Six cities. $360 million in concessions. A 40-year transit system facing withdrawal elections. What each city's residents need to know.
dartfunding.org
What's Happening
Six of Dallas Area Rapid Transit's 13 member cities called withdrawal elections for May 2, 2026, threatening to remove nearly a third of the agency's $937 million in annual sales tax revenue. In response, DART offered its largest-ever concession package: the General Mobility Program, returning $360 million to all member cities over six years with board governance restructuring.
The deal has split the coalition. Some cities see meaningful progress. Others see a short-term concession without structural reform. As of February 27, 2026:
CoppellPop. 42,983 (2020)
LEFT DART 1989
16,881 → 42,983 — 155% growth since withdrawal
Flower MoundPop. 81,270 (2024 est.)
LEFT DART 1989
15,527 → 75,956 — 389% growth since withdrawal
ArlingtonPop. ~375,000
NEVER JOINED
Rejected transit 3 times — runs citywide Via for ~$9M/yr
MesquitePop. ~150,000
VOTED NO 1983
On the 1983 DART ballot — voters rejected joining
Grand PrairiePop. ~196,000
VOTED NO 1983
On the 1983 DART ballot — voters rejected joining
DuncanvillePop. ~40,000
VOTED NO 1983
On the 1983 DART ballot — voters rejected joining
Historical Precedent: Cities That Left DART
▼
Coppell and Flower Mound are the only two cities to have successfully withdrawn from DART. Both voted to leave in 1989 amid management concerns. Neither city established a formal public transit replacement.
Both cities grew substantially after leaving. Coppell's population rose from 16,881 (1990 Census) to 42,983 (2020 Census) — a 155% increase. Flower Mound grew from 15,527 to 75,956 over the same period — a 389% increase, with a 2024 estimate of 81,270. Flower Mound's median household income is $159,636 and 67.7% of adults hold a bachelor's degree or higher (Town of Flower Mound, 2024).
Context: This growth occurred without any DART rail or bus service. However, both cities are located along major highway corridors with strong school districts and commercial development — factors that drive suburban growth throughout DFW regardless of transit access. The region as a whole grew rapidly during this period. These cases demonstrate that withdrawal does not preclude growth, but do not isolate the effect of transit access on development.
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau (1990, 2020 Decennial Census), Texas State Historical Association, Town of Flower Mound Demographics (flowermound.gov)
Cities That Never Joined DART
▼
When DART was created on August 13, 1983, voters in 14 cities and Dallas County approved a 1% sales tax. But additional cities were on the ballot and voted against joining — including Mesquite, Grand Prairie, and Duncanville (D Magazine, May 1988; Dallas Observer).
Arlington (pop. ~375,000) is the most prominent non-DART city in the region and was once the largest city in the United States without traditional mass transit. Arlington voters rejected public transit proposals three times between 1980 and 2002. The city's local sales tax capacity has been committed to stadium debt (AT&T Stadium, Globe Life Field). Arlington now operates citywide Via microtransit covering all 99 square miles for ~$9M/year — less than what Addison (pop. 16,000) pays DART annually (Mass Transit Magazine; GovTech, May 2021).
Other major DFW cities including Frisco, McKinney, and Allen in Collin County have never been part of any regional transit authority and are among the fastest-growing cities in the state.
Sources: dart.org (40th Anniversary — "14 cities and Dallas County"), Mass Transit Magazine (2025), GovTech (May 2021), D Magazine (May 1988), Dallas Observer
How to read these cards
▼
1University Park2$0.28/dollar
3VOTERS DECIDE MAY 2
4Worst return of any DART city — pays $6.4M, gets $1.8M back
50.6% of DART budget
City name
$/dollar return — for every dollar this city sends to DART in sales tax, it gets back $0.28 in allocated services (EY FY2023)
Status badge — where this city stands in the withdrawal process
Detail line — key context about this city's DART relationship
% of DART budget — this city's DART contribution as a share of DART's $1.093B total revenue (FY2024 ACFR)
Background tint:warm = pays more than it receives cool = receives more than it pays. Intensity scales with distance from $1.00.
Sort by:
The Funding Imbalance
The Ernst & Young FY2023 cost allocation report identified seven "donor cities" that contribute more to DART than they receive in services: Addison, Carrollton, Farmers Branch, Highland Park, Plano, Richardson, and University Park. The remaining six cities — including Dallas, Irving, and Garland — receive equal or greater value than they contribute.
Dallas alone puts in 48% of total DART funding and receives 65% of the expense allocation (KERA News, Jul. 2024). This imbalance is at the center of the withdrawal debate. Five of the six cities that called elections are donor cities; the exception is Irving, which receives $1.21 for every dollar it contributes.
