
Passengers at the South Bellevue light rail station await the arrival of the train that will take them to Seattle. (Renton is still waiting for a station.)
The Renton Reporter informs us that in Mayor Pavone’s “State of the City” address he said the city missed an opportunity by denying light rail to preserve the small town feel. That decision continues to shape some of the challenges we’re working to overcome today.”
This untrue statement by the Mayor works against Renton’s urgent need to obtain equitable transit service. And the statement is grossly unfair to the four Mayors that preceded Mayor Pavone who all toiled through complicated, difficult regional politics to try to get Renton light rail access.
Mayors Clymer, Tanner, Keolker-Wheeler, and Law all labored to get light rail service to Renton. Mayor Clymer led Renton through our first Growth Management Plan in 1994, in which Renton worked to be recognized regionally as an “Urban Center.” This designation, which required upzoning of downtown and South Renton, was accomplished primarily to make Renton eligible for regional high capacity transit, which was just coming into existence with Sound Move in 1995.

Renton has been working for 30 years to get high capacity transit along the I-405 Corridor, as shown in this 1996 Sound Transit Long-Range Vision. This vision shows Regional Express Bus Service (BRT) on I-405, along with a “potential rail extension” along the corridor.
Mayor Tanner worked to recover funding and commitments from Sound Transit after the agency backed out of their ST1 campaign promise to spend $100 million improving regional bus service in Renton with HOV direct access connections to I-405. Mayor Tanner, an accomplished engineer and former FAA executive who had spent his life promoting safe public transportation, would have been delighted if Sound Transit had offered to install the light rail system per the 1996 long-range vision.
Mayors Keolker-Wheeler and Law both advocated vociferously for Renton light rail through Sound Transit 2 and Sound Transit 3 planning efforts. But ultimately the fact that Renton is in Sound Transit’s Eastside Planning District and our Eastside Board Members were from Bellevue, Redmond, and Issaquah was too big a hurdle; all three of these cities received light rail while Renton did not. Both Mayors sought Renton representation on the Sound Transit Board, and both were turned down until after ST3 had passed. In a series of past blog posts I’ve given the details of these frustrating battles to bring light rail service to Renton.
These four Mayors were backed by incredible staff leadership, including Chief Administrative Officer Jay Covington and Public Works Director Gregg Zimmerman, who both advocated for high capacity transit for Renton for thirty years. The Renton Mayors were also supported by about twenty-five councilmembers during these years who would have all liked to see Renton get light rail service. Many of us on Council worked countless hours on regional bodies in east King County, south King County, and in Seattle in an effort to get us light rail.
If Mayor Pavone has knowledge of any of these previous Renton public officials working to deny light rail to Renton, he should be forthcoming with the names of those involved.
When I retired in 2021, Renton was supposed to receive BRT Stride Service starting in 2024, with a parking garage at the Rainier/Grady station and a large park-and-ride lot at the Seahawks station; and Sound Transit was supposed to be spending $5 million to develop concepts and layouts for a potential future light rail line from Renton to Burien along the I-405 corridor. But since I retired, the BRT service was pushed out to 2028, the parking facilities have been delayed until 2036, and the Renton light rail study has been seemingly ignored. A year ago, many Renton Highlands residents were celebrating that new King County Council legislation would provide improved access to light rail via more frequent Metro 111 service once the Seattle-Bellevue rail link was activated. But Metro has recently delayed this improvement, and Renton officials have not even acknowledged it yet, let alone tried to speed it along.
Mayor Pavone cannot blame these delays on past Mayors or Councils.

2015 Sound Transit Corridor Studies, in advance of finalizing the Sound Transit 3 package, included two Renton light rail options that aligned with the 1996 long-range vision. Renton officials strongly advocated for funding one of these in ST3, but only got a commitment that Sound Transit would spend $5 million developing the layouts for a Burien to Renton light rail line (along with providing Stride Bus Rapid Transit service on I-405). Current Renton officials need to hold Sound Transit to their commitment to finalize the Renton light rail concept.
Excerpt with context from April 6, 2026 Renton Reporter:
“Pavone said they have to plan with the future in mind, which involves making tough decisions. He cited the land acquisition for the expansion of Coulon Park in the 1960s and moving the car dealers out of downtown as good decisions the city has made. However, he said the city missed an opportunity by denying light rail “to preserve the small-town feel.” “That decision continues to shape some of the challenges we’re working to overcome today,” Pavone said. “The decisions we make now will define our future. It’s up to us whether we impact it positively or negatively.”


