Seattle vs. Jakarta: The Monorail Challenge - Part 3

This is Part 3 in my ongoing quest to understand how the city of Jakarta is building 17 miles of monorail for $600 million in 2.5 years, while Seattle is building 14 miles of monorail for $1.7 billion in 4.5 years. Part 1 Part 2

I'm looking at Jakarta today. What is the root of their Herculean efficiency?

One thought that immediately comes to mind is motivation. Are they more motivated than us to build this thing? I watched the movie Singles last night for the first time since I moved here in 1997. In that movie, Tom Skerritt has a short appearance as Seattle's mayor. He tells the main character, who's working on a Supertrain, that people here won't give up their cars. Now I don't need a movie to tell me that; I live here, and I see firsthand all the people shaving and putting on make-up while they inch along the freeway. But this article about Jakarta tells us how similar we all are, no matter what language we speak or what flag we salute:

This year, authorities inaugurated new bus lanes with luxury buses. But observers say many commuters still prefer to sit in their cars in traffic jams rather than take buses or trains.

But this isn't the only way that the situation in Jakarta is similar to Seattle. From the Herald Tribune:

Public transport in the city, which has a population of eight million, consists mainly of buses, many of them old and polluting, and minibuses.

So for the most part, both cities are starting from the same problems, and the same existing infrastructure. Of course, the Seattle buses aren't quite as old or as unsafe for the environment, but they get stuck in the same nightmarish traffic, just as they do in Jakarta.

So where's the difference? Is it from a financial standpoint?

The Seattle monorail will be financed by a tax on car registration, which always gets a lot of panties in a bunch around here. The cost has slowly crept up from $1.2 billion to around $1.7 billion, but since this only applies to people living in the city of Seattle, we don't have to worry about suburban based Tim Eyman and his devoted following of tax-whineys. But there is opposition, and it is growing.

In Jakarta, I can't quite figure out where the money is coming from. This article in the Jakarta Post mentions the following:

Separately, chairman of City Council Commission D for development affairs Koeswadi Soesilohardjo said the commission did not know about the details of the project, including the construction time frame, as the monorail was not funded by the city budget.

Not funded by the city budget? Man, that's a sweet deal. Can Seattle pull that off? More from the Herald Tribune:

Jakarta Monorail, the consortium carrying out the project, consists of Indonesia Transit Central and the Omnico Consortium which represents companies from Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand. The Japanese company Hitachi will supply materials and technology needed for the construction, which will create 10,000 jobs, and Singapore MRT will be a partner in the system's operation, said Sukmawaty Syukur, director of Jakarta Monorail.

Sutiyoso, the governor of the capital, said the project proved "that Jakarta is still an attractive investment destination in the eyes of foreign investors."

Interesting, but that doesn't answer where exactly the money comes from, or more importantly, why can't American businesses do the same things here? It seems like this arrangement is truly a way for the capitalist instincts of companies to provide for investment in a public need to bring about returns both in having a reputation for getting things done and for building a better infrastructure for the entire economy to move forward. Even if the monorail turns out not to be a cash cow, it opens up doors down the road for better opportunities in Jakarta. Why can't this attitude prevail in Seattle? If there are companies willing to invest in Jakarta, why aren't there companies willing to invest in Seattle? Is it because the citizens in Seattle have more power here to make ridiculous NIMBY protests that drive up costs? Is it because we have people so ideologically opposed to public transit that they will fight something that most people find necessary? Is it over-eager environmentalism that will kill the feasibility of any project? Is it Seattle city politics knowing that they will all be facing re-election at some point while the monorail is still being built and people are paying taxes for something they can't use yet?

Too many questions, too few answers at this point. But before we all move to Jakarta, remember, it's not over till the fat lady sings. From the Environmental News Network:

Previous agreements to build monorails [in Jakarta] fell through because of poor planning and corruption, critics say.

I guess it's too early to predict which city's citizens will be communiting to work at an elevation of 20 feet, but my money is still on them.

Next, Part 4 - Pushing a basketball through a garden hose (the 520 commute experience).