Note: The EY analysis measures where DART spends money — not where riders live. DART claims 75% of trips cross city lines, which would mean these ratios understate the value suburban residents receive; we could not independently verify that figure. See the About DART tab for ridership data and budget context.
Key Context
DART Annual Revenue
$937.5M projected FY2026
At-Risk Revenue Share
32% of sales tax from 6 cities
Sources: Bond Buyer (Jan. 22 & Feb. 24, 2026), KERA News, Ernst & Young FY2023 Analysis
DART maintains investment-grade credit ratings from four agencies. For credit analysis and rating agency warnings, see Bond Rating & Credit Implications in the GMP Deal tab.
The Reform Debate
DART and its member cities disagree about whether the agency's recent reforms are the product of longstanding institutional efforts or a response to political pressure. Both sides cite the public record.
DART's position: CEO Nadine Lee has acknowledged that funding and service equity concerns "have been around a long time" (Community Impact, Jan. 29, 2026). DART points to the original GMP — approved in March 2025, before any city called a withdrawal election — as evidence that reform was already underway. The agency's February 2026 press release described the expanded GMP as a plan "to unify 13 member cities" (dart.org, Feb. 20, 2026). DART also notes that the Silver Line opened in October 2025, representing a major infrastructure investment years in the making.
Critics' position: Elected officials in multiple cities contend that decades of complaints about funding equity produced no structural change until withdrawal became a credible threat. They point to a sequence of events: cities supported state legislation (SB 2118, HB 3187) to reform DART's board and allow cities to redirect 25% of their sales tax — DART opposed both bills. Then-Board Chair Gary Slagel sent a letter demanding cities drop all legislative reform efforts as a condition of receiving GMP funds; Irving's mayor called the letter "disingenuous" (KERA News, Aug. 1, 2025). Only after six cities called withdrawal elections in late 2025 did DART announce its largest-ever concession: a restructured $360M GMP plus board governance reform giving every city its own seat.
The timeline of events is documented in the Timeline tab. Readers can evaluate the sequence and draw their own conclusions about cause and effect.
Under Texas law, member cities can call withdrawal elections every six years. In late 2025, six city councils voted to place the question before their residents on May 2, 2026. In the weeks that followed, DART negotiated directly with city officials to produce the GMP deal. Several councils then voted to cancel the elections they had called — meaning voters in those cities will not have the opportunity to evaluate the deal at the ballot box.
How each council decided: Plano's council voted unanimously on Feb. 23 to cancel its election and accept the GMP (KERA News, Feb. 23, 2026). Farmers Branch held a special session on Feb. 25 and voted on a split council to cancel; Council member David Reid argued "the people should have a voice" on decisions of this magnitude, and Council member Lupe Gonzalez called the deal "an ultimatum" (KERA News, Feb. 25, 2026). A Farmers Branch resident, Pamela Silver, urged the council: "The citizens deserve the right to have a say" (KERA News, Feb. 25, 2026). Irving voted 7-2 on Feb. 26 to cancel — notable because the same council had voted 9-0 in November to call the election. Council Members Luis Canosa and John Bloch dissented (KERA News, Feb. 26, 2026).
Cities proceeding to vote: Addison voted 5-2 on Feb. 25 NOT to rescind its election. Council member Randy Smith stated that "the poison pills that DART puts in their agreements are absolutely unacceptable" and that the deal would "take away the right of the people voting" (KERA News, Feb. 25, 2026). University Park's council voted unanimously in January to call its election and has not moved to cancel.
Who was at the table: The GMP was negotiated between DART officials and city leaders. Transit rider Alex Flores told the Plano council: "There's one member of this compromise that is still missing and that's us, the riders" (KERA News, Feb. 23, 2026). DART CEO Nadine Lee described the process as working "in partnership with the cities...in good faith" (KERA News, Feb. 23, 2026). No public hearings on the terms of the deal were held before councils voted to accept it and cancel elections.
The other view: Supporters of the cancellations argue that city councils are elected to make decisions on behalf of their constituents, and that accepting a $360 million deal with governance reform was a responsible exercise of that authority. Plano Mayor John Muns described it as "meaningful change" and "real progress." Under this view, the councils evaluated the deal and concluded that withdrawal was no longer in their cities' interest — and that proceeding with an election would have created unnecessary disruption and cost.
City officials have cited competing municipal funding needs as a reason the DART sales tax attracts attention. Addison's annual DART contribution ($17.6M) exceeds its spending on either Police or Fire services individually (Town of Addison, addisontx.gov). Plano Mayor John Muns has stated the city needs more revenue for economic development and infrastructure projects, noting that property tax caps and state-level pressure limit other funding options (Governing.com, 2025). Non-DART cities use their retained sales tax for infrastructure, economic development, and debt reduction. However, redirecting the sales tax would require voters to first approve withdrawal, then wait for DART debt obligations to be paid off before the revenue becomes available for other purposes.
