Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transit Operations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council briefed on proposed $54M transit contract with RATP Dev as members press for service, safety and term clarifications
Summary
Staff previewed authorization for a four‑year, $54 million contract with RATP Dev (with two two‑year options) to run Asheville transit; council members pressed staff on funding tradeoffs, on‑time performance targets (proposed 80%), crisis management staffing on platforms, and procurement constraints on shortening the contract term.
City staff previewed a proposed contract for city transit operations during the March 19 agenda briefing, describing a four‑year, approximately $54 million agreement with RATP Dev that includes two optional two‑year extensions. No formal action was taken at the briefing; the item is scheduled for full council consideration at the March 24 meeting.
Assistant City Manager Ben Woody said the proposed contract funds the current level of service and that any reduction in the contract amount "will likely impact the service level in our transit system," echoing Council Member Sage Turner’s question about what would happen if the council declined to fund roughly $800,000 of the proposed increase.
Council Member Ronnie emphasized contract priorities identified by riders and drivers, including crisis‑management staff on platforms to de‑escalate incidents and better connections to health and human services. Ronnie also highlighted a performance accountability change: the proposed contract increases target on‑time performance from around 72% to 80%, including handling early bus runs that deny riders a connection.
Ronnie said the Planning & Economic Development committee had discussed a shorter extension, but staff and the city attorney explained procurement constraints: the RFP specified the contract term, bidders built pricing around that term, and changing the term after bids could alter pricing and risk procurement noncompliance. Assistant City Manager Ben Woody warned that "anything less than the amount that we have here will likely impact the service level," and the city attorney said altering the term could run "a foul of the procurement laws."
City Attorney Brad Brandom also noted limits imposed by state rules on local governments and collective bargaining dynamics that make third‑party contractors common for transit operations in North Carolina—an explanation offered in the context of council members’ questions about whether a public transit authority might be preferable to a for‑profit operator.
Council members asked staff to provide scenarios showing service impacts of different funding choices and possible alternatives, including a regional or city‑county transit authority in the longer term. Woody said staff would return with additional information; the item had no committee recommendation after a missing seconded motion at the prior PED meeting and will move to full council for consideration on March 24.
Next steps: staff will provide follow‑up information requested by council (scenarios on funding/tradeoffs and service impacts) and the RATP Dev contract authorization will be on the March 24 council agenda for formal consideration.
