Nearly $5M from Mesa general fund will be used for bus routes, paratransit, RideChoice

The Mesa City Council unanimously approved funding for bus transportation, paratransit and RideChoice services during its Jan. 26 meeting, authorizing the city manager to enter into a seven-year agreement with the Regional Public Transportation Authority.

The estimated cost of transit services for fiscal year 2025–26 is just under $39 million.

Almost $34 million will be funded through public transportation funds from Propositions 400 and 479, while about $5 million will come from the city’s general fund.

The funding includes support for four bus routes that operate exclusively within Mesa and do not qualify for regional funding.

The agreement marks the first year of a seven-year contract between the city and RPTA.

Before the vote, Mesa resident David Winstanley asked council members to postpone approval to allow for further discussion of the contract’s cost and requirements.

Winstanley said he spent several hours researching the agreement on his own but was unable to find what he believed to be sufficient information.

“I did not find this subject in any agendas for study sessions nor in the transportation advisory board,” he said.

Winstanley questioned whether the council had evaluated Valley Metro RPTA’s performance and whether continued financial support for the local routes was in the city’s best interest. He also raised concerns about the length of the agreement.

“Seven years also seems like an awful long time for this kind of a contract,” Winstanley said.

The contract requests nearly $5 million but it was unclear where that funding appears in the city’s budget, Winstanley said.

“I could not find the relationship between what’s being asked here and what’s in the budget,” he said.

He noted roughly 80% of the funding used in the agreement comes from a countywide half-cent sales tax implemented under Proposition 479, and said it is the council’s responsibility to ensure the money is spent wisely.

“You as council are the stewards of our tax dollars. You’re deciding how that money is spent, and it is all of our tax dollars,” he said. “Are these dollars being spent wisely?”

Winstanley also questioned the efficiency of the bus system, citing fare recovery rates.

“For the county-funded bus routes, the fares collected average about 5% of the total net cost of operation,” Winstanley said. “That does not seem like a reasonable nor a rational value.”

He asked council members whether buses were being used efficiently, questioning whether large buses were transporting only a small number of riders.

Winstanley suggested the council explore alternative transit models used in other cities and urged members to push Valley Metro to justify its spending.

“Please ask them. Please challenge them,” he said. “I am asking you to look a little deeper into how you spend my tax dollars and your tax dollars.”

City Manager Scott Butler responded by saying extensive information about RPTA funding, route performance and budget allocation is publicly available online and reviewed on a regular basis.

“This is an exhaustive process that happens annually,” Butler said.

Mesa partners with RPTA and Valley Metro to administer transit services in order to avoid duplicating bus systems and infrastructure within the city, Butler said.

“This is an annual process that we do and has been part of the obligation of the city of Mesa for this partnership with RPTA going back to the voter-approved Proposition 400 that the voters approved in 2004,” Butler said.

Mesa has representation on the RPTA board and participates in approving the agency’s annual documentation, Butler added.

Mesa Transit Services Director Jodi Sorrell also addressed concerns raised about the length of the agreement, saying the seven-year term allows for flexibility and is determined regionally rather than by Mesa alone.

“Seven years is a number we all as a region decided on because things change, we need to be flexible,” Sorrel said. “We can amend but administratively we do it every seven years.”

Proposition 400, approved by Maricopa County voters in 2004, established a dedicated regional sales tax to fund transportation projects, including transit services.

Mesa has worked for years to move eligible routes under regional funding to reduce the burden on local taxpayers, Sorrell said.

“Over the last 20 years, we have moved every route that is regionally eligible for funding over to be funded by Proposition 400 and take that burden off the general fund that was in there and in some cases added new routes,” she said. “The roughly $5 million that’s in the agreement represents funding for four routes that do not meet the regional criteria that we continue to fund,”

Partnering with Valley Metro is more cost-effective than operating an independent transit system because expenses are shared across multiple cities and Valley Metro manages a larger network of routes, Sorrell said.

“Years ago, Mesa did operate our own transit service and we transitioned to have Valley Metro operate that because it was more efficient and more effective,” Sorrell said.

Despite Winstanley’s request to delay the vote, the council ultimately approved the agreement unanimously.

To voice your opinion on this story, connect with us at AzOpinions@iniusa.org.