Sources: Governing.com (Nov. 10 & Dec. 2025), Town of Addison (addisontx.gov)
Rail Access and Withdrawal Decisions
▼
There is a geographic pattern in how cities have responded to the GMP deal. Cities with DART rail stations within their borders — Richardson (three Red/Orange Line stations), Plano (Red Line plus Silver Line), and Irving (Orange Line plus TRE commuter rail) — have all accepted the GMP and cancelled their elections. Farmers Branch, served by the Green Line, cancelled its election on a split council vote.
The two cities proceeding to a May 2 vote without moving to cancel — Highland Park and University Park — have no DART rail stations within their city limits. Their nearest rail access is SMU/Mockingbird Station in Dallas. Their DART service consists of a single shared bus route (Route 237 on Preston Road) and the Park Cities GoLink on-demand zone.
Addison is a partial exception: it received its first rail station when the Silver Line opened in October 2025, yet its council voted 5-2 on Feb. 25 to proceed with the withdrawal vote.
This pattern does not establish causation. Cities without rail stations may simply receive less measurable value from DART, making the fiscal case for withdrawal more straightforward. Cities with rail have more infrastructure to lose and, in some cases, transit-oriented development tied to station access. DART's rail lines follow existing freight and highway corridors — primarily Central Expressway and I-35E — rather than the Dallas North Tollway corridor where Highland Park, University Park, and Addison are located.
Sources: DART system map (dart.org), KERA News (Feb. 23, 25, & 26, 2026), DART City Spotlight reports (dartdaily.dart.org)
Sales Tax Mechanics After Withdrawal
▼
DART is funded by a 1% sales tax collected in all 13 member cities. If voters approve withdrawal, the city's relationship with that tax changes — but does not end immediately.
Debt obligations continue. Under Chapter 452 of the Texas Transportation Code, a city that withdraws from DART is required to continue paying the 1% sales tax until its share of DART's $3.86 billion in outstanding bonds is fully paid off. DART claims University Park owes $91.7 million — its proportional share of that total — with an additional $22.55 million projected as UP's share of $2.5 billion in planned new issuances over six years (KERA News, Jan. 2026; People Newspapers, Feb. 2026). Addison's estimated debt obligation is $50.76 million, with a payoff estimated at approximately three years (Bond Buyer, Jan. 2026; addisontx.gov staff presentation). University Park's payoff is estimated at approximately 10 years. DART's bond debt service is flat through 2040, with final maturity in 2058.
Services stop; tax payments do not. Under Texas Transportation Code §452.656(b), if voters approve withdrawal, the authority "ceases in the unit of election on the day after the date of the canvass of the election." Section 452.657(a)(1) requires the authority to "cease providing transportation services in the withdrawn unit of election" on that date — including buses, rail access, and paratransit. However, under §452.658(a), the city's sales tax continues to be collected until the city's total financial obligation is paid. This means residents would pay the same tax rate with no transit service during the payoff period.
After debt is retired. Once a city's share of DART debt is fully paid, the 1% sales tax levied for DART would no longer be collected. The city could then pursue voter approval to levy its own sales tax for local transit or other purposes, subject to the state sales tax cap. Coppell and Flower Mound, which left DART in 1989, went through this process and now operate without any dedicated transit tax (Bond Buyer, Jan. 2026; Governing.com, Nov. 2025).
Dallas Area Rapid Transit is one of the largest transit agencies in the United States, serving 13 member cities across a 700-square-mile service area. This tab covers DART's operations, finances, ridership, debt, and real estate portfolio.
DART's Record
DART operates the longest light rail system in the United States — 93 miles of track with 65 stations — plus 34 miles of commuter rail, nearly 700 buses, and paratransit across a 700-square-mile, 13-city service area. The system carried more than 50 million riders in FY2024, including 29 million bus trips and 22 million light rail trips (Governing.com, Nov. 2025).
In October 2025, DART opened the Silver Line, a 26-mile commuter rail line connecting DFW Airport to Plano, funded by a $908 million federal RRIF loan. The Trinity Railway Express, a joint service with Trinity Metro, was the first commuter rail line in the southwestern United States (dart.org).
A 25-year study by the University of North Texas found that transit-oriented development within a quarter mile of DART light rail stations has generated $18.1 billion in direct economic impact. In 2022–2024 alone, these developments created 5,295 jobs, generated $51.5 million in state and local tax revenue, and produced rent premiums of 10% (residential) and 12.6% (commercial) near stations (DART press release, citing UNT Economic Research Group). Active projects include a $1 billion development at Trinity Mills Station in Carrollton and $240 million at Addison Junction. DART retains ownership of station-area land through 99-year ground leases rather than selling property outright. Four DART transit-oriented development projects were named as finalists in the D CEO 2026 Commercial Real Estate Awards (dart.org).
