Local opinion: Tucson can do better than RTA Next plan

The following is the opinion and analysis of the writer:

Ahead of us is a massive choice for the Tucson region, as we are being asked whether to renew an existing sales tax to fund RTA Next. Twenty years ago, the region voted to approve the first RTA, a plan that left much to be desired. Propositions 418 and 419 ask us if we’re willing to say yes to RTA Next’s transportation vision for the next twenty years. As a student in Urban and Regional Development and a public transit user in Tucson, I think it's wise to say no this time around.

Let’s start with some things that are simply true at the moment. The city of Tucson is facing budget constraints that will not be resolved overnight. It is true that quality transit, roads, sidewalks, and cycling infrastructure don’t appear overnight, nor can we build the dream of a balanced multi-modal city without significant investment. It is also true that we can choose something better than RTA Next.

At a time when Tucson is supposed to be planning and building Arizona’s first Bus Rapid Transit line, this current plan dedicates relatively little to direct investments in new transit. In the RTA Next plan, only $70 million is allocated for “High-Capacity Transit Improvements” with another $70 million in matching funds dependent on the Federal government. While this covers the first 5 miles between the Tohono T’adai and Ronstadt transit centers, it leaves no mention of the connection with the southside and the airport that was a part of the initial proposal.

While $70 million for new transit projects may sound like a large investment in a car-centric region, this is all the allocated funding for the next twenty years. When we look at some of the road projects which are carryovers from the first RTA, over $70 million is allocated for the Silverbell Road reconstruction, with around $64 million in addition non-RTA funding also going towards the project. This means new high-capacity transit investment is receiving basically the same amount of funding as a single road project initially promised twenty years ago. In total, over $257 million of RTA Next is for completing projects that were not fully funded by the first RTA.

Back to homepage

Subscriber Login

Keep reading with a digital access subscription.

Subscribe now

Another component that makes RTA Next a difficult pill to swallow is the inequitable structure of the RTA’s decision-making and funding allocation. Despite Tucson making up half of the population of Pima County, the city only has one vote on the RTA board. Tucson also generates around 60% of the sales tax revenue for the RTA, but only around 44% of RTA Next funding will be for new projects within the city.

This means Tucson will effectively lose out on over $300 million over the next 20 years to fund road widenings far outside the city. While there is worry about immediate budget deficits and cuts to services without RTA Next, Tucson is guaranteed to slowly bleed money over the next 20 years if it does pass. Asking Tucson or the county to establish a new plan with new funding may sound risky given the current budget issues, but RTA Next won’t heal the fiscal wounds; it promises a slow bleed out at best. We don’t have to accept the current plan as is. Just looking around the country we see cities and counties undertaking real efforts in improving infrastructure, not repeating the mistakes of the past.

Last year, Mecklenburg County in North Carolina, which includes Charlotte, passed a one-percent sales tax for transportation investment throughout the county. Despite also being a car-oriented region their plan dedicates 40% of its funding to rail transit expansion including new rail lines to the airport and northern suburbs. In Texas, Austin plans to break ground on a new light rail system next year.

There will never be such a thing as a perfect transportation plan. But wanting something better for Tucson and the greater region isn’t asking for perfection; it's just asking for a plan that looks toward what other cities are doing in building the future, rather than continuing down the same road from twenty years ago.