Debate Over Dallas Area Rapid Transit Funding Heats Up

House lawmakers heard more than two hours of testimony late Thursday night on a bill that would change how Dallas Area Rapid Transit is funded. The bill, known as House Bill 3187, along with companion Senate Bill 1557, would compel the agency to create a permanent general mobility program, funded by 25% of DART’s annual sales tax revenue.

However, DART has said that this would amount to a loss of more than $230 million in 2026, an amount that would cripple the agency. Widespread service cuts throughout the region, slowed frequencies, and layoffs would follow the passage of either bill, agency leaders say. This has led to concerns about the potential impact on the community, with many arguing that it could have far-reaching consequences for the region’s economy and transportation infrastructure.

Concerns Over Funding Cuts

The proposed funding cuts have sparked concerns among community leaders, who argue that they would have a devastating impact on the region’s transportation system. During the hearing, leaders from DART and mobility management partner Transdev, Trinity Metro, Richardson, Dallas, Rowlett, Glenn Heights, the Regional Hispanic Contractors’ Association, and riders all spoke in opposition to the bill.

Speakers argued that the diversion of agency revenue to a mobility program and subsequent service cuts would mean longer waits and fewer route options for riders. It could also compromise system safety and paratransit service for passengers with disabilities, and would jeopardize regional transportation for the FIFA World Cup next summer, they added.

“It could really hurt us economically throughout the entire region, not just Dallas,” said Omar Narvaez, Dallas City Council member and chair of the city’s transportation and infrastructure committee. This concern is shared by many, who argue that the funding cuts would have a ripple effect on the region’s economy, impacting businesses, residents, and visitors alike.

Voluntary General Mobility Program

In late March, the DART board committed to a voluntary general mobility program that will allocate 5% of DART’s annual sales tax revenue to funding the initiative for three years, in the hopes of appeasing cities that have pushed for legislative action. Under the fund, seven cities that an EY study shows paid a surplus into DART in 2023 would be eligible to receive a collective $42 million back in the first year, for use on non-DART transportation projects in their cities.

The agency also expects to spend at least $18 million on service requests from member cities. Those dollars, along with more than $9 million for additional Silver Line operations and “unknowns,” together create a more than $78 million projected budget shortfall for 2026. However, several cities have indicated that the moves do not go far enough, leading to stalled negotiations between DART and member cities facilitated by the North Central Texas Council of Governments’ Regional Transportation Council.

Proponents of the Bill

Proponents of the bill, including the mayors of Plano, Carrollton, Highland Park, and Irving, argue that the legislation is necessary to address the region’s transportation needs. “I think we need a structural fix that has the permanence of state legislation to it,” Plano representative Anthony Ricciardelli said during a vote on the voluntary general mobility fund last month.

“What came out of the partnership discussions, both through RTC (Regional Transportation Council) and directly, is that it’s going to require all this to be codified,” Carrollton Mayor Steve Babick said. Several criticized DART’s statements about the impact of funding cuts, pointing to increased revenue over the past several years.

“DART from 2010 to 2020, their revenues increased 54% [but] their ridership only increased by 13%, a 40% delta,” Shaheen said. “Just keep that in mind when you have multiple people come forward to you today to talk about the devastation of this bill [because] it’s inaccurate.”

Next Steps

The House bill has not been scheduled for a vote as of Friday morning. A twin Senate bill has been referred to the Senate Transportation Committee but not yet scheduled for a hearing. As the debate continues, community leaders and residents are urged to stay informed and make their voices heard on the issue.

The fate of the bill remains uncertain, but one thing is clear: the decision will have far-reaching consequences for the region’s transportation system and economy. As lawmakers consider the bill, they must weigh the competing interests and priorities of the various stakeholders involved.

Conclusion

The debate over Dallas Area Rapid Transit funding has sparked a heated discussion about the region’s transportation needs and priorities. While proponents of the bill argue that it is necessary to address the region’s transportation needs, opponents argue that it would have a devastating impact on the region’s economy and transportation infrastructure. As the issue continues to unfold, it is essential for community leaders and residents to stay informed and make their voices heard.

FAQs

Q: What is House Bill 3187, and how would it impact Dallas Area Rapid Transit funding?

A: House Bill 3187 would compel DART to create a permanent general mobility program, funded by 25% of DART’s annual sales tax revenue. This would result in a loss of more than $230 million in 2026, leading to widespread service cuts, slowed frequencies, and layoffs.

Q: What is the voluntary general mobility program, and how would it impact DART funding?

A: The voluntary general mobility program would allocate 5% of DART’s annual sales tax revenue to funding the initiative for three years. This would result in a projected budget shortfall of more than $78 million in 2026.

Q: What are the next steps for the bill, and how can community leaders and residents stay informed?

A: The House bill has not been scheduled for a vote as of Friday morning, and a twin Senate bill has been referred to the Senate Transportation Committee but not yet scheduled for a hearing. Community leaders and residents can stay informed by following local news and attending public hearings and meetings.