Transit advocates argue that the regional system's value extends beyond any single city's cost-to-service ratio. "Plano doesn't exist in an infrastructure bubble," one transit policy expert noted (Governing.com, Nov. 2025). Benefits cited include reduced road congestion, economic development near transit infrastructure, and essential mobility for low-income residents and people with disabilities.
Sources: dart.org (DART Facts, Silver Line, UNT TOD Study press release), Governing.com (Nov. 10, 2025), Railway Age (Feb. 24, 2026)
What the Ridership Data Shows
System-wide trends (DART Board presentations, FY2025): Q1 (Oct–Dec 2024) saw 14.9 million total trips, up 4.6% year-over-year but still only 83% of pre-pandemic levels. Q2 (Jan–Mar 2025) dropped to 13.0 million trips — down 0.9% YoY, the first quarterly decline since the recovery began — reaching 80% of pre-pandemic. Weekday ridership is declining while weekend ridership is growing.
Q1 FY25 System Total
14.9M trips +4.6% YoY, 83% of pre-pandemic
Q2 FY25 System Total
13.0M trips -0.9% YoY, 80% of pre-pandemic
Bus Subsidy per Rider
$11.39–$13.85 Q1: 7.5M trips / Q2: 6.7M trips
Light Rail Subsidy per Rider
$7.80–$8.59 Q1: 6.1M trips / Q2: 5.2M trips
GoLink (Microtransit)
$13.93–$16.36 subsidy/rider; 4.67 riders/hr
Parking Utilization
13% vs. 39% pre-pandemic
Light rail performance by line (Q2 FY25):
Red Line
113.8 riders/hr $7.33/rider
Green Line
98.3 riders/hr $8.06/rider
Blue Line
88.2 riders/hr $9.18/rider
Orange Line
78.2 riders/hr $10.02/rider
Other notable patterns: The top 5 bus routes by ridership are all in Dallas (883 UTD Shuttle, 22 Forest Lane, 57 Westmoreland, 38 Ledbetter, 20 NW Highway). Paratransit has exceeded pre-pandemic levels at 108% of 2019 ridership. Parking lot utilization at 13% — down from 39% pre-pandemic — suggests suburban commuters who once drove to stations have not returned.
City-specific context: Dallas accounts for 75% of all system ridership while contributing 48% of funding. Plano's 566,000 quarterly rides (Q1 FY25) are modest for a city of 290,000 paying ~$131M per year. Irving's resident survey (5,000 respondents) found only 1% use DART daily and over half had not used it in the past year. Highland Park's single bus route (Route 237 on Preston Road) averages about 60 riders per day.
Sources: DART FY2025 Q1 & Q2 Ridership and Route Performance Updates (COTW presentations), Texas Tribune (Jan. 2026), Irving 2024 Resident Satisfaction Survey, CBS Texas (Nov. 2025), DART City Spotlight reports
Budget Context: How Much Each City Matters to DART
DART's total FY2024 revenue was $1.093 billion (FY2024 ACFR). The 13 member cities' sales tax accounts for 78% ($852M); federal grants, fares, and interest income make up the rest. DART's FY2026 adopted budget forecasts $937.5 million in sales tax revenue. The two cities proceeding to a May 2 vote — Addison and University Park — contribute 2.1% of DART's total revenue combined.
The cities with the worst fiscal returns are also the smallest contributors to DART's total budget. University Park (0.6% of revenue) gets back $0.28 per dollar; Addison (1.5%) gets $0.58. Meanwhile, the cities that make up the bulk of DART's funding — Dallas (38.6%), Plano (10.4%), Irving (9.7%) — are not leaving.
Sources: DART FY2024 ACFR (dart.org), DART FY2026 Adopted Budget & 20-Year Financial Plan (dart.org), EY FY2023 Cost Allocation Analysis
Understanding DART's Debt
Total Outstanding
$3.86B senior lien bonds, final maturity 2058
Planned New Debt
$2.5B vehicle replacement, modernization, Silver Line
Debt Moratorium
No new issuance before Nov. 2026 elections
What's my city's share? DART's debt is allocated proportionally across member cities. Published figures: University Park owes $91.7M (payoff estimated at ~10 years); Addison owes $50.76M (payoff estimated at ~3 years). Highland Park's share has not been published. Note that simple proportional estimates based on each city's share of DART revenue produce lower numbers than DART's published figures — the allocation methodology has not been publicly detailed.
