The following is an original production of AZPM News.

Coming up today on The Press Room, it was the vote that affects everyone in Pima County, RTA Next.

The people have now spoken.

We have the head of the RTA and a distinguished panel of journalists to talk about what Tuesday's decision means moving forward for the next 20 years.

I'm David Lee and The Press Room starts now.

[Music] Welcome to The Press Room.

I'm AZPM News Director David Lee and joining us today we have the head of the RTA Mike Ortega.

We have Tim Steller from the Arizona Daily Star.

We have Jim Nintzel from Tucson Sentinel and AZPM's, Nick Rommel.

And Mike, let's start it off with you.

It's been a long campaign to lay out the plan for RTA Next.

There were points made on both sides of the debate that needed to be considered.

Perhaps maybe the loudest was, you know, all of the unfinished projects that happened to the first RTA plan.

In the end though, voters went ahead and approved both propositions.

How do you now work out the priorities in terms of what projects to go with first and then implementing the new ones?

Sure.

Thank you, David.

So I think first of all there's a plan already in place which was approved by the voters.

Part of the effort was to identify which period the various projects would be delivered or constructed.

And the key there is to start construction during those periods.

So when you look at the plan as a whole, that first period is going to be pretty busy because we're taking all of the RTA 1 projects as well as the new RTA Next projects and putting them in the mix.

So there will be a lot of activity within that first period.

And that's just a function of the logistics of actually organizing ourselves to get on that and start delivering those projects.

-Tim, I know you went back and forth personally on this vote.

You wrote a column on this a little bit earlier.

How do you think the public overall dealt with it?

I know you struggled with it.

How do you think they came to their conclusion?

-I thought it was a really interesting political question in that it didn't break evenly along our normally polarized lines.

There were democratic socialists who were opposed to it and republicans who were opposed to it.

I think in the end, in any group you would find people who were for and against it.

In the end, I think one thing that really hurt the opposition was that they did not have a plan, an alternative plan.

I'm not sure it was their duty to have one, but here in this city, in this metro area, we know that our roads are a problem, that our transportation system is a problem, and we were presented with a yes or no alternative on a plan.

That being the case, and then there being a $1.4 million campaign in favor of this, a lot of people, especially in the middle, I would guess, politically decided to go ahead, go with it.

Jim, a 30% turnout for the vote in this election, which was maybe a little unusual, but high, which is nice.

Some of it had to do with some of the money that went towards the whole application of, "Do you vote yay or nay?"

Do you think that helped to increase the amount of folks that came out to vote?

The spending?

I think that absolutely people were made aware that there was an election underway with the advertising on TV and the direct mail and things like that.

There was definitely an effort to tell people, because I think when they started out, I think someone, they did a little peek behind the curtain yesterday with a press conference with some of the folks who were involved with the campaign, and they talked about how an extraordinarily small number were aware that there was going to be an election way back in August when they started polling this last year.

Clearly, they were able to let people know with that funding.

I think the fact that there wasn't a strong opposition campaign against it in terms of spending and advertising probably made a big difference, because when you look at Tucson voters, they've been pretty positive about approving propositions regarding transportation and public safety.

It was only until Prop 414 really came up with the programs for the homeless and for the public safety last year that you saw voters say, "No, they don't want to move forward with something like that."

In that case, you had the business community spending pretty heavily against it.

I think as long as there's a robust campaign in favor of things, people are generally supportive of spending on roads and public safety in this community.

-Nick, you were out there on election day interviewing a lot of folks, making their vote and finally dropping off.

What was the sense from folks who were voting at that time that you saw from them?

-It was actually remarkable, of the people I talked to, they werere exactly split down the middle in terms of supporting the plan or not, so I had really no read on how the votes would pan out that day.

Obviously, that wasn't exactly what happened, so maybe the people voting in downtown Tucson on the last day of the election were slightly skewed towards no compared to the county at large.

People all had very unique takes on the plan.

Clearly, people had done their reading.

Some people had, just based on what they were saying, it was clear they had engaged with either the yes advertising or the things that the 'No RTA Next' groups were putting out, but some people just looked at the document and said yes, and other people said they looked at the document and said, "Ah, too many suburban things.

I'm voting no."

There was definitely a high level of interest and I spent probably an hour and a half total at the ballot drop box and people were coming and going the entire time.

Mike, a huge portion of the community voted for this.

It's now here, but there were a lot of folks who didn't.

I don't know how you start to get that factored into what's moving forward.

I know we had talked about the Citizens Advisory Committee.

How much more input do you think they'll have as you take this moving forward?

Well, I think the folks that did not vote for it, at least those that we heard from, gave us a roadmap.

