APPENDIX A Phoenix Metropolitan Area, AZ FINAL REPORT TCRP H-49: Improving Transit Integration Among Multiple Transit Providers APPENDIX A: PHOENIX METROPOLITAN AREA, AZ INTRODUCTION The Maricopa County’s Regional Public Transportation Authority (RPTA), also known as Valley Metro, is the regional transit authority for the majority of the Phoenix metro area. According to the U.S. Census, Maricopa County had a population of 3.9 million in 2012, th making it the 12 largest metropolitan The Valley Metro brand on the street. region in the United States. Phoenix is Photo: courtesy of Vally Metro webpage by far the largest municipality in the region, with nearly 1.5 million people. In addition to the City of Phoenix, the region includes three Native American Communities and 25 municipalities, several of which have populations of 250,000 or more. The history and development of regional transit services in Maricopa County and Valley Metro are tied closely to a series of successful and unsuccessful funding initiatives. In 1985, the Arizona State Legislature passed a law that allowed citizens of Maricopa County to vote on a sales tax increase to fund transportation. Later the same year, county residents approved a proposition for a half-cent regional sales tax with money dedicated to regional freeway improvements, plus seed money for a new regional transit authority (Regional Public Transportation Authority, or RPTA). The sales tax also included $6 million to develop a regional transit plan, find dedicated funding, and develop and operate a regional transit system. Prior to the 1985 authorization and vote, all funding for public transportation was local and the City of Phoenix operated the vast majority of transit service in the region. Appendix A: PHOENIX METROPOLITAN AREA, AZ A-1 FINAL REPORT TCRP H-49: Improving Transit Integration Among Multiple Transit Providers Figure A-1 Map of Phoenix Area Building on the planning work funded by the 1985 tax initiative, the RPTA went back to Maricopa County voters in 1989 with a transit funding proposal, known as ValTrans, that included significantly expanded bus service and 103 miles of elevated, automated rail. This regional proposal was defeated as was a subsequent regional transit proposal in 1994. On the heels of the failed regional initiatives, however, several municipalities were able to pass local sales taxes for transit. The City of Scottsdale passed a dedicated local transportation tax in 1989, which included funding for transit. Several years later in 1996, voters in the City of Tempe approved a ½ cent sales tax for local transit service, followed by successful initiatives in Phoenix (2000) and Glendale (2001). A regional tax was finally approved by the voters in 2004, when Maricopa County residents reauthorized the original 1985 tax. This time the regional tax includes significantly more revenues for transit with $2.8 billion allocated for transit service development, including light rail. The system of regional and local funding for transit made the development of regional transit services in Maricopa County complicated. Nearly all of the region’s most populated cities A-2 Appendix A: PHOENIX METROPOLITAN AREA, AZ FINAL REPORT TCRP H-49: Improving Transit Integration Among Multiple Transit Providers operate local transit services. The regional services that connect communities are funded and operated separately by the RPTA, or Valley Metro. As a regional service operator, Valley Metro’s initial role was fairly small; however, as regional services are added and light rail built, the agency is playing an increasing role in developing a cohesive regional network. Some of Valley Metro’s early success was to coordinate the appearance of the system by consolidating passenger systems such as service branding, fares, and some capital projects. As a result of continued effort over the years to consolidate transit operations in Maricopa County, there are currently two very large transit operators in the region: the City of Phoenix and Valley Metro. There are also several small-to-medium sized fixed-route systems in the region, as well as numerous dial-a-ride operators. HISTORICAL OVERVIEW In the past few decades, Phoenix and Maricopa County have been and continue to be among the fastest growing regions in the United States. Between 1970 and 1980, Maricopa County’s population increased by more than 50%, growing from around 970,000 to more than 1.5 million. Growth has continued since 1980, such that the County’s population is now nearly four million residents. Meeting the needs and expectations of such a rapidly growing population is inherently challenging, and among the biggest challenges is simultaneously developing, planning and managing new services and infrastructure. In the 1980’s, the City of Phoenix was the primary transit operator in the region with the Phoenix Transit System. As such, it also was the designated recipient of federal transit funds and manager of the regional transit programs. The Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) was responsible for regional planning but much of the transit service planning and development