If my city leaves: The city continues paying the 1% sales tax until its share of DART debt is retired. All DART services — buses, rail access, paratransit — stop immediately after the vote is canvassed (§452.656–658). Cities that withdraw before new bonds are issued do not owe shares of that future debt.
If my city stays: The city's share of debt grows as DART issues new bonds. DART has $2.5B in planned issuances over six years for light rail vehicle and bus replacement, system modernization, and remaining Silver Line costs. No per-city cap on future debt exposure is included in the GMP deal.
Bond maturity: DART's debt service is flat through 2040 with final maturity in 2058. The debt moratorium — no new long-term issuance before the November 2026 elections — means current obligations are fixed for now.
Debt vs. assets: DART's debt ($3.71B) is distinct from its capital assets ($4.8B net of depreciation). Both are relevant to withdrawal: the debt follows the city (§452.658–659), but the assets stay with DART. See DART's Real Estate & Capital Assets below.
Sources: Bond Buyer (Jan. 22, 2026), KERA News (Jan. 2026), People Newspapers (Feb. 2026), Town of Addison (addisontx.gov), dart.org (debt moratorium press release), DART FY2024 ACFR, Texas Transportation Code §452
DART's Real Estate & Capital Assets
Capital Assets (Net)
$4.8B net of depreciation, FY2024 ACFR
Land & Rights-of-Way
$616M stations, corridors, parking, facilities
Active TOD Sites
37 DART-owned land being developed
What does DART own? DART's capital assets include 93 miles of light rail track, 65 stations, the Silver Line corridor, bus facilities, maintenance yards, and hundreds of acres of station-area land. The FY2024 ACFR values these at $4.8 billion net of depreciation, including $616 million in land and rights-of-way alone.
How is DART using this land? DART is converting underutilized station-area parking into revenue-producing developments through long-term ground leases. At Mockingbird Station, Trammell Crow broke ground in January 2026 on a $300M+ mixed-use project on ~16 acres of DART parking under a 99-year ground lease. Similar projects are underway or planned at Buckner ($107M mixed-income development), Hampton, Royal Lane, and other stations across 37 identified TOD sites. Lease payment amounts are not publicly disclosed (D Magazine, Jan. 2026; Dallas Observer).
If my city leaves: The withdrawal statute (§452.659) addresses only financial obligations — bond debt. It does not address real property. Cities that withdraw have no statutory mechanism to recover any share of DART's $616M in land and rights-of-way or revenue from ground leases, despite having funded these acquisitions through decades of 1% sales tax payments. Property acquired with federal funds also carries FTA obligations: proceeds from any disposition must be shared with the federal government (FTA Circular C5010.1E).
If my city stays: Member cities retain indirect benefit from DART's real estate portfolio. A UNT study found $18.1 billion in economic impact within a quarter mile of DART stations over 25 years, including property value premiums near stations. However, these benefits accrue primarily to cities with rail stations — not to Highland Park, University Park, or Addison (pre-Silver Line), which lack station-area development on DART-owned land within their borders.
Each city faces a different calculus. Click any city to see the full picture — key facts, and balanced arguments for staying and leaving.
A Note on the EY Numbers
The Ernst & Young analysis measures where DART spends money operating and maintaining service — not where riders live. DART Board Chair Randall Bryant has claimed that 75% of DART trips cross city lines — meaning a Plano resident riding the Red Line to downtown Dallas generates value counted in Dallas's column, not Plano's. If accurate, this would understate the value suburban residents receive. We could not independently verify the 75% figure.
However, suburban ridership remains modest relative to the cost. Irving surveys show only 1% of residents use DART daily and over half haven't used it in the past year. Highland Park's sole bus route averages about 60 riders per day. Dallas accounts for 75% of all system ridership. Plano recorded about 566,000 total DART rides in Q1 FY2025 — a 6% drop from pre-pandemic levels — modest for a city of 290,000 paying $131M per year (Texas Tribune, Jan. 2026).
Addison Deep Dive
This section compiles data from Addison's own staff presentations and Council Questions & Answers documents (Jan–Feb 2026). All sources are official Town of Addison documents published on addisontx.gov.
Current DART Services in Addison
According to Addison staff's transit options presentation (Feb. 10, 2026), DART currently provides the following services within the town:
Bus: 12 bus routes serving 70 bus stops. Of these, 11 routes operate at 40–60 minute frequency; one route operates at 15–20 minute frequency.
Rail: Silver Line commuter rail, with service every 30 minutes during peak hours and every 60 minutes during non-peak hours. The Addison station opened in October 2025.
Other: Addison Transit Center (the town's primary hub), paratransit (ADA-mandated door-to-door service), and GoLink on-demand zone (expanding to cover all of Addison in April 2026).