They gave us a roadmap for the concerns that the community had with the plan, but also with some of the other pieces, the completion of RTA 1, making sure accountability was clear.

In my mind, the conversation now is as we move forward, how do we address some of those concerns?

Because I think that they're fair and I think that as an organization moving forward with the mandate of the voter, that we need to also incorporate some of those concerns.

I think that's a function of the processes, the systems, and memorializing and codifying them so that they are there the entirety of the 20 years.

-Jim, the plan is here, Mike is here.

What are some of the questions maybe you have?

One for Mike that comes out of the top of your mind as we move forward now?

-You mentioned that the projects from the first plan are in that first five years, as well as some of the projects from the new plan.

Is it going to be a challenge to get all those different projects underway within that first five years?

-Absolutely.

There's absolutely a challenge, but the reality is if we organize ourselves in a way to deliver them with the RTA facilitating that delivery, it gives us an opportunity to be successful.

The board's already given me direction to in fact take on more of a leadership role in those delivery conversations.

Instead of just handing over a project to one of the jurisdictional partners, the RTA will actually be in a leadership role to facilitate initially and then ultimately to deliver if we need to step in and help.

-So Grant Road.

We've been waiting 20 years for Grant Road to get done.

We're looking at at least launching that project.

-So I'll use that as an example, Jim, because I think that the last segment, which was on the RTA Next ballot, was one of the projects, I believe it was Project Six, that project has already begun with the RTA engaged in a way that wasn't previously accomplished.

So we are out there helping and assisting with right-of-way acquisition, talking to the property owners and business owners to facilitate that, which is something we've never done.

So I can already demonstrate to you that it is moving.

It's not business as usual.

-And with Grant, I guess the challenge is all that working with and $70 million, I think, from RTA and $70 million from the city and the city has its half.

-So that, I believe, the $70 million is part of the bus rapid transit.

There was a conversatio around that.

But the dollars are there both from the regional funds and the new funds, the tax, basically.

And the city's dollars are there because most of those that are listed in that column, if you will, the non-RTA dollars are impact fees.

And so those are dollars they've either collected or will collect.

Tim, same question for you, for Mike.

-Well, I mean, I've noticed and I've written about this repeatedly through the years that, you know, in the last five, you know, starting maybe five years ago, the city of Tucson was getting angrier and angrier about their treatment within RTA.

A lot of it had to do with feeling animosity from the previous director or run over by the majority that was suburban districts that were, or jurisdictions that were voting sometimes against the city's interests.

What I'm getting at actually may not be what you're thinking.

You've come in, you've been a more calming influence.

Now you've won an election along with the rest of the campaign.

So how long can we expect you to be around to guide this new RTA?

-That wasn't where you started, Tim.

I know.

I'm just curious about that.

-Yeah, took a quick right turn there.

-I appreciate that.

And that's a fair question and I have been asked that many times when I've been out chatting with folks.

So the commitment that I've made to the board is that I will help in establishing the systems that will carry this program forward.

I can't give you an exact time frame because we are totally changing the way we approach this.

A facilitation role versus a subordinate role or a secondary role is very different and it requires different chemistry within the teams, not just the team at the RTA, but also the team at the various jurisdictions.

So with that, what I've committed to the board is I'm here to help.

I'm here to stay as long as I need to, to make sure that we can confidently show and demonstrate through our quarterly analysis that we have a great trajectory throughout the remainder of the program.

-So what I'm hearing from you is it sounds like we're talking about maybe a year or two, you know, sometime in that time frame to get the new thing established.

Am I thinking in the right time frame?

-I would say to you, whatever it takes within reason, obviously I need to talk to my family and particularly my wife.

Yeah, and you've got golf to play, right?

-Yeah, I don't play golf, but I do a lot of woodworking.

-Sorry.

But I do own clubs, if that counts.

But I think that the key is really establishing and memorializing the relationship for how we move the entirety of the program, all partners, moving it forward.

And Nick, from your perspective, some of the folks that maybe you reported on in prior, maybe there's a question that you have.

-Yeah, I did some recent reporting looking back on the kind of 11th hour dealmaking that went into the plan and some of the things that were added very late.

And I've talked to planners who basically said like this is not how, you know, plans at the city level are done.

Usually those are more of like a long process.

So I was just curious on a more personal note, even like having been the Tucson city manager, now stepping into this role where it's more of this kind of like political process to choose how these projects get dealt with.

Just wondering like what your take on the differences there are like making a 400 page city transportation plan versus a two page regional one.

What you know, should people still feel like there is kind of a solid regional approach here or what's your take on the difference there?

-Sure.

