A Closer Look at RTA Next
by Kristen Sharp
There is a lot being said right now about RTA Next, and much of it sounds confident while being misinformed. Sensationalized narratives often gain traction online without full context. With ballots starting to arrive in homes, it’s worth slowing down and separating fact from frustration.
No, RTA Next Is Not a Tax Increase
Let’s start with the idea that RTA Next represents a tax increase. It does not. The half cent sales tax that funds the Regional Transportation Authority was approved by voters in 2006 and has been in place for the last 20 years. That tax expires in June 2026. If RTA Next is approved, that same half cent tax continues at the same rate to fund the next 20 year plan. One tax ends and the same tax begins.
Opponents frequently rely on semantics to label this a “new” tax, a tactic that can easily mislead people who have not dug into the details. While it is technically a new authorization, it is the same tax voters have been paying for two decades, with no increase in rate or burden.
Potholes Are the Wrong Measure of RTA’s Success
Complaints about potholes often get lumped into this conversation. People ask why roads across the county look the way they do after 20 years of RTA funding. It is important to clarify what RTA can and cannot fund.
RTA does not maintain roads. Fixing potholes and routine surface repairs are the responsibility of individual municipalities and the county. Those agencies handle neighborhood streets and day to day maintenance using their own budgets.
By law, RTA funds cannot be used for routine maintenance. They are reserved for voter approved projects like major roadway improvements, intersections, bridges, transit, and regional connectivity. That said, the RTA Next plan does include funding to fully rehabilitate and reconstruct certain arterial and collector roads that are in poor condition and serve as major regional corridors. These projects go far beyond patching potholes and are engineered to last at least a decade.
So when people talk about “fixing roads,” the nuance matters. RTA is not a pothole repair program, but it does invest in deep, long-term pavement reconstruction on heavily traveled roads that otherwise might remain in poor condition for years.
Why Not Every Original Project Was Completed
There has also been criticism that the original RTA plan was not fully completed. It is true that several projects remain unfinished. What is often left out of that conversation is context. The original plan assumed a level of population growth that did not occur. It also ran headlong into the Great Recession, the COVID pandemic, and historic inflation.
Those events were not foreseeable when the plan was created. Seven remaining projects have been carried forward into RTA Next, with scopes adjusted to reflect current realities and population trends.
The Myth of “Local Control” and Getting Your Money Back
Another argument I hear is that we should vote no so communities can “get their money back” or create their own local sales taxes instead. That ignores a few important realities. There is no guarantee voters in individual municipalities would approve new local taxes, and even if they did, those funds would not be restricted to transportation. Cities could legally divert that money into their general funds for any purpose. RTA funding, by contrast, is locked by law into voter approved transportation projects and cannot be repurposed.
There is also a practical problem with the idea that each municipality would somehow be better off on its own. Sales tax follows spending, not residency. No one shops, dines, or does business exclusively within their own city limits. Residents of Oro Valley, Marana, Sahuarita, and other communities regularly spend money in Tucson and vice versa, and that is where the sales tax is collected. If each municipality pursued its own transportation plan, communities like Oro Valley would still be contributing millions of dollars to Tucson simply because that is where much of the retail, dining, and entertainment spending occurs, while receiving little or nothing back for their own local transportation needs. A regional plan helps ensure those dollars are reinvested across the entire region rather than disappearing into a single jurisdiction.
Voting no does not magically create a better funding system. It creates uncertainty and fragmentation at a time when regional coordination matters more than ever.
What We Stand to Lose If RTA Funding Goes Away
People also tend to underestimate what would be lost if the RTA funding stream disappears. Roughly two thirds of Pima County’s transportation funding comes from the RTA sales tax, with federal and state sources making up the rest. The impact would be immediate and significant, particularly for public transportation. Services many residents rely on every day, including Oro Valley’s Dial a Ride, would be severely constrained or at risk without the RTA funding that helps sustain them.
Gas Taxes Are No Longer Enough
Along the same lines, much of the transportation funding we do receive from the state is heavily reliant on the gas tax, which has not seen a meaningful increase in roughly 30 years. Vehicles today are far more fuel efficient, which is a good thing, but it also means less gas tax revenue is being generated. The growing number of electric vehicles compounds the issue even further. Relying on a declining gas tax to fund modern transportation infrastructure is not realistic.
Road Widening Does Not Create Traffic
In a recent conversation, someone told me they were voting no because they opposed road widening and believed it would lead to more traffic. That logic misunderstands how congestion actually works. Wider roads do not create traffic. Population growth does. Traffic increases whether or not we invest in infrastructure. The difference is whether roads are designed to handle that growth safely and efficiently.
Ignoring capacity and safety needs does not stop growth. It simply makes everyday travel more frustrating and less safe.
Why the Business Community Supports RTA Next
Finally, some have questioned why so many organizations support RTA Next, suggesting that business and community groups must have ulterior motives. The reality is far less dramatic. Businesses and business organizations understand the importance of thinking regionally. Employees, customers, suppliers, and visitors move across municipal boundaries every day, and infrastructure needs to support that reality.
What a No Vote Really Means
Voting no does not send the plan back for improvement. It allows the existing funding mechanism to expire and leaves the region scrambling to replace it. That uncertainty carries real consequences for mobility, safety, economic development, and quality of life.
Before casting a vote, I encourage people to read the plan, ask questions, and seek out reliable information. Disagreement is healthy. Misinformation is not. Our region deserves better than decisions made on frustration alone.
Vote YES on Propositions 418 and 419.
Kristen Sharp, OV Chamber CEO
Kristen Sharp is President and CEO of the Oro Valley Chamber of Commerce and a resident of Oro Valley. She advocates for strong regional collaboration across communities, industries, and sectors, and understands that a healthy, connected region strengthens every municipality within it.