Tukwila, West Seattle, and Issaquah are fighting. Renton…. crickets.
Didn’t our ST rep give up our funding? I seem to remember something like that.
You’re not supposed to know about that.
Glad he passed on it. Light Rail = trouble.. Just wait and see MI…
Sadly, we’re getting the get the same trouble, just by bus.
One day after opening, MI got it’s first fent overdose at their station. I however don’t care…. they voted for that.
Link light rail would benefit from fare gates. The BART system in San Francisco has always had them, but they’ve recently gone to more secure gates that are much harder to evade. Their station maintenance has dropped by about 99% as a result. BART also gets much more of their funding from fares than Sound Transit does; it was as much as 80% prior to the pandemic. Here is a report on their improved fare gates.
It’s weird that we think that even SF is learning that civilization has benefits, while WA is stuck on being a derpy soviet republic.
All this is sort of true, but not quite the full picture. For the last three decades, Renton (as a town) has had a unified call for Sound Transit. Various people have made noises, some more vocal than others, but when push came to shove, nobody stepped up and threw enough of a fit to get anything done. Same reason 405 in Renton looks like shit, but Bellevue looks wonderful. We care, but not enough to get anything fixed.
I agree with you Anonymous that we could never seem to get our entire community to pressure Sound Transit as much as we apparently needed to, but I also think the structure of the Sound Transit Board worked heavily against us. I mentioned this structure quickly in this post, and wrote about it in detail in one of my past blog posts. I’ll cut and paste it here. This structure gave us a disadvantage in day-by-day, month-by-month advocacy, which seemed to enable Redmond, Bellevue and Issaquah to always remain a step ahead in directing the eastside money. We would make noise, and then they would make noise; and since they were seated on the board and we were not, they would win out.
Here is the section from my blog post on Sound Transit 3:
As Sound Transit 3 was being formed, it became ever more apparent that the structure of Sound Transit was repeatedly leaving Renton out of a fair share of service.
Sound Transit is its own taxing district with its own governance board. It was structured by the legislature to have four “sub-areas” that are each supposed to receive as much benefit as they pay in. The legislature placed Renton in the Eastside sub-area, along with Bellevue, Redmond, Issaquah and other eastside cities. Under the legislative structure, certain current city elected officials were appointed by the County Executive to represent these subareas. This structure unfortunately has a built-in conflict for those appointed; do they represent the sub-area overall, or give preference to the city that elected them? The County Executive picked elected officials from Redmond, Issaquah, and Bellevue to represent our eastside subarea. These three cities will receive Sound Transit light rail service in the coming years. Renton has been left out of rail service, and will only receive two Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) stations.
In order for our community to rally with sound transit, a call to Action should have been led by our leaders.
Did you mean: “Renton has not had a unified call…”
Mayor Law didn’t give a rip about light rail whether you thought he did or not. I’ve heard people who knew him personally more than you realize I’m implying speak say as much.
Mayor Law didn’t give a rip about light rail whether you thought he did or not. I’ve heard people who knew him personally more than you realize I’m implying say as much.
Randy if you’re going to fight for light rail, you should advocate for a light rail from Renton that merges with the existing light rail line going to Seattle.
A light rail line to Burien and West Seattle practically goes nowhere. The only main case is transferring to go to the airport… Still not a one seat ride which Stride BRT is good enough to replicate
Ideally Renton should have two lines:
1. Renton to Seattle/Ballard, merging with existing line at Rainier Beach
2. Federal Way to Bothell, passing by SeaTac, Tukwila, Southcenter, Renton , South Bellevue station, and Bellevue / Kirkland on the way.
The second one is way more expensive but they can easily deliver the first one. Just need to add a short segment from Renton to Rainier Beach, then it runs parallel with the existing line similar to how the Bellevue Line merges at Chinatown today.
Renton stations should be
1. Southport
2. Landing
3. Downtown
4. S Renton P&R
5. Skyway (optional)