Well, I'm disappointed to hear that people would think that this is not a robust plan or that there wasn't a robust process.

I mean, it was a six year process.

And I think that when you look at that process and you start with the citizens and well, actually start with the jurisdictions, the jurisdictions submitting their request for projects.

And then that is vetted through a citizens advisory committee, which is then vetted through the RTA board, which is then vetted back to the public.

I think it's pretty robust opportunity for folks to see that it encapsulates the needs and the diversity of the region.

And I think the reality is if you look at the plan, the diversity of this region is encapsulated in the plan.

So that's a key piece.

And that doesn't happen by somebody making a unilateral decision to dole out money.

It just doesn't happen that way.

It has to include the stakeholders and the folks that really are going to be impacted by those decisions.

And to that point, you mentioned the citizens advisory committee, and I know that there's like this new oversight committe that's kind of being created.

Can you talk a bit more about that?

Is that like a standing committe that's always going to be in place now?

-Sure.

Yes.

So the short answer is yes.

There is a citizens accountability for regional transportation committee, CART committee, which is reconstitute in terms of a new role.

But before I even get into the role, I want to talk about the chemistry of the committee.

One of the concerns, as Tim mentioned earlier, was maybe being outvoted and having power in a way that might not serve some folks.

Well, the committee itself now has four members that are residents of the city of Tucson and one advocate for transit.

That was not the case before.

But now let's talk about the role.

The role is one of review on a quarterly basis, the projections for project delivery and the financials, expenditures and revenues for the entire program.

Not to look back by itself, but really looking at and challenging ourselves to really make sure that that 20 year period we're within that 20 year period, we're able to deliver the program as we've outlined to the voters.

-So Mike, we're going to put you on the spot here.

20 years from now, what do you hope folks look back at this whole process and either appreciate or tweak a little?

Well, 20 years, as we all know, is a long time, right?

And we understand that.

But I think the important piece is delivery of the program and that we as a community are proud of the fact that we delivered the program that was approved by the voters.

I think that's first and foremost.

Now, it's important to think about what happens to the funding structure for transporta investment.

If it doesn't change in the very near term, we may have to come back to the voter and say, look, we've invested, but here is our report card.

Here are all the projects.

Here's all the programs.

Here's all of that investment and how that return on investment really came out to better the quality of life of our entire region.

Not only our business community, but also just our lives as a whole.

And that will be a conversation that I'm hoping will be less contentious, quite frankly, because we'll have a track record and we'll be able to point to it and say, here it is.

Look at this as opposed to having to explain why.

And that will entail constant conversation and communication throughout the 20 years.

How often are we going to see these report cards?

I mean, that's, I guess, one of the big things, right?

People want to know, all right, if we're going to assess this project, how often are we going to be able to check in and really see where we're at?

-Sure.

That's a great question.

We currently are required annually to provide a financial report, a financial audit analysis.

Every five years, there's a performance audit, but those are the, we'll call those the statutory required.

What I've suggested to the board and they've approved is a quarterly.

So every, every three months, three months, there'll be a conversation in public, both at the CART committee that Nick asked about also the technical management committee and the RTA Board, where that view, that analysis of the entirety of the program will be very public.

And there'll be a lot of conversation about that so that the report card, quite frankly, you're looking at every quarter.

Okay.

Mike Ortega, thank you so much for being with us today and good luck.

You got a lot on your plate right now.

Thank you, David.

Thank you everyone.

-When you want news that matters to you, turn to AZPM News, your voice, your news, AZPM News at news.azpm.org.

Classical 90.5 has been on the air for 50 years and we're celebrating all year long.

Join AZPM as we look back on 50 years of classical music in Southern Arizona and all of your favorite classical composers, conductors, and performances.

Keep listening to classical 90.5 on the radio or online at azpm.org slash classical for special programs, interviews, memories, and the music you've loved for 50 years.

Classical 90.5, 50 and fabulous.

-As the war in Iran continues, still a lot of confusion about a possible end date if there's one in sight.

Jim, the war continues.

Americans are really starting to feel it now here with gas prices and other things skyrocketing.

I think the the democracies are looking ahead to the midterms are certainly focusing on affordability.

-Yeah.

And having gas prices rising the way they are is not going to be helpful to Republicans like Juan Ciscomani, who is in a very competitive district and has won his last two elections by only three, less than two actually, percentage points.

So he really will, I think, if this continues and grows more unpopular, you know, the military action becomes something that's not a popular thing with voters, I think Juan's really going to have some challenges there for sure.

-Tim, you recently wrote an interesting column talking a little bit about Congress and quote, declining to try to represent their constituents.

Yeah.

Talk a little bit about that.

