Log in

Gilbert Town Council punts on transit station study 

Proposed anti-rail ordinance to get revisions before coming back 

Posted

The Gilbert Town Council tabled a proposed feasibility study on transit stations in town at its Aug. 23 meeting, which was marked by dissension on the dais and a charged crowd criticizing council members. 

Council also studied a proposed ordinance that would prohibit expenditures or use of resources for commuter or light rail and would prohibit town from any tax or fees for construction, operation or maintenance of heavy or light rail. 

During the business meeting, an item to approve the feasibility study was pulled from consent agenda and council voted 6-1 to table the issue indefinitely with Vice Mayor Aimee Yentes voting in dissent. 

Council members in study session worked on hammering out compromise language for the ordinance, which will come back to council Sept. 6 for a vote. 

Also during the study session, council contended with audience members shouting at members, calling them liars and at one point laughing derisively at a member.  

The “communications from citizens” period during the regular meeting was filled with residents expressing the opposition to any rail in town. Some tacked on complaints about apartments being built or the use of eminent domain on capital projects. 

Unlike the last council meeting Aug. 9, in which no one expressed support for rail options, two people did voice at least some support, one for alternatives modes of transportation being addressed in the transportation master plan and the other for rail options to downtown. One of those speakers was later harassed in the parking lot and called a liar until public safety personnel intervened. 

At the study session, Kyle Mieras, director of development services, presented the background of rail in the region that included the Arizona Department of Transportation first looking at rail options in 1993 and then summarized several studies’ findings and Gilbert’s involvement in them. 

Rob Bohr, Gilbert’s intergovernmental relations director, presented about the current state of intercity/passenger rail in the state. 

“These studies (from ADOT and Maricopa Association of Governments) have currently not translated into any organized efforts or plans for development of an intercity passenger rail corridor in Arizona to date,” Bohr said. “In fact, it may be important to point out we are not currently aware of any proposals related to new rail in Arizona. And we can definitively say there are no proposals that are planned to come forward to Town Council for consideration.” 

Bohr said the federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Acts passed in November has opened programs and funding for intercity passenger rail projects in the country for which Arizona agencies could compete in a competitive bid process. 

After the presentations from staff, Council Member Kathy Tilque clarified that the issue council was looking at from April 26 was funding a study for an integrated transit station, as opposed to solely commuter rail, but questions on the status of commuter rail prompted a call for this study session. She further clarified that council was not considering bringing to town or funding light or commuter rail. 

Tilque said she was confused how the council got from studying options for a multimodal transit station to people thinking the council was bringing light and commuter rail into town. She asked about meetings Vice Mayor Aimee Yentes held for people with such concerns that did not include invitations to other council members or staff.  

Yentes said she presented factual information at the meetings and pushed back against the presentation. 

“I’m sorry, but it really feels like a lot of double-speak,” she said. “It’s like, here’s all these plans, but we don’t have any plans. Here’s what we’re doing to further investigate this, so it doesn’t really have to do with commuter rail. It has to do with all transportation. Oh, by the way, these properties we are studying are located along the railroad tracks.” 

Peterson and Council Member Scott Anderson contended with people shouting in the audience. 

“We have to get a grip in this community,” Anderson said. “There’s 269,000 people, almost 270,000 people, in this community. There’s maybe 100 of you here in the audience, and I agree with Council Member Tilque. Who speaks for that other 269,000 people? We want to hear them, too.” 

Anderson was sharply criticized in public remarks for his comments, and he later apologized for lashing out at the audience. 

Anderson and Peterson pushed back against charges that the council had plans to bring light rail to town. Peterson said she served on Valley Metro’s board and had town staff look for plans on light rail and could find none.  

“If we voted about light rail in this community right now, we’d vote 270,000 to zero to not bring light rail to Gilbert,” Anderson said. 

The study session’s final portion included a look at the proposed ordinance, drafted by Yentes and put on the agenda by her, Hendrix and Tilque. Tilque said she was not necessarily in support of it but wanted the conversation. 

Tilque and Yentes spoke about compromise language, including possibly limiting the ordinance to the tax and fee prohibition or just language on light rail. Some council members expressed concerns about tying future councils’ hands or misleading people into thinking the issue was put to rest for good, but Yentes said she saw no downside to putting an ordinance into code. 

Yentes said by text Wednesday there would be revisions to the version that gets voted on Sept. 6. 

Gilbert Town Council, commuter rail, light rail, intercity passenger rail, Arizona Department of Transportation, Maricopa Association of Governments, Kyle Mieras, Rob Bohr, Aimee Yentes, Kathy Tilque, Brigette Peterson, Scott Anderson

Share with others


Have an opinion on this story? Click here to send a letter to our editors.

Comments

No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here