was led by the City of Phoenix. In 1985, the Arizona State Legislature authorized Maricopa County to tax itself to improve regional transportation systems, including public transportation. This authorization was exercised almost immediately and county residents approved a sales tax primarily to fund regional freeway improvements. The tax also included a relatively smaller pot of money dedicated to creating a Regional Public Transportation Authority (RPTA). Among other tasks, the RPTA worked on developing a regional transit system plan, which it brought to the voters in 1989. This first sales tax initiative was defeated, as were two subsequent efforts. Given the region’s reluctance to vote for a regional tax, several individual municipalities – Appendix A: PHOENIX METROPOLITAN AREA, AZ A-3 FINAL REPORT TCRP H-49: Improving Transit Integration Among Multiple Transit Providers including Scottsdale, Glendale, Tempe and Phoenix -- were able to pass local tax initiatives to develop local transit services 1. Consequently, local transit networks and interests outpaced development of regional services. Despite a lack of success in the voting booths, the RPTA was able to make progress toward a regional transit network by operating service and assuming responsibility for several regional transit service functions. In 1993, the RPTA began operating regional bus services and branded itself as Valley Metro. The RPTA also encouraged several regional systems, including the cities of Phoenix and Mesa, to join the Valley Metro brand at this time. The goal of the regional brand was to remove visual distinctions between the services for riders. When Valley Metro was first branded, the cities of Scottsdale and Tempe did not join the brand. However, as the Valley Metro services expanded so did the value of the unified brand and visual continuity of the system. Nearly ten years later, in 2002, the cities of Tempe and Scottsdale also joined the Valley Metro system, further regionalizing the system. Another critical step toward strengthening the regional transit network occurred in 2004 when Maricopa County residents voted to reauthorize the original tax and allocated a larger percentage to transit. Proposition 400 (or Prop 400) authorized $2.8 billion for transit over the 20-year authorization period, including funding for bus and light rail transit improvements, development of a “supergrid” bus network and development of 27 additional miles of light rail or other high capacity transit service 2. Prop 400 was a major step forward in creating a regional transit network because it called for a restructuring of the bus service into a regional grid system and for incorporating the City of Phoenix’s plans for light rail into a regional system. Light rail development was incorporated into the Valley Metro system but is managed and governed as a separate entity, Valley Metro Rail (METRO). The light rail system opened in December, 2008 with 20 miles of “starter” track and 28 stations, providing service in Phoenix, Tempe and Mesa. Most recently (2012), METRO and Valley Metro merged into a single organization headed by a single Chief Operating Officer, although there are still separate boards governing each organization. The merger was motivated by a recognized need for 1 Note not all local tax initiatives were successful. In 1997, the City of Phoenix defeated a half-cent sales tax for transit service improvements, but a 2000 effort was successful. After passing a transportation tax in 1989, the City of Scottsdale defeated a subsequent effort in 1997. The City of Chandler also had an unsuccessful tax effort in 1999. 2 Valley Metro – Regional Public Transportation Authority (RPTA). 2012. Short Range Transit Plan: FY 2012-2016. Phoenix, AZ. A-4 Appendix A: PHOENIX METROPOLITAN AREA, AZ FINAL REPORT TCRP H-49: Improving Transit Integration Among Multiple Transit Providers more integration between the bus and rail services; a desire to more closely coordinate service goals; and the potential to reduce costs. Given that both boards will continue, the merger also identified a conflict resolution process: if the boards provide conflicting instructions, a subcommittee of an equal number representatives from each board will meet to review the concern; the subcommittee will have advisory authority only. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT Project Purpose The original goal of creating a Regional Public Transportation Authority was to create a regional public transit system for Maricopa County. Project Leadership and Partners Developing a regional transit system in Maricopa County has been an ongoing effort since 1985 and, thus, the role and individual representatives participating in the process have evolved in the more than 25 years since that time. The RPTA is a member organization. All members contribute financially to the development and provision of regional transit services, thus all members participate in the governance of the system. The governance structure is comprised of representatives from 16 communities, including Maricopa County 3 and board members are elected officials in their home communities.