A task force empaneled to look at strategies for making transit service in the D.C. region sustainable long-term might not, in the end, deliver specific recommendations on a funding mechanism.
“It is, at this time, I think, still up in the air,” Nick Donohue, a staff facilitator for the DMV Moves task force, told the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission (NVTC) Board of Directors last Thursday (April 3).
The task force was created last year by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (COG) and Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) to develop a region-wide vision for the future of transit and, crucially, identify possible dedicated funding options, particularly for Metro.
Donohue, a principal at Capitol Transportation Consulting who served as Virginia’s deputy secretary of transportation for eight years, assured the NVTC board that DMV Moves will provide guidance to local and state leaders, if not actual funding recommendations, before wrapping up work in the coming months.
“I think we will be providing a host of information that would be available to folks as they make some of those decisions,” Donohue said.
Some regional leaders privately might prefer that specific proposals come out of the DMV Moves process, providing political cover against the likelihood of higher taxes and fees on their constituents.
But Falls Church City Council member David Snyder, who chairs the NVTC board, seemed content to live without specific recommendations from the panel.
“Virginia needs to come up with our own revenue solutions,” he said.
The DMV Moves task force already has vetted a range of funding options. A December report provided revenue estimates on a host of possibilities, ranging from property and sales tax increases to higher vehicle-related taxes and fees.
A subcommittee created by the Virginia General Assembly also recommended options last year for the state to fund its share of Metro and local transit systems. Suggestions included tax revenue and expanded I-66 tolling hours.
Some possibilities, such as a regional income tax — estimated to bring in $1.55 billion its first year — are likely to be political nonstarters in Virginia, no matter the political composition in Richmond next year.
The next DMV Moves meeting is set for May 16. Any decision then would be forward to COG and WMATA for discussion in June.
“We are at the point … where the rubber is going to meet the road,” Donohue said.
An estimate presented to the task force by staff in March pegged the baseline additional annual cost necessary to meet Metro’s needs going forward at $500 million to $600 million per year. More funding would need to be found to support Virginia Railway Express (VRE) and local bus systems, and any expansion of current services.
The Virginia-focused Senate Joint Resolution 28 subcommittee hasn’t met yet in 2025 but “we’re gearing up,” according to Sen. Adam Ebbin (D-39), who leads the committee.
An April 22 meeting will serve as a refresher on existing funding sources and challenges, while also offering a “high-level” look at how Virginia’s state and local governments might meet their obligations for regional transit costs, he said.
The legislative panel expects to hold three more meetings this year before submitting a final report, Ebbin said. Its authority extends to looking at Metro, VRE and local transit systems in Northern Virginia, such as Fairfax Connector and Fairfax City’s CUE bus.
Pushback continues on bus system consolidation
Objections from local leaders to a recent suggestion that their bus systems be consolidated into a broader regional network continue to grow.
At the April 3 NVTC meeting, Alexandria City Council member Canek Aguirre added his criticism of the proposal, which was floated at a DMV Moves meeting on March 24 by Virginia Senate Majority Leader Scott Surovell (D-34).
Local bus systems like Alexandria’s DASH and Fairfax Connector “meet our local needs,” Aguirre said, saying the consolidation idea should be off the table entirely.
“DMV Moves has much higher priorities to focus on,” he said. “Do we really need to take time to show up and have this discussion? I hope not.”
At last month’s DMV Moves meeting, Surovell argued that consolidating bus systems — either by subsuming them into Metrobus or creating a new regional service — was an obvious way to reduce transit costs. However, Fairfax County Board of Supervisors Chairman Jeff McKay and Arlington County Board member Matt de Ferranti, among others, were dubious.
Based on that discussion, Donohue told the NVTC board that bus consolidation seems unlikely, but localities could still collaborate through a regional call center or joint procurement.
“We have to identify what the hurdles are,” he said, adding that localities must “work together collaboratively and try and find solutions.”
That seemed a reasonable way forward to Paul Smedberg, a member of the WMATA board of directors representing Virginia.
With 13 different bus systems across the region, “people need to come to the table and be open to opportunities,” Smedberg said.
‘Microtransit’ seen as opportunity, but not panacea
Last week’s NVTC meeting also included an overview of the concept of “microtransit,” which is being embraced by a number of localities and considered in Fairfax County.
“There are advantages and disadvantages” to using smaller-scale microtransit as an alternative traditional bus service, according to NVTC analyst Xavier Harmony.
“You really need to think about what your goals are, what purpose you are trying to achieve,” Harmony said.
In Northern Virginia, microtransit service is currently operational in Manassas Park and the Quantico-Dumfries-Triangle corridor, operated by OmniRide.
Arlington and Loudoun counties are planning microtransit pilots, and there are “very preliminary” discussions about a system in Fairfax County, Harmony said.
Microtransit systems use vans or sometimes even smaller vehicles to pick up riders, either at their locations or at designated nearby streets. The vehicles are typically driven by professional staff, but autonomous vehicles have been tested in some areas, including a recent pilot program in Merrifield.
Harmony said jurisdictions considering microtransit need to be aware that it’s not always cheaper than buses.
“The answer is not so simple,” he said, adding that the failure rate for microtransit service nationally is about 25% within the first two years and 40% within three years.
Braddock District Supervisor James Walkinshaw wondered if setting up a microtransit system in Fairfax County would be the transportation management equivalent of reinventing the wheel.
Localities already partner with local taxi companies, providing vouchers for those who need to get from point to point on a frequent basis, he said.
“At what point does it make more sense … to provide a voucher?” Walkinshaw asked. “Why would you stand up [a new program] on your own?”
Harmony suggested localities should be clear about their goals before exploring microtransit. While there were several systems operating across Virginia, “it’s really difficult to compare them” because they’re trying to achieve different goals, he said.
Arlington’s planned microtransit initiative could give Fairfax County officials some insight to the pluses and minuses after it begins later in the year.
On-demand service will be provided to the East Falls Church and Ballston Metro stations, VHC Health, and schools, libraries and community centers located close to the primary service area, which is bounded by N. Glebe Road to the east, Langston Blvd to the south and the county line to the north and west
A consultant has recommended using vans, which would be easier to maneuver in residential neighborhoods.
By offering on-demand service, rather than running fixed routes like Arlington Transit and Metrobus, the pilot is intended to provide flexibility and bridge gaps in the county’s existing transit networks. Arlington anticipates launching the pilot this fall and operating it for at least a year before deciding whether to continue or expand the service.
