<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-2022-jp"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Aptos;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;
mso-ligatures:standardcontextual;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#467886;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link="#467886" vlink="#96607D" style='word-wrap:break-word'><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Hi everyone,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>On this coming Wednesday, July 16, at 5:30 p.m., the RTD Operations, Safety and Security Committee is supposed to discuss Access on Demand. This is a Zoom meeting; you can register here:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><a href="https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_SCRpno9WRMuSpZEWms59AA#/registration">https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_SCRpno9WRMuSpZEWms59AA#/registration</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>The full RTD Board is supposed to vote on this on July 29, so this is our last chance to speak up. Because right now, the recommendation is still to cut the service area and hours to correspond with Access-a-Ride and to implement a fare of $6.50 per trip, with LIIV program enrollees paying half that. The current 60 trip limit would remain the same, but the subsidy per trip would be reduced to $20.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Additionally, they still maintain this utterly pointless and counterproductive recommendation to force new applicants to “actively” use Access-a-Ride for 90 days before they can enroll in Access On Demand. I have no idea what “actively” means in this context. This is despite the fact that Access-a-Ride costs RTD 80% more per trip than Access On Demand.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>So, we’ve got our work cut out for us, and unless you want to see these changes implemented, we all need to be there, virtually at this meeting on July 16, but in person for the full Board meeting on July 29.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Let’s raise our voices and make sure they hear us!<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Here’s a fact sheet that Mary Henneck created that shows the current numbers for Access On Demand and how management’s urgency to severely cut this program is misplaced.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>-----Fact Sheet----<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>RTD CEO Debra Johnson has spent the past year leading an aggressive campaign to dramatically scale back<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Access on Demand (AOD)—the most effective, affordable, and rider-preferred paratransit service in the<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Denver metro area. Alongside former staffer Fred Worthen, CEO Johnson has repeatedly framed AOD as<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>financially unsustainable.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>This narrative doesn’t hold up to scrutiny.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>While costs increased when AOD expanded from a limited four-zip-code pilot to a full regional program, that is<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>expected growth. Now, the data shows those costs have stabilized. According to data from RTD staff member<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Erin Vallejos’ “Preferred Scenario” presentation on June 30, 2025, AOD is projected to have 0% cost growth<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>from 2024 to 2025—and will finish the year nearly $500,000 under budget. The numbers speak for themselves.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>The Numbers<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>AOD Budget<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Detail 2024 Amount 2025 Amount<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Original Approved<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Budget $13,814,441<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Additional<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Approved Funding $2,000,000<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Total Approved<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Budget $15,814,441<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Actual/Projected<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Spend<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>(per Vallejos) $15,300,000 $15,329,785<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Variance (Under<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Budget) ($484,656)<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Growth Rate 0%<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Despite these strong indicators of stability and fiscal responsibility, CEO Johnson is advancing a proposal to<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>cut the AOD program by 36.5% (just short of her requested 40%) as soon as October 2025.Unlabeled graphicEven more baffling: the plan shifts more riders to Access-a-Ride, a program that costs 80% more per<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>trip—undermining both budget goals and service quality.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>From the May 28, 2025 Board presentation by Erin Vallejos:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Program 2024 Annual Cost 2024 Trips Cost/Trip<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Access-a-Ride $53,000,000 500,000 $106<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Access on Demand $15,300,000 685,000 $22<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>The Impact on Riders<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>The proposed cuts would create extreme financial burden on AOD riders—and the impact is deeply human.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>According to RTD’s own June 30 “Preferred Scenario” presentation, AOD riders would bear nearly $5 million in<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>new costs, including:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Increased fares $4,223,160<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>LiVE discount ($239,220)<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Subsidy reduction $931,620<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Total cost to AOD riders $4,915,560<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>And that’s not all. The proposal also calls for cutting approximately 34,250 trips affecting those outside the<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>ADA-mandated service area.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Trip reduction estimate<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>2024 AOD trips 685,000<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>% Trips outside ADA service area 5%<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Proposed AOD trips cut 34,250<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>The Wrong Direction<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>RTD leadership has failed to:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>1. Provide transparent, data-backed justification for cutting AOD.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>2. Acknowledge the real-life impact on thousands of riders who rely on the program for work, medical<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>appointments, social connection, and basic independence.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Despite many hundreds of public comments from riders, caregivers, and advocates, RTD has not engaged with<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>their concerns.Let’s be clear: budget lines don’t capture lived experiences.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>● How many people will lose their jobs because they can’t get to work?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>● How many medical appointments will be missed?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>● How many people will be further isolated from their communities?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>This is a False Choice<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>RTD is pitting two vital programs—AOD and Access-a-Ride—against each other. That is not necessary and not<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>fiscally sound. Cutting AOD and shifting riders to Access-a-Ride doesn’t save money. It increases per-trip<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>costs, reduces flexibility, and worsens service delivery for people with disabilities.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>To summarize, cutting AOD:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>● does not reduce paratransit costs,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>● does not improve Access-a-Ride, and<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>● effectively guts a high-performing, cost-effective service that many riders depend on.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Conclusion<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>RTD must reconsider this proposal. Riders, taxpayers, and advocates are not asking for favors—they’re asking<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>for facts, fairness, and a commitment to proven solutions. Access on Demand works. It’s efficient. It’s under<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>budget. And it must be protected.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></body></html>