In a six-page letter to the King County Council dated April 14, County Executive Ron Sims signaled that the complicated business of acquiring the 42-mile Eastside BNSF Railway corridor for public use was moving forward. With his letter, the Executive transmitted over 200 pages of daunting legal documents necessary to carry out the transaction.

As the April 16 Seattle Times Editorial entitled “Rails as placeholders” so aptly stated, “Scrutiny of Sims’ agreement with the railroad and the Port of Seattle falls to the Metropolitan King County Council, which has been receptive to the regional transportation potential the corridor represents. Council members have a complex deal in front of them.”

To be sure.

According to Sims’ letter, “… (A)n additional $2 million was added to BNSF’s purchase price as the result of the Port of Seattle and the County Council requiring that existing rails be left in place. … I also agreed that the county will contribute the additional $2 million to the purchase price in exchange for an easement on the corridor. The easement will allow for the development of a regional trail that will in no way inhibit any future transportation uses in the corridor.”

The multipurpose easement attempts to foresee challenges that a dual-use corridor might present. The easement, according to the letter, “specifies that the Port of Seattle and the county will jointly decide the proper size and location of the trail area, and that they must do so in a manner that will accommodate transportation use of the corridor. … There would also be additional extensive public processes, master planning processes and budgetary processes that King County would complete prior to any trail construction. All of these processes assure both the King County Council and the Port that no trail can proceed that does not protect the transportation uses. Even so, the easement agreement goes on to specify how and when the county’s trail and trail improvements can later be reconfigured, relocated, and in some cases even rerouted off the corridor, in order to accommodate new or expanded transportation uses.

“Despite these protections, members of the council expressed a desire for even stronger language to make clear that a transportation use could supersede the trail easement if necessary in the future. Executive staff drafted language that would accomplish this as long as any affected easement segment was purchased from King County, King County was reimbursed for any trail investments it had made, and a comparable trail connection was established to maintain the rails to trails obligation. This draft language was generally accepted by the council but has not been agreed to by the Port of Seattle.”

Discussions between the port and county about the easement will continue, he said.

So BNSF will sell the corridor to the Port for $106.9 million. At closing, the county will pay $1.9 million to the Port of Seattle for the multipurpose easement. The Executive told the council that the county’s share would come from a Conservation Futures Fund, though some councilmembers worry, per the letter, “that use of (Conservation Futures Taxes) for this purpose may in some way inhibit future transportation on the corridor.”

Sims said that he called for a legal review of the issue.

“As a result of this review,” he wrote, “I believe that the risk of (Conservation Futures Tax) revenue creating such a complication is minimal, and that if there ever were such a conflict, it could be resolved. … Nevertheless, King County does not make the payment until closing. If the council wishes to identify a different funding source, it may do so anytime prior to closing in December.”

To meet the year end closing date, BNSF asked that King County and the Port of Seattle execute all necessary agreements (an interlocal agreement between the county and the port regarding the corridor; a purchase and sale agreement for the Woodinville Subdivision – North Rail Line; a donation agreement for the Woodinville Subdivision – South Rail Line; a public multipurpose easement; and a trail use agreement) by May 15. If the county authorizes the agreements, then decides to back out of the deal, “BNSF will receive $5 million in liquidated damages,” stated Sims.

“Born out of a partnership between King County and the Port of Seattle,” the Executive wrote, “this transaction represents a priceless opportunity to creatively address the region’s growing transportation and ongoing freight needs, while at the same time allowing for an expanded regional trail system that will enhance the quality of life for the people of our region.”

From early on in the negotiations for the rail corridor, Executive Sims wanted the tracks ripped out, especially those from Renton to Woodinville. A number of things may have affected Sims’, the public’s and other elected officials’ stance on a dual-use corridor.

Bruce Agnew, director of the Discovery Institute’s Cascadia Center for Regional Development, said that he gave Ron Sims a lot of credit for recognizing the common-sense notion of using the corridor for a regional trail and for a transportation corridor.

“He deserves a lot of credit,” said Agnew. “He has been very open to alternative ideas.” Agnew also said there was no question that the grassroots efforts of Eastside Rail Now! and All Aboard Washington helped sway public sentiment for a dual-use corridor. Elected officials from the Port Commission, the County Council, Sound Transit, the Puget Sound Regional Council and cities along the corridor heard the arguments of rail advocates and responded. In fact, the state Legislature and Sound Transit have earmarked funding ($100,000 and $200,000, respectively) for a corridor transit study.

Agnew also believes the defeat of Proposition I, the regional road and transit package put before the voters last November, left the public and officials asking, “Now what do we do?” Defeat of that proposal opened the door for more serious consideration of a rail and trail proposal.

Furthermore, Cascadia Center commissioned a rail inspection report from Read Fay, a 35-year railroad veteran and former BNSF operations manager. Fay’s report stated that the Eastside corridor tracks could be replaced for about $40 million and Cascadia has featured a very convincing Fay at many of its public meetings about the Eastside corridor.

Agnew also believes the Seattle Chamber of Commerce trip to Austin, Texas, provided a realistic snapshot of what is possible. Austin was able to buy five DMU sets (Diesel Multiple Units, self-propelled railcars that allow trains to operate without separate locomotives) and build stations and other amenities for a 32-mile rail line for under $100 million.