Attachment D - Summary minutes CTC Dec 4.pdf

Attachment D 
CITY OF PHOENIX 
CITIZENS TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 
Agenda Item 7 – Summary Meeting Minutes 
December 4, 2025 
7. CAPEX Light Rail Options
The Commission received a comprehensive presentation on the Capitol Extension 
(CAPEX) and I-10 West Extension light rail projects. Presenters included: 
•
Amber Williamson, Deputy City Manager
•
Markus Coleman, Light Rail Administrator
•
Jessica Mefford-Miller, CEO, Valley Metro
•
Trevor Collon, Chief of Capital Development, Valley Metro
Presentation Overview: 
The presentation included discussion on the significance and history of the light rail 
extensions, route alternatives, financial considerations, community engagement, and 
outlined two options for the Commission’s consideration: 
•
Option 1: Recommend a locally preferred alignment for the CAPEX project and
continue in the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) Capital Investment Grant
(CIG) process.
•
Option 2: Exit the CIG process and reevaluate other high-capacity transit
alternatives for West Phoenix.
Three alignment alternatives were presented, discussed and illustrated for Option 1: 
1. 16th Avenue North
2. 16th Avenue South
3. 7th Avenue North
Each alignment alternative was evaluated through a multifaceted lens to ensure a 
comprehensive understanding of its feasibility and impact. Each evaluation considered 
the projected cost of construction and the availability of funding sources, including local 
and federal contributions. Economic development potential was a key factor, with 
projections estimating the level of investment and tax revenue each alignment could 
generate over time. Environmental review requirements were also assessed, 
particularly the need for either reevaluation or a full restart of the National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process, depending on the alignment chosen. 
Community feedback has also played a significant role, with input gathered through 
public meetings, stakeholder engagement, and over 1,400 submitted feedback forms to 
date. Finally, each alignment was analyzed in terms of its compatibility with the federal 
grant timeline, particularly the need to meet the FTA’s Capital Investment Grant (CIG) 
program deadline of April 2026 to remain eligible for funding. 
The 16th Avenue South alignment was projected to generate the highest economic 
return and had the second strongest community support. 16th Avenue North alignment

Attachment D 
has the most community support of the three options but has the lowest economic 
return. The 7th Avenue option has the least community support with the second highest 
economic return. Presenters emphasized that the CAPEX project is currently in the 
FTA’s CIG pipeline with a “medium-high” rating, making it eligible for federal funding if it 
proceeds on schedule. 
Public Comments: 
Multiple speakers addressed the Commission, all in support of continuing the CAPEX 
project: 
City of Phoenix Councilmember Anna Hernandez (District 7) emphasized the 
importance of fulfilling promises made to voters under the T2050 plan and warned that 
exiting the CIG process could jeopardize future light rail expansions. She noted that 
over $20 million had already been invested in the project and that development interest 
in the corridor was growing. 
Ventura Herrera, Kaitlin Wright, and Michelle McCormick, residents of the Woodland 
Historic Neighborhood, expressed strong support for Option 1 and the 16th Avenue 
South alignment. They cited minimal displacement, better development potential, and 
concerns that reevaluation of other high-capacity transit alternatives would lead to 
indefinite delays or cancellation. They also noted that the north alignment would 
interfere with community events and potentially require the demolition of a building. 
Staff noted that over 1,400 community feedback forms have been submitted so far, with 
63% supporting continuation of the CAPEX project and 37% favoring reevaluation. 
Among alignment preferences, 16th Avenue North was the most favored. 
Commission Discussion and Presenter Responses: 
Commissioner Panaitescu made a motion to recommend Option 1, citing the urgency of 
maintaining eligibility for federal funding and Phoenix’s strong track record in managing 
federal grants. She emphasized that delays could result in lost funding opportunities 
and that the city’s performance history made it a strong candidate for continued federal 
investment. 
Commissioner Douglas seconded the motion and spoke in favor of continuing the 
project, highlighting the long-term benefits of light rail and the importance of connecting 
transit to civic institutions. He noted that while construction can be disruptive, the South-
Central Extension had already proven successful in ridership and economic impact. 
Commissioner Vallo expressed support for the project and the 16th Avenue South 
alignment, referencing her community involvement and familiarity with the area. She 
emphasized the need to move forward without further delay.

Attachment D 
Commissioner Steinmetz asked about previous studies on alternative routes. Mr. 
Coleman clarified that the Indian School corridor was part of a separate federally funded 
alternatives analysis and not directly related to the CAPEX/I-10 West project. However, 
he noted that Council could direct staff to revisit that corridor as part of a broader 
reevaluation under Option 2. 
Commissioner Perez-Pawloski noted her concerns about legislative interference. She 
asked about what might happen if the legislature blocked the project after significant 
investments. Ms. Mefford-Miller responded that while the project currently has a 
favorable “medium-high” rating from the FTA, federal funding is not guaranteed until a 
Full Funding Grant Agreement (FFGA) is executed. Exiting the CIG process would 
forfeit the project’s current rating and require restarting the process from scratch, which 
could delay the project by years and jeopardize future funding. 
Mr. Coleman added that while no federal funds had yet been obligated, the project’s 
inclusion in the FTA CIG pipeline was a significant milestone. He noted it is important for 
the City and Valley Metro to maintain the good working relationship with the FTA that 
has been developed over the years. In addition, exiting the process would require 
notification to FTA Region 9 of the City’s decision to evaluate other options if Option 2 is 
selected. He also confirmed that the T2050 plan was built on the assumption of federal 
participation and that failure to secure it could impact other projects. 
Ms. Mefford-Miller further explained that Phoenix’s history of delivering projects on time 
and on budget strengthens the case for continued funding. She noted that the project’s 
economic development potential and ridership projections were strong, and that the FTA 
had been engaged throughout the planning process. She also provided insight into the 
national funding climate, noting the CIG program remains a priority in the President’s 
and Senate’s budgets with a proposed increase in funding, despite the House proposing 
a decrease in the CIG budget, and noted she is always cautious with federal funding. 
Commissioner Huckins proposed a substitute motion to recommend Option 2, citing the 
need for flexibility and the risk of legislative opposition. Commissioner Perez-Pawloski 
seconded the motion and reiterated concerns about potential state-level barriers. She 
emphasized that reevaluation would not eliminate the project but would allow time to 
reassess a best path forward. 
Vice Chair Princell asked for clarification on the role of the Joint Legislative Budget 
Committee (JLBC) and the Arizona Department of Administration (ADOA). Staff 
confirmed that JLBC must approve station locations within the Capitol Mall area and 
that ADOA has zoning authority in that district, adding complexity to any alignment that 
enters the Capitol core. 
Motions and Votes: 
•
Substitute Motion (Option 2 – Reevaluation):
o
Motion: Commissioner Huckins
o
Second: Commissioner Perez-Pawloski

Attachment D 
o
Vote: 4 Yes – 5 No → Motion failed
•
Original Motion (Option 1 – Continue the CIG Process for the CAPEX Project):
o
Motion: Commissioner Panaitescu
o
Second: Commissioner Douglas
o
Vote: 4 Yes – 5 No → Motion failed
As both motions failed, the Commission did not reach a consensus, and no formal 
recommendation was made to City Council. Staff confirmed that the vote results and 
public feedback would be forwarded to Council for consideration.