KS: With bus system at risk of more cuts, some say KC needs regional way to pay for transit

Could budget cuts mean layoffs and big reductions in bus service provided by Kansas City’s regional public transit agency?

Fearful of that possibility, transit workers, bus riders and advocates for social justice causes rallied in the cold just before noon Wednesday outside the headquarters of the Kansas City Area Transportation Authority as block west of the 18th & Vine Jazz District.

Their two aims: a call for the city government of Kansas City, Missouri, to provide adequate funding to preserve existing bus and paratransit service within the city limits in the short term.

The other was to call on local leaders across the metro area to support creation of a regional tax that might provide a permanent and reliable source of funding to expand a public transportation system that many find wanting.

“We have to be able to start looking at regional funding for multiple years. It’s always been talked about, but nothing’s been done about it,”

Nic Miller, president and business agent of Local 1287 of the Amalgamated Transit Union, told the KCATA Board of Commissioners at their meeting after the rally.

The board and KCATA President and CEO Frank White III don’t disagree. It’s something he continues to work on, White said.

“We’ve got to have a long-term permanent funding model,” he said, adding that it’s not sustainable for the bus system to rely so heavily on funding from Kansas City to keep the operation afloat. Other municipalities in the metro need to kick in more.

But short term, KCATA has little choice but to ask for more support from Kansas City, as the transportation authority doesn’t know whether it will have enough money to continue current service through the rest of 2025.

Local support is key

No cutbacks or layoff plans have been announced. But the KCATA might have to contemplate deep reductions in the coming months, as the revenue coming in now won’t cover future expenses without some kind of boost.

While state and federal money helps keep buses and paratransit service rolling, the bulk of KCATA funding comes from local governments who contract for service.

Board chair Reginald Townsend reminded transit advocates of that in a prepared statement that he read from his chair at the start of the meeting: “It is clear the community desires a robust transit system. Like you, KCATA doesn’t want to make transit cuts. However, KCATA is reliant on funding it receives from contracting partners throughout the region. These contracts have not been finalized yet.”

Johnson County, Wyandotte Country, Independence and several cities have contracts with the KCATA. They pay for the cost of bus and paratransit service in their communities that the transportation authority provides either directly by running buses through them or indirectly with management support.

But rising costs have brought changes. Grandview, Raytown and Gladstone dropped their contracts over the last year and a half after KCATA implemented a policy that forced communities to pay the full amount of what it costs to provide them bus service.

Kansas City officials – two top administrators are now on the KCATA’s 10-member board – had complained that KC was paying more than its fair share by paying for administrative costs that effectively subsidized bus service to the suburbs.

From a political standpoint, that’s important as Kansas City is both the KCATA’s largest customer and the only one with dedicated sources of tax revenue to support that service.

Kansas City under pressure

However, Kansas City has also come in for criticism. Not all of its dedicated transit tax money is spent on public transit, as the Kansas City Council has discretion on how much will go to the KCATA during each city budget year.

No one knows how much that will be for the one that starts May 1, which has some worrying about cutbacks. Mayor Quinton Lucas and Manager Brian Platt won’t transmit their proposed budget until February.

One aim of the rally, Miller said, was to influence those financial decisions before they are announced by putting some heat on the KCATA because the transit union has less pull at City Hall.

“We should be pressuring KCATA to put pressure on the city, because they have the contract with them,” he told The Star a day before the rally. “We have a contract with KCATA, we don’t have a contract with the city, right. So it’s kind of up to us to put pressure on both of them.”

Local 1287 represents more than 500 drivers and other workers at the regional bus system and fears that, unless Kansas City steps up with more funding, a third of its members could lose their jobs. As many as 15 of the 78 routes within the boundaries of Kansas City, Missouri, could be eliminated.

Miller says that’s based on some worst-case scenarios put forward last year, not on any current projections. So it’s hard to know what’s at stake until the city’s budgeting process begins.

Kansas City supports its fixed-route bus service and other transit with revenue collected from two transit sales taxes.

Transit revenue diverted

Almost all of the revenue collected from a 3/8th-cent sales tax that was authorized by voters two decades ago and twice renewed goes to support fixed-route RideKC bus and RideKC Freedom paratransit service provided by the KCATA.

That totaled $41.3 million in the 2024-25 fiscal year that ends April 30, according to budget documents posted on the city’s website. To encourage voters to pass that tax in 2003, city officials promised that the revenue raised would be in addition to the money raised through an existing ½-cent sales tax.

The KCATA was in serious financial trouble at the time. The goal was to prop up and improve the city’s bus system.

But the city gradually reneged on that promise around the time of the Great Recession 15 years ago. It began reducing the amount of money it provides the KCATA from that ½-cent public mass transportation sales tax and diverting it to other purposes. Instead of 95% of those revenues going to the KCATA, it’s now roughly two thirds.

In the current budget, revenue from that tax was estimated to be nearly $46 million. But only $29.6 million of it was earmarked for the KCATA. About $2 million went to help subsidize the city streetcar, which is not run by the KCATA. And the rest went for other purposes. The largest line item was $11 million for “contractural services.”

Assistant City Manager Melissa Kozakiewicz said that contract spending was for street lighting, street improvements, traffic signals and bicycle/pedestrian projects.

A city spokesperson did not respond to questions about one of the larger line items on the current list, identified only as contractual services.

But a few years ago, the city spent more than $22 million in transit tax dollars on the installation of new streetlights. That amount was equal to the amount the KCATA went without to comply with the city’s directive to not charge riders fares.

KCATA officials have never been happy with the arrangement but are reluctant to issue public criticism of city officials for what they see as the misuse of public mass transportation sales tax funds. And with good reason.

After White’s predecessor as KCATA’s top executive, Robbie Makinen, complained about the diversion of revenue for street lights, Platt and Lucas sought his ouster and he was forced to quit. Among his perceived sins was that he sought to get legislation passed in Jefferson City that would have prevented Kansas City from raiding the half-cent sales tax fund for non-public transit uses.

On Wednesday, Miller and White both told commissioners that the KCATA needed to work with the city and not be adversarial in finding a long-term funding solution.

“I’ve been employed with this company for over 24 years,” Miller said. “The entire time that I’ve been here, it’s always been a feud between all of us. Everyone’s always pointing the finger. The company’s not doing this. The union is too heavy. The city’s not supplying this. The board isn’t doing their job right.

“We have to be able to put all that aside. We have to be able to work together …. We have to be able to start looking at regional funding for multiple years. It’s always been talked about, but nothing’s been done about it. We’re quick to point the finger, but we’re not quick to point at solutions.”

A bi-state transit tax was first proposed in the early 2000s. Voters have never been presented with a chance to vote on one.

©2025 The Kansas City Star.
Visit kansascity.com.
Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.