com/archive/?date=20020315&slug=sound15m | title=Sound Transit gets green light to buy land for light rail | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Eric Pryne | date=March 15, 2002 | accessdate=July 21, 2007}} Sound Transit was also informed that Link Light Rail received a rating of "Recommended" from the Federal Transit Administration, making it eligible for federal funding.{{cite news | url=https://www.soundtransit.org/get-to-know-us/news-events/news-releases/federal-government-gives-major-green-light-to-central-link | title=Federal government gives major green light to Central Link light rail project | publisher=Sound Transit | date=August 20, 2002 | accessdate=November 30, 2021}} The Seattle City Council and King County made over $50 million in investments in the neighborhood to compensate for the light rail, including paying off small business loans, burying power lines, and other community developments.{{cite news | url=https://archive.seattletimes.com/archive/?date=20020430&slug=rainierfund30m | title=Millions OK'd for Rainier Valley to mitigate effects of light rail | publisher=The Seattle Times | author=Jim Brunner | date=April 30, 2002 | accessdate=November 30, 2021}}

The 1 Line from Tukwila International Boulevard to Downtown Seattle (Westlake Center) opened in July 2009, followed closely by the final station at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport in December 2009. The extension from Downtown to the University of Washington via Capitol Hill opened March 19, 2016.{{cite news|url=http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-sej-seattle-light-rail-20160404-story.html |title=Seattle continues quest to get greener as it grows with 'transformative' light-rail expansion|first=William |last=Yardley |newspaper=Los Angeles Times|date= April 4, 2016 |access-date= April 12, 2016}} Angle Lake station, planned as a Sound Transit 2 project, also opened in 2016. The Northgate extension opened three stations simultaneously at the U District, Roosevelt, and Northgate in October 2021.{{cite news |date=September 10, 2021 |title=Roosevelt history lives on at new light rail station |url=https://www.soundtransit.org/blog/platform/roosevelt-history-lives-new-light-rail-station |work=The Platform |publisher=Sound Transit |access-date=November 30, 2021}}

The 2 Line opened from South Bellevue to Redmond Technology station in April 2024, with a connection across Lake Washington through Mercer Island station to Seattle expected to open in 2025, for a total of 10 new stations. {{Cite web |title=East Link Extension {{!}} Project map and summary {{!}} Sound Transit |url=https://www.soundtransit.org/system-expansion/east-link-extension |access-date=September 30, 2024 |website=www.soundtransit.org}} The Lynnwood Link Extension opened in August 2024 with three new stations and 8.5 miles of new track, connecting Lynnwood City Center station to Northgate station via Mountlake Terrace. An infill station on NE 130th St. is still under construction. {{Cite web |title=Lynnwood Link Extension {{!}} Project map and summary {{!}} Sound Transit |url=https://www.soundtransit.org/system-expansion/lynnwood-link-extension |access-date=September 30, 2024 |website=www.soundtransit.org}}

Construction on the Federal Way Link Extension began in 2020, with completion expected in 2026.{{Cite web |title=Federal Way Link Extension: Project map and summary |publisher=Sound Transit |url=https://www.soundtransit.org/system-expansion/federal-way-link-extension |access-date=December 30, 2024}}

Sound Transit contracted with Pierce Transit to operate an interim shuttle bus from the initial endpoint of Central Link at Tukwila International Blvd Station to SeaTac/Airport Station until the extension to the airport was finished. Pierce Transit was awarded the contract in February 2009, as an expansion of their contract to operate a connector bus between Tacoma Dome Station and Lakewood Station.{{Cite web |url=http://www.soundtransit.org/documents/pdf/about/board/motions/2009/Motion%20M2009-20.pdf |title=Archived copy |access-date=January 3, 2010 |archive-date=June 20, 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100620204033/http://soundtransit.org/documents/pdf/about/board/motions/2009/Motion%20M2009-20.pdf |url-status=dead }} This service ran every ten to fifteen minutes in both directions until the end of the day on December 19, 2009, when direct light rail service to the airport commenced.{{Cite web |url=http://www.soundtransit.org/Documents/pdf/riding/airportconnector.pdf |title=Archived copy |access-date=January 3, 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110617120911/http://www.soundtransit.org/Documents/pdf/riding/airportconnector.pdf |archive-date=June 17, 2011 |url-status=dead }}

{{Reflist}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:History Of Link Light Rail}}

Category:Link light rail

Category:History of transportation in Washington (state)