The 2023 DART On Board Survey tracked 10,075 total passenger boardings and alightings at Addison stops.
The Addison Transit Center dominates: 8,251 total activity (4,178 boarding, 4,073 alighting) — representing 82% of all tracked passenger activity in Addison. The next busiest stops were Belt Line-Marsh East (185), Belt Line-Business West (105), and Belt Line-Marsh West (101).
Note: This is boarding/alighting count data from a point-in-time survey, not a count of unique riders.
Addison has 1,200 registered paratransit riders and records approximately 1,600 paratransit rides annually. Of those trips, 99% start or end in a different DART city.
DART contracts its paratransit service through Transdev Services, Inc. Addison staff explored what independent paratransit would look like after withdrawal, evaluating Transdev as the operator with buffer ring options of 5, 10, and 15 miles from Addison's borders.
The 99% cross-city figure underscores a key implication: withdrawal would sever Addison paratransit riders' access to DART's 13-city network for virtually all of their current trips.
Source: Addison Transit Options staff presentation, slides 6–8, 20 (Feb. 10, 2026 Work Session); Council Q&A, Jan. 13, 2026 (Q12)
Financial Obligations — What Addison Owes
Addison staff prepared exit obligation scenarios based on data provided by DART:
Best Case
$50.76M
0.67% allocation — ~2.88 years repayment
Worst Case (5 cities leave)
$65.05M
0.89% allocation — ~3.69 years repayment
If DART borrows $2.25 billion as planned over the next seven years, Addison's obligation rises to an estimated $85.05 million.
Key facts from Council Q&A sessions:
Past sales tax payments ($400M+ since 1983) do NOT offset exit obligations
Silver Line debt IS included in the payback calculation
Silver Line total budget: $2.099B (RRIF $908M, Municipal Debt $864.5M, Grants $262.7M)
Addison contributed $5M toward Silver Line completion in 2015 (NCTCOG funding arrangement)
DART bonds are NOT collateralized with property tax — payable with sales tax and/or fare revenue
May vs. November vote timing: delaying to November costs ~$8.5M more (DART collects sales tax May–Nov that does not count toward exit obligation)
Source attribution: All data in this section from Town of Addison official documents: “Addison Transit Options” staff presentation (Feb. 10, 2026 Work Session), Answers to Council Questions — January 13, 2026, January 27, 2026, and February 24, 2026. Available at addisontx.gov/Government/Meetings-Agendas.
The General Mobility Program
What the Deal Offers
DART returns $360 million to all 13 member cities over six years, starting at 5% of annual sales tax collections in FY2026, rising by 0.5% annually to a maximum of 7.5%. The Regional Transportation Council approved an additional $75 million to supplement the program.
The DART board will be restructured so each member city has its own representative, expanding the board and reducing Dallas's voting power from majority control. Dallas City Council has already voted to surrender its majority.
Returned funds must be used for transportation or mobility projects within the cities.
The Math in Context
The GMP has both a financial component and a governance component. Evaluating only the dollar return does not capture the full scope of the deal, but the financial figures are relevant context for voters.
What the GMP returns financially: Under the EY FY2023 analysis, several cities pay more than they receive in DART services. The GMP returns a portion of that gap. Plano pays DART ~$131M/year and receives ~$49M back over six years (~6% of its projected ~$786M contribution over that period). Irving receives ~$9.1M over six years (~6% of ~$146M). Farmers Branch receives ~$2.7M over six years (~6% of ~$44M).
What the GMP changes structurally: Beyond direct payments, the deal restructures DART's board so each city gets its own representative, reduces Dallas's voting share from majority control to 45%, and gives cities local control over how returned funds are spent on transportation projects. Supporters argue these governance reforms address the root cause — not just the symptom — of funding inequity.
What the GMP does not change: The underlying 1% sales tax rate remains the same. The EY cost-to-service ratios are not directly altered by the deal. Cities accepting the deal forfeit withdrawal leverage until 2032. No service guarantees, accountability metrics, or debt caps are included. DART Board Chairman Randall Bryant acknowledged this gap, stating: "We still have to work on service and there's a lot of priorities within each city that we have to figure out how to bring together" (KERA News, Feb. 26, 2026).
Note: Dollar figures are approximations based on EY FY2023 data and current contribution rates. Actual amounts will vary with sales tax collections.