-Well, I mean, I think this is the decision to go to war is a massive decision.

I think sometimes we start to take it lightly because we've done it so many times and we haven't experienced war in this country.

So I find that we take it a little bit casually, even though I know we view it as a serious action.

And our Constitution says it's Congress's duty to declare war.

Now that's been worn down by executive actions over the years.

And at this stage, Congress simply needs to be informed about military action within 48 hours.

And then there's other requireme months out.

But my request was that Congress, which has, again, the authority to declare war or not, should debate it, you know, should grapple with our responsibility for getting into war, which inevitably leads to casualties, deaths, innocent victims, and that sort of thing.

-Nick, what's some of the sense you're getting talking with people out reporting and just kind of out in Tucson?

-You know, I think the remarkable thing is how it's not really coming up in conversations.

And I want to go back to something Tim said about just taking this casually.

You know, it's not a popular war, like it's one of our least popular wars in terms of public opinion, but still, like, we're not seeing protests in the streets really beyond a couple smaller ones right after it started.

It's not a huge topic of conversation.

I mean, compare that to the huge protests we saw in downtown Tucson about ICE activity a few weeks ago.

So I think the remarkable thing to me is the way that obviously people feel at the gas pump.

I got gas for the first time since this all started today, and didn't fill up my car because I couldn't bear seeing the numbers run past 35.

But, you know, I just, I think it's remarkable how the military part of it is really not, I mean, unless for military families, I don't think it's a huge conversation.

-Well, that is a question.

I mean, Tucson has a, you know, a very big footprint when it comes to air combat in particular, Davis- Monthan.

And then we also have Raytheon, who also makes several of the missiles here.

For anybody here at the table, how concerned are the local families, you know, about a deployment?

-I mean, I think everyone, you know, there are units around the country are being told to be on alert or what have you.

And so, you know, that obviously raises the concern level.

You know, some people support this and are, you know, happy that we're taking on this regime in Iran.

But separately, there is the Raytheon factor, which is really important in a war carried out this way.

That is, essentially firing missiles from ships.

That's something that Raytheon specializes in making.

And so many, we don't know exactly what was fired at what targets in Iran, but we can presume and we know that some of them were Tomahawk cruise missiles, which are manufactured in Tucson, that they hit various, you know, many, many targets.

Probably although we don't have this confirmed, one of the missiles that are the missile that hit a school in southern Iran was probably a Tomahawk missile and therefore probably made in Tucson.

-Well, we're gonna try to do a pivot here and it's a little abrupt.

But this weekend, Saturday and Sunday Tucson Festival of Books, Selfish Plug, I will be at our AZPM booth on Saturday at one o'clock.

Hope to see many of you and speak with you.

Jim, I know this is my first time at the festival.

I know you and the Sentinel folks are going to be there as well.

What do I need to know about this festival?

-Well, selfish plug, we will have a tent.

The Tucson Sentinel team will.

Come by and say hello to us.

But you need to know that you're not going to be able to see nearly as much as you'd like to because there's so much going on that you have to make tough choices.

You're going to say, oh, I want to see this author, this author, this author, and realize they're all at the same time.

So you definitely want to take a look at that schedule ahead of time and nail down what it is you want to do.

And it is absolutely, kudos to the Arizona Daily Star because this is a remarkable event for our community and it has grown so rapidly since it was launched and is one of the top festivals in the country.

-Yeah, Tim, I know the Arizona Daily Star, one of the co-founders of this with the University of Arizona.

What is it about this event that you're looking forward to this year?

-I mean, I look, it is to me the best weekend of the year every year.

I really, I experience it that way.

It's exciting because it's, people are out there talking and thinking about ideas.

You know, there's, it's not just, you know, there's the nonfiction writers who I tend to deal with as a moderator or sometimes going to watch, but there's also fiction writers, you know, I recall a time not being able to get into some event with my father that was something to do with politics.

And so we said, well, let's go see if we can get in and see T.C.

Boyle, the fiction author across the mall.

So we walked over there and sure enough we were in, we heard him the whole time, you know, so you can make those adjustments too in your plans because there's so much good stuff going on.

And I think it just does Tucson proud.

It shows how lively the world of ideas and thinking is here in Tucson.

Nick, 20 seconds, you get to cover it for AZPM this year.

How are you approachi it?

-I'll be looking for interesting reactions to the talks that people heard and also their takes on the new clear bag policy.

-Oh, boy.

Yeah, that's one that's going to definitely be a talker.

Tim Steller, Jim Nintzel, Nick Rommel, thank you all for being with us today.

And thank you at home, the listener and viewer for watching.

This is The Press Room.

I'm David Lee.

We'll see you next week.