Our initial thoughts & recommendations on the draft RTA Next plan

For nearly five years now, the greater Tucson region has been grappling with the fact that its twenty-year 1/2 cent sales tax for transportation—the RTA—will sunset in June 2026, while also disagreeing on what should be proposed to voters in order to ensure its reauthorization and continuation beyond that date. Finally, last Fall (2024) they arrived at a draft plan for RTA Next totaling $2.466 BILLION. (Note: We’ve put together a page with the nuts & bolts of both RTA and RTA Next for your quick and easy reference.)

As a transportation advocacy organization, we have been following RTA Next conversations and development of the draft closely, eager to see a plan that looks vastly different from the last RTA and instead prioritizes investment in transit, biking, and walking—things we have heard voiced over and over by the Tucson community. As it currently stands…

We are disappointed by and not supportive of the Draft RTA Next Plan.

While we could go into great detail and provide all sorts of facts about how this plan is not good for Tucsonans, the environment, is inequitable, and would make our streets more unsafe for people, this Op-Ed already does a great job of it. Instead, here are our main reasons why:

• The Draft Plan fails to align and fully support LSA's Mission, Vision, Values & Strategic Goals, which have been informed and guided over a decade by the Tucson community;

• The Draft Plan has insufficient funding for investments that Living Streets Alliance supports—investments that align with Complete Streets;

• The Draft Plan does little to implement Move Tucson, the mobility master plan envisioned with the Tucson community and approved by Mayor and Council;

• Despite nearly 20 years of RTA Plan investment, our streets are more dangerous than ever;

• Regional cooperation is necessary, but too much of the region's transportation funding is committed by the Draft Plan for projects that do not address local priorities and needs;

• The 20-year term of the Draft Plan does not include a way of addressing changing conditions and cost escalation, therefore locking the region into projects that might not be relevant or useful down the road;

• The Draft Plan and the RTA Board structure is a poor fit for the City of Tucson in terms of self determination; the Board structure does not allow for proportional and equitable representation of the community.

---

Weigh in via the RTA Next Public Survey

A public survey of the Draft RTA Next Plan is available through January 31st, 2025. Don’t sit this one out!—click below to take the survey.

If you believe in Living Streets Alliance’s mission to transform our streets into vibrant public places that bring people together and provide safe, accessible, and attractive transportation options, here’s a handy cheat-sheet for how to fill out the RTA Next Public Survey in a way that aligns with our mission. Click the drop-down to see our recommended answer/response to each question. For your convenience we’ve also embedded the project list at the bottom of this page so you can see what projects we’re referencing.

Your LSA Mission-aligned Survey Guide:

• #1. In your opinion, are the projects listed in the RTA Next draft plan Elements (Roadway, Transit, etc.) a good representation of transportation needs in the region?

  No

• #1a. If you answered "No," which line items (Nos. 1-50) do you believe are not representative of regional needs?

  Projects 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 14, 17, 24 should all be replaced with high-capacity transit projects. Projects 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 16, 30 should get changed to modernization projects instead of road widenings.

• #2. Which proposed line items (Nos. 1-50) in the RTA Next draft plan represent the highest priority for you? If any, please list up to five line items that you are most interested in as part of the overall plan.

  Projects 36, 37, 43, 44, 46

• #3. Which proposed line items (Nos. 1-50) in the RTA Next draft plan represent the least priority for you? If any, please list up to five line items that you are least interested in as part of the overall plan.

  Projects 1, 2, 4, 5, 14

• #4. The draft RTA Next plan includes 30 new Roadway Corridor improvement projects and four roadway projects that have been deferred from the 2006 RTA plan due to project scope and cost changes. Considering projects Nos. 1-34 as a regional package to benefit users across the region’s transportation network, how likely are you to support the plan?

  Less likely

• #4a. If you selected "less likely," please list which line items led you to make that choice

  There are too many new interchange projects and road widening projects. In particular, the interchange (#4 and 5) and Colossal Cave Rd (#14) projects seem to benefit certain jurisdictions rather than the region as a whole. The cost of #14 is substantially higher than any other project and will primarily serve a sprawling community that continuously refuses to incorporate and that refusal harms our region by limiting our state-shared tax revenue (i.e., leaving our region's tax dollars in Maricopa County). Our region needs significantly more public transit and better infrastructure for people on foot and on bike to meaningfully alleviate congestion, improve safety, protect our environment, and spur resilient economic development.

• #5. Considering projects Nos. 44-47 under the Transit Element, how likely are you to support the plan?

  More likely

• #6. Considering projects Nos. 35-41 under the Safety, ADA, and Active Transportation (bike and pedestrian) Element, how likely are you to support the plan?

  More likely

• #7. Of the $2 billion available for new investments, $1.2 billion is proposed to be spent on 30 new Roadway Corridor improvements. In your opinion, is this amount too little, too much, or just right?

  Too much

• #8. Of the $2 billion available for new investments, $20 million is proposed to be spent on Arterial Reconstruction (rebuilding pavement curb to curb). In your opinion, is this amount too little, too much, or just right?

  Too little

• #9. Of the $2 billion available for new investments, $25 million is proposed to be spent on Wildlife Linkage improvements. In your opinion, is this amount too little, too much, or just right?

  Too little

• #10. Of the $2 billion available for new investments, $610 million is proposed to be spent on Transit Services. In your opinion, is this amount too little, too much, or just right?

  Too little

• #11. What do you believe is the single most important item that should be changed (added/deleted/modified) in the RTA Next draft plan to gain your overall support of the plan?

  The Safety, Transit, and Environment elements need significantly more budget, which could be achieved by replacing project numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 14, 17, 24 with high-capacity transit projects and changing Project numbers 9, 10, 12, 13, 16, 30 to modernization projects instead of road widenings.

• #12. The proposed RTA Next plan would be funded by a half-cent sales tax, collected from the RTA taxing district within Pima County. The tax currently represents nearly two-thirds of the region's transportation funding, or about $110 million annually. Given what you know now about the proposed RTA Next plan, please indicate your level of support for the plan and tax.

  Very unlikely