Supporters Say
• Real dollars returning to cities for local transit priorities
• Payments can be delayed if tax revenue underperforms
• RTC's $75 million requires separate legislative approval not yet granted
• Cities accepting the deal forfeit all GMP funds if they later pursue withdrawal
Sources: KERA News, D Magazine, Texas Tribune, NBC DFW, Bond Buyer, Tina Bennett-Burton (Farmers Branch Mayor Pro Tem) public email — Feb. 2026
Bond Rating & Credit Implications
DART currently holds investment-grade ratings from four agencies: Aa2 (Moody's), AA+ (S&P), AAA (KBRA), and AA (Fitch). These ratings affect DART's borrowing costs for the $2.5 billion in planned bond issuances. All three agencies with public commentary have flagged the withdrawal elections as a material credit risk:
Fitch Ratings analyst Omid Rahmani stated that "lower pledged revenues would pressure debt service coverage metrics" and "could necessitate revisions to capital plans and funding strategies." Fitch said it "is closely monitoring the elections" (Bond Buyer, Nov. 2025).
KBRA Senior Director Pete Stettler warned that "loss of sales tax revenue and immediate cessation of service within withdrawn community" would create "financial and logistical pressures" (Bond Buyer, Nov. 2025).
Moody's Ratings issued a January 2026 sector outlook report warning that "signs of a significant, broad-based reduction in political support for mass transit could shift its stable outlook for the sector to negative," specifically citing the DART withdrawal elections (Bond Buyer, Feb. 2026).
How DART's leverage compares: DART's debt service coverage has exceeded 300% annually since 2016. Its debt-to-sales-tax-revenue ratio (~4.1x) is comparable to RTD Denver, which similarly leveraged debt for rail expansion, and higher than MARTA Atlanta (~2.6x) or Houston METRO (~0.6x). The high leverage reflects DART's 93-mile rail buildout — the longest light rail system in the U.S.
A credit downgrade would raise DART's borrowing costs on future bonds, increasing the financial burden on remaining member cities. DART announced a moratorium on new long-term debt issuance until after the elections (Bond Buyer, Jan. 2026). For cities that stay, the departure of others would concentrate debt service obligations among fewer taxpayers.
If cities leave DART, what comes next? Several North Texas communities have already experimented with local transit models outside the regional system. Each offers lessons — and trade-offs.
Key trade-off: Microtransit and regional transit serve different purposes, and direct cost comparisons have limitations. On a per-passenger-mile basis, microtransit costs more ($6.80 vs. $2.32 for fixed-route per FTA data) and cannot replace intercity rail, high-capacity corridors, or paratransit at scale. However, total annual costs can be lower: Arlington covers 400,000 residents citywide for ~$9M/year, while DART member cities pay substantially more (Addison: $17.6M/year for 16,000 residents; Plano: $131M/year). The comparison is imperfect — DART contributions fund a 93-mile rail network, regional bus service, and paratransit that microtransit does not replicate, while microtransit provides flexible local coverage that fixed routes may not.
The Big Picture
No city that has left a regional transit authority and built a local replacement has replicated the intercity rail connectivity that a regional system provides. Microtransit excels at filling gaps in low-density areas but cannot replace high-capacity corridors.
The Dallas–Fort Worth region is projected to grow from 8.7 million to approximately 12.4 million residents by 2050 (NCTCOG, Jan. 2026). Even TxDOT has stated the state needs more public transit capacity, not less. The question facing DART cities is not whether transit is needed, but who should control it and how it should be funded.
Plano's C4 committee and Irving's microtransit exploration suggest a hybrid future may emerge — cities maintaining DART membership for rail while contracting local on-demand service independently.
Disability & Paratransit
DART's paratransit service is a significant factor in the withdrawal debate. This section presents the facts about what exists today, what would change, and what cities have proposed as alternatives.
Current DART Paratransit Service
DART operates curb-to-curb paratransit across all 13 member cities for riders with physical, cognitive, or visual disabilities who cannot use standard bus or rail. More than 12,000 people are registered for the service (CBS Texas, Jul. 2025). Under the ADA, transit agencies with fixed routes must provide paratransit within three-quarters of a mile of those routes. DART has historically exceeded that minimum, covering its entire 700-square-mile service area.
Paratransit ridership has exceeded pre-pandemic levels — at 108% of 2019 numbers as of March 2025 — while bus and rail ridership remain below (DART FY2025 Q2 Ridership Report). In Plano, paratransit averages 329 trips every weekday (Community Impact, Jan. 2026). University Park logged approximately 700 paratransit rides in 2025, down from roughly 1,700 the year before (Dallas Observer, Jan. 2026).
The current one-way paratransit fare is $3.50, with a $1.00 feeder fare. In mid-2025, DART proposed raising the fare to $6 and restricting the service area to ADA minimums as part of budget cuts related to GMP commitments. The proposal drew significant public opposition — nearly 200 people signed up to speak at a July 2025 board hearing that lasted nearly six hours (Dallas Observer, Jun. 23 & Aug. 19, 2025). DART subsequently shelved the paratransit fare and service area changes (Dallas Observer, Aug. 19, 2025).
