Tucson council reviews transit cuts that could follow a failed RTA Next vote

City of Tucson officials on Jan. 21 outlined how much local transit service could change if voters reject the RTA Next package in March, and urged contingency planning to protect riders who rely on evenings, weekends and paratransit services.

Sam Credeo, director of transportation mobility, told Mayor and Council that the city participates annually in two intergovernmental agreements (IGAs) with the Regional Transportation Authority covering in‑city and regional services. The gross IGA value cited for the recently adopted agreements is just under $21.8 million, with roughly $10.3 million allocated to service inside the city limits and about $11.5 million for service outside the city; after fare‑revenue credits the net is about $19.1 million.

Credeo presented a draft city‑operated scenario that assumes a 6 a.m.–7 p.m. baseline and seeks to preserve a weekday frequency of 30 minutes and weekend frequencies of 60 minutes where possible. In the scenario staff estimated reductions of approximately 141 weekday trips, 205 Saturday trips and 115 Sunday trips. That change would affect 21 routes, reduce headway frequencies on 13 routes, and combine hour and frequency impacts on five routes. He also warned that express and on‑demand services — fully funded by the RTA — could be eliminated, estimating the loss of 34 weekday express trips on 11 express routes and elimination of two on‑demand zones.

"On the contrary, if our TNX is successful, we would maintain the current service levels," Credeo said, adding that the RTA Next plan would provide roughly $726 million in transit funding across 20 years and fund expanded service recommendations.

Mayor Regina Romero and councilmembers pressed staff on cost backstops and timing. Credeo said the city would have to return to the Mayor and Council immediately after the Mar. 10 vote to begin major‑service‑change procedures — including public outreach, a service‑equity analysis and a public hearing — and that changes could not take effect without an affirmative Council vote.

Council members expressed particular concern for riders who depend on evening, weekend and paratransit service. Councilmember Nick Schubert urged exploration of alternatives and bridge funding; Councilmember Nikki Lee pressed staff for a clear accounting of which roadway projects and transit elements would be deferred if RTA Next fails; and others asked staff to return with concrete contingency options.

Credeo also highlighted local impacts to Sun Shuttle and Sun Van paratransit, which are primarily RTA‑funded. He said Route 450 (an in‑city route) and the two on‑demand zones would be at risk without RTA Next funding.

The presentation did not include a formal Council action on policy; instead the session functioned as an informational briefing and a prompt for follow‑up work with RTA staff and local jurisdictions. Councilmembers directed staff to provide more detailed cost estimates for deferred projects and to return with options for mitigating service losses.

Next steps: staff said they would return to Mayor and Council with supplemental analyses if the Mar. 10 vote is unsuccessful and that any service changes would require the public‑process steps Credeo outlined.