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 25, 2026:
Plano$0.41/dollar
CANCELLED ELECTION
Irving$1.21/dollar
COUNCIL MEETS FEB. 26
Addison$0.58/dollar
PROCEEDING TO MAY 2 VOTE
Farmers Branch$0.86/dollar
CANCELLED ELECTION
Highland Park$0.30/dollar
STATEMENT PENDING
University Park$0.28/dollar
PROCEEDING TO MAY 2 VOTE
The Other Seven Member Cities
DART has 13 member cities. The six above called withdrawal elections. The remaining seven — Dallas, Richardson, Garland, Carrollton, Rowlett, Cockrell Hill, and Glenn Heights — did not call elections. All are expected to accept the GMP deal.
The EY FY2023 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 — including Dallas, Irving, and Garland — receive equal or greater value than they contribute. Dallas alone puts in 48% of total funding and receives 65% of the expense allocation (KERA News, Jul. 2024).
Richardson is notable as a donor city that chose not to call an election. The Richardson City Council approved the GMP interlocal agreements on Feb. 24, 2026, and will receive an estimated $26.12 million over six years. Richardson officials have publicly defended DART, with council members stating they do not support calls to cut funding (Community Impact, Feb. 24, 2026; KERA News, Jul. 2024).
Note: Return-per-dollar figures are from the EY FY2023 cost allocation report, which measures where DART spends money — not where riders live. Because 75% of DART trips cross city lines, these ratios understate the value suburban residents receive. See City Profiles for fuller context including ridership data.
Key Context
DART Annual Revenue
$937.5M projected FY2026
Outstanding Debt
$3.86B senior lien bonds
Planned New Debt
$2.5B over six years
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
Note on DART's debt: $3.86 billion in outstanding bonds is significant, but DART maintains investment-grade credit ratings — Aa2 (Moody's), AA+ (S&P), AAA (KBRA), and AA (Fitch) as of its most recent 2021 issuance. Debt service coverage has exceeded 300% annually since 2016. DART's 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. (Bond Buyer, Jan. 2026; rating agency reports)
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.
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)
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; Garland officials described this as an ultimatum; Carrollton's mayor called it a "poison pill" (Dallas Express, Jul. 23, 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.
Sources: Community Impact (Jan. 29, 2026), Dallas Express (Jul. 23 & Nov. 5, 2025 & Feb. 24, 2026), KERA News (Feb. 23, 2026), DART press release (dart.org, Feb. 20, 2026), Governing.com (Nov. 10, 2025)
A Note on the Process
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. 24 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).
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.
Sources: KERA News (Feb. 23 & Feb. 25, 2026), Community Impact (Feb. 23, 2026), Texas Tribune (Feb. 24, 2026)
What Happens to the Sales Tax After Withdrawal
DART is funded by a 1-cent 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-cent sales tax until its share of DART's outstanding debt — incurred while the city was a member — is fully paid off. DART claims University Park owes $91.7 million in debt obligations, with an additional $22.55 million projected over the next six years (KERA News, Jan. 2026). The debt payoff timeline varies by city and depends on outstanding bond maturities.
Services stop; tax payments do not. DART has stated that transit services — including buses, rail access, and paratransit — would cease the day after votes are canvassed. However, the city's sales tax would continue flowing to DART for debt service. 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-cent 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).
What cities say they would do with the money. 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: Bond Buyer (Jan. 22, 2026), Governing.com (Nov. 10 & Dec. 2025), KERA News (Jan. 14, 2026), Town of Addison (coatx.org), Texas Transportation Code Chapter 452
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.
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
• Board restructuring addresses longstanding governance imbalance
• Preserves regional transit connectivity during growth period
• Plano Mayor: "Meaningful change" and "real progress"
• 2026 FIFA World Cup requires functional regional transit
Critics Say
• Returns only ~6% of what cities pay in over the six-year deal period
• Cities forfeit withdrawal leverage until 2032
• Prohibits legislative efforts to reduce DART's sales tax
• No service guarantees, accountability metrics, or debt cap
• Transit advocates: "Decided without rider input"
Financial Fine Print
• GMP payments for FY2028–2031 are not included in DART's own 20-year financial plan
• Revenue projections assume 3.8% annual sales tax growth
• 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).
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.
Sources: Bond Buyer (Nov. 2025, Jan. 22, 2026 & Feb. 24, 2026)
Transit Alternatives: What's Been Tried
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 103% of 2019 numbers as of December 2024 — while bus and rail ridership remain below (DART FY2025 Q1 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. DART officials have stated that if voters approve withdrawal, services in that city would cease the day after votes are canvassed — including paratransit. DART VP of Service Planning Rob Smith: "Should voters in any city calling a withdrawal election choose to leave, DART is required to cease all services to that jurisdiction the day after the votes are canvassed" (KERA News, Jan. 14, 2026). DART's own press release states: "services would cease immediately upon canvassing of the vote, and as early as May 3, 2026" (dart.org, Feb. 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).
On cost alone, these numbers suggest cities could fund paratransit locally for far less than their current DART contributions. Plano pays DART $131 million per year; a Via contract covering microtransit and paratransit would run roughly $8 million. University Park pays DART $6.4 million; its paratransit estimate is $112,000.
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 (Jan. 14, Jul. 7, 2025 & Feb. 12, 23, 2026), Dallas Observer (Jun. 23, Aug. 19, 2025 & Jan. 9, Feb. 2026), CBS Texas (Jul. 22, 2025), Community Impact (Jan. 14, Dec. 22, 2025 & Feb. 12, 2026), D Magazine (Dec. 10, 2025), WFAA (Jul. 2025), DART Paratransit Services (dart.org), DART FY2025 Q1 Ridership Report
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, 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.