What Happens if a City Votes to Withdraw
The withdrawal process is governed by Chapter 452 of the Texas Transportation Code. Under §452.656(b), if voters approve withdrawal, the authority "ceases in the unit of election on the day after the date of the canvass of the election." Section 452.657(a)(1) requires the authority to "cease providing transportation services in the withdrawn unit of election" — including paratransit. This is a statutory requirement, not a DART policy choice. DART VP of Service Planning Rob Smith confirmed: "DART is required to cease all services to that jurisdiction the day after the votes are canvassed" (KERA News, Jan. 14, 2026).
Paratransit trips that originate in, end in, or pass through a withdrawn city would be discontinued — not just rides within that city but cross-city trips as well (Community Impact, Jan. 14, 2026).
What Cities Have Proposed as Alternatives
Several cities have stated they would provide paratransit replacement independently. Plano created the Collin County Connects Committee (C4) to evaluate alternatives. City officials earmarked $4 million for a six-month pilot with Via — covering both microtransit and federally required paratransit within a 1.5-mile radius of city limits — with an option to renew annually at $8 million (Dallas Observer, Feb. 2026). Plano's director of government relations stated that paratransit continuity is a top staff priority (Community Impact, Feb. 12, 2026).
University Park Councilmember Mark Philbin estimated the city could fund paratransit independently for approximately $112,000 per year, based on 2024 ride volumes (Dallas Observer, Jan. 2026). Plano City Councilmember Steve Lavine stated the C4 committee would develop an intra-city program including senior transit and paratransit (D Magazine, Dec. 10, 2025).
However, the C4 committee could not reach consensus — half its members declined to rank vendors, citing insufficient cost data and unresolved questions about coverage. At least one committee member publicly stated he was not convinced the proposed budget would ensure continuity of service (Community Impact, Dec. 22, 2025). A key unresolved question is cross-city paratransit: a Plano resident who currently rides paratransit to a medical appointment in Dallas would lose that trip under withdrawal, and no city has detailed how cross-jurisdictional service would be maintained.
Sources: KERA News, Texas Tribune, D Magazine, Bond Buyer, DART History, Dallas Observer, NBC DFW, Governing.com
Sources & References
Every factual claim on this site is sourced to mainstream media, official government documents, or primary agency data. No Wikipedia references are used. URLs are provided for independent verification.
Per-city cost vs. service data. The EY FY2023 Cost Allocation Report (Table 1) has been verified against the original document, available on addisontx.gov. Media reporting is consistent with the source data:
Note on sourcing standards: This site uses only mainstream media outlets (Texas Tribune, KERA/NPR, CBS Texas, WFAA, NBC DFW, Dallas Observer, Governing.com, GovTech, Bond Buyer, Denton Record-Chronicle, People Newspapers, Railway Age, CultureMap Dallas, Irving Weekly, Community Impact), official government publications (City of Irving, Town of Highland Park, Town of Flower Mound, Town of Addison, NCTCOG), primary agency data (DART board presentations, DART press releases, DART Facts page, UNT Economic Research Group study), academic reference works (Texas State Historical Association Handbook of Texas), and credit rating agency reports (Moody's, S&P, Fitch, KBRA as cited in Bond Buyer). No Wikipedia references are used. All URLs were verified as of February 25, 2026.
Corrections & Feedback
Accuracy is the primary goal of this resource. If you believe any fact presented here is incorrect or incomplete, we welcome corrections. To be considered, feedback must meet the following standards:
1. Cite a verifiable source. Corrections must reference a specific mainstream media article, official government document, agency report, or public record — with a URL or document identifier. Sources must be independently verifiable by any reader.
2. Acceptable sources include: Major newspapers and wire services, local broadcast news (KERA, CBS Texas, WFAA, NBC DFW), established trade/policy publications (Governing.com, GovTech, Bond Buyer, Railway Age, Mass Transit Magazine, Community Impact), official government websites and press releases, agency board presentations and public filings, and peer-reviewed research.
3. Not accepted as sources: Wikipedia, social media posts, personal blogs, anonymous forums, advocacy group publications (from either side of the debate), opinion columns or editorials (unless clearly labeled as such), and unsourced claims.
4. Scope of corrections. We will correct factual errors, update outdated figures, add missing context that materially changes the meaning of a claim, and note where sourced information has been disputed by a credible authority. We do not publish opinions, testimonials, or advocacy content from any party.
This site is not affiliated with DART, any member city government, any advocacy organization, or any political campaign. It does not advocate for or against withdrawal from DART. Its purpose is to compile publicly reported facts in one place so that residents can make informed decisions.