[Colorado-Talk] RTD Update: A Win You Haven't Heard About, and Why July 28 Still Matters

[Tim Keenan]

Hello all, 

By now most of you have probably seen the Denverite article on RTD's five
service-cut scenarios, so I won't rehash the route lists here. Instead, I
want to focus on what the coverage missed: a paratransit funding win almost
nobody knows about, and the eligibility threat that win doesn't cover.

* * * 

A WIN YOU PROBABLY HAVEN'T HEARD ABOUT 

At the June 23 board meeting, Directors Guzman and Ruscha ran an amendment
to protect paratransit funding in the budget. It passed 10-5. In Director
Ruscha's own words to me: "Last night, Michael and I ran an amendment to the
budget scope to protect paratransit. For now, paratransit funds for both
programs will be protected."

That is a real, hard-won victory, and it has not gotten nearly the attention
it deserves. Our sustained pressure through public comment and emails helped
make it happen, so take a moment to feel good about that.

* * * 

BUT FUNDING PROTECTED IS NOT THE SAME AS SERVICE AREA PROTECTED: 

Here is the catch, and it is the reason we cannot let up. Access-a-Ride's
service area is defined by federal law as everywhere within three-quarters
of a mile of RTD's local fixed routes and rail stations. The eligibility map
IS the route map. When a route is eliminated, the three-quarter-mile
paratransit corridor around it disappears too. This is not hypothetical:
under RTD's existing rules, riders can lose Access-a-Ride eligibility when
the bus service near their home is withdrawn.

So even with the June 23 funding win, every one of the five cut scenarios
still shrinks the paratransit map. At the smallest 5 percent cut, 21 routes
are eliminated, and each one takes its paratransit corridor with it. At 20
percent, it is 39 routes. Nobody at RTD has published a map showing how many
current Access-a-Ride customers would fall outside the service area under
each scenario. That is the question we need to force them to answer before
the July 28 vote, not after.

The rail cuts compound this. The T Line is eliminated in every scenario, and
the R Line starting at the 10 percent level. Light rail stations anchor
paratransit coverage the same way bus routes do.

We already have a concrete example of what this looks like on the ground.
Route 53 is discontinued in all five scenarios, and it is the route that
provides paratransit access for residents of The Grove, a brand-new housing
complex in Broomfield built specifically for people with disabilities.
Multiply that story across dozens of routes and you have the real cost of
these cuts.

 

* * * 

SO FAR, ACCESS ON DEMAND IS SAFE:

 

Access on Demand would not be affected by these cuts, and, wonder of
wonders, it does not appear to be on the chopping block under any of these
scenarios. 

That's huge for many of us, but it means nothing for those of us who use
Access-a-Ride.

 

* *  * 

WATCH FOR THE PRESSURE PLAY 

Buried in the staff report is a warning that delaying a maximum cut from May
2027 to January 2028 would cost RTD an extra $40 million. Expect management
to use that number on July 28 to push the Board toward a fast, deep cut. 

 

* *  *

Do not let the urgency framing go unchallenged.

 

Here is the thing: there is no financial necessity forcing the deeper cuts.
Director Benker's independent budget analysis shows that a 5 percent service
reduction, combined with revenue measures, labor savings, and the bond
refinancing already underway, closes the entire deficit. The deeper
scenarios are a choice, not a requirement. 

* * * 

WHAT YOU CAN DO 

The full Board votes on which scenario to adopt on Tuesday, July 28 at 5:30
PM at 1660 Blake Street. That is the meeting that matters most. I will send
registration details as we get closer.

In the meantime, written comment can go anytime to
RTD.Directors at rtd-denver.com and becomes part of the official record. 

 

* * *

Three asks:

First, if your route is on the cut list, say so. Tell the Board how you use
it and what losing it would mean. 

Second, ask the question RTD has not answered: how many current
Access-a-Ride customers lose eligibility under each scenario? Demand that
analysis before any vote. Funding protection means nothing if the service
area quietly shrinks out from under us.

Personal, specific stories from real riders are the most powerful thing we
have. 

 

Finally, the Board should hear from us that the smaller-cut path is the
responsible one, and that no route cuts should outpace the independent
paratransit study that SB 26-150 requires.

The simplest way to accomplish this is to lock in all routes as they
currently exist when it comes to paratransit eligibility. We used to call
this "grandfathering." That's what we need to push the Board to do, because
it's the one thing that would completely protect Access-a-Ride riders.

 

Over the coming days, I'll be connecting with my fellow paratransit
advocates to make sure I haven't missed anything and to build the most
powerful public comment path to best protect the services we all rely upon.

 

If you have questions about any of this, feel free to email me directly at
tkeenan at cocenter.org. 

More to come as we approach July 28. 

 

Thanks for all you do!

 

 

 

Tim Keenan 
State Transportation Chair 
National Federation of the Blind of Colorado 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/colorado-talk_nfbnet.org/attachments/20260715/f6fdacc5/attachment.htm>