A bill to consolidate transit service across the seven-county metro region has advanced within the Minnesota House of Representatives, leaving local public transportation advocates worried about what the future might hold.

Introduced on March 9, House File 4111 would allow Metro Transit to swallow up four suburban transit operations on July 1, 2027.

SouthWest Transit — which serves riders across Chanhassen, Chaska, Carver, Victoria and Eden Prairie — is one of the independent transit organizations that would be impacted by the proposal.

At the House Transportation Finance and Policy Committee meeting March 11, legislators heard testimony from area leaders and residents who strongly oppose the consolidation plan. In the end, however, the committee advanced HF-4111 to the House Ways and Means Committee for further consideration.

The bill, introduced by Rep. Jon Koznick (R-Lakeville), is at the center of an intense lobbying effort by SouthWest Transit supporters and others. Community leaders across the southwest metro are hoping to convince legislators that creating one massive transit organization is not in the best interest of riders.

At the Wednesday committee meeting, Rep. Koznick told the crowd that the consolidation plan is the logical outgrowth of a recent Metropolitan Council report that details the high cost of public transit along some suburban routes. According to the report, subsidies that help maintain certain routes can reach between $23.83 and $110.30 per rider.

Rep. Koznick claims that the consolidation plan would allow for more scrutiny of such suburban transit routes and result in significant savings to taxpayers. According to the fiscal notes attached to the bill, the consolidation plan would save the state about $24 million in annual operating costs and about $25 in one-time savings.

“This proposal makes sense for efficiency and fiscal and rider service reasons,” he told the committee. “Good routes that are used in these suburban areas will continue to be preserved. The high-subsidy routes should be and will be terminated. Nobody should be defending the horrible high-subsidy routes and mismanagement.”

Rep. Koznick called the current opt-out model, which has allowed suburban transit providers to operate separate from Metro Transit, outdated and inefficient.

“It limits our ability to deliver cost-effective service across the entire metro region,” he said.

He noted that the four suburban providers account for just 4% of total ridership across the metro area, yet each of the organizations maintain separate, expensive administrative teams.

“Consolidation could save millions annually in unnecessary administrative redundancy alone,” he said. “This will allow us to have the same service be delivered throughout these communities at significantly less cost.”

Rep. Koznick also highlighted the significant costs associated with micro transportation services offered by suburban providers. SouthWest Prime — which offers door-to-door public transportation for residents needing rides for medical appointments, grocery shopping, emergencies and more — is one example of the excessive cost of suburban transit, he noted.

According to Koznick, the state subsidy for SouthWest Prime rides reportedly is $54.91 per passenger. He noted that per-passenger cost is higher than Metro Mobility’s cost to transport someone.

The bill as proposed would designate Metro Transit, under the direction of the Metropolitan Council, as exclusive transit operator in the Twin Cities, with the exception of existing transit services at the University of Minnesota.

More than a dozen people testified against the bill during the committee meeting.

According to Tom Workman, Carver County Board chair, SouthWest Transit was formed 40 years ago to provide public transportation options that weren’t available in the region before. It has since grown into a critical link for residents traveling to work, school, medical appointments and airport terminals.

“I’m here today to express my steadfast support for SouthWest Transit and our transit system that has stood the test of time for 40 years,” he testified.

He said the southwest metro chose to create its own transit service to ensure that local residents had access to reliable and excellent transit options.

As Carver County continues to grow, Workman said the area is going to need more transit options rather than fewer.

“Less transit is what we are going to get if this bill passes,” he said. “I know this because there is no way you can save money on transit without cutting service.”

Erik Hansen, chief executive officer for SouthWest Transit, echoed those sentiments, adding that he doesn’t think consolidation will actually lead to taxpayer savings.

Hansen suggested that overall funding will remain the same — a combination of motor vehicle sales taxes and regional sales taxes specifically earmarked for transit.

“The size of the pie will be the same,” he said. “This legislation simply means that Met Council’s piece would now be the entire pie. Make no mistake, this bill is really just a tax redistribution scheme disguised as a cost-saving measure.”

Hansen said its easy to “cherry pick” data to boost one’s argument about whether Metro Transit or the suburban operators are more efficient. He noted that it costs Metro Transit $15 per person to send riders downtown. It costs SouthWest Transit $12.07 per rider to transport commuters there.

Hansen admitted that micro transit service is more expensive in the suburbs because trips are longer between stops and population density is less, but door-to-door service is critical for many, he added.

He asked legislators to vote down the proposed bill and instead work with suburban providers to improve efficiency.

Chaska City Council member McKayla Hatfield, who chairs the SouthWest Transit Commission, testified that she “strongly” opposes the consolidation effort. She said the transit provider has worked hard to become an award-winning organization that meets the needs of local residents and operates efficiently.
“We are the 14th fastest growing agency in the country,” she reported. “That did not happen by accident. It happened because local providers can move quickly, adapt service and meet the needs of the communities we serve. This proposal is a step backwards. Southwest Transit is not a problem that needs to be fixed. What this would do is absorb a high-performing local provider into a much larger system with less local control, less flexibility and less accountability.”

Chaska Mayor Taylor Hubbard asked the committee to support the current transit system, including the regional operations.

“Transit is not a luxury, it is a lifeline,” she said. “It is essential infrastructure that supports our workforce, our economy and our community’s quality of life.”

Jerry McDonald, a Chanhassen City Council member, agreed. He testified that local transit options are key to a stronger community.

“It’s not about dollars, it’s about service,” he said. “What you should be looking at is … how do you fund a transit service so that we can serve our communities better.”

Chanhassen Council member Josh Kimber said the separate suburban transit operators are more responsive to community needs and do a better job overall.

“Under this proposal, these decisions would shift to the Metropolitan Council, placing them further away from our residents and the communities most affected,” he said.

In addition, Kimber said, the suburban providers help connect residents in distant communities and rural areas to the broader transit network, meeting the needs of riders beyond the metro.

As an example, Carver City Council member Erik Perschmann testified that his community sits outside the official Metro Transit District and relies on SouthWest transit to provide service to its residents. He said that Carver will likely double in size over the next 10 years — to a population of about 14,000 — and will need expanded transit options to meet the needs of all.

Of particular importance is SouthWest Prime, which picks up riders throughout Carver.

“We had 3,000 micro-transit rides last year just in the city of Carver,” he said. “It’s an important service. We don’t want to see that go away. Without that partnership with a regional company like SouthWest Transit, a city like mine loses our ability to service all of our residents.”
Several customers also testified about the critical service offered by SouthWest Transit.

Carol Saefke said she doesn’t drive due to a disability. She uses SouthWest Prime for trips to the doctor, gym and more.

“SouthWest Transit is a necessity for me to live a normal life,” she said.
Emma Dufresne, a University of Minnesota student, uses SouthWest Transit to get to work and school.

“I greatly appreciate that SouthWest sees the need in the community to service this route,” she testified. “I fear that this bill would take that away, so please oppose this bill.”

Marie Snodgrass of Chaska said she feels it’s important to keep local control of the transit system.

She has used the bus to commute to work in the past, and now regularly uses the airport shuttle and activity buses that bring riders to the State Fair, Renaissance Festival, sporting events and more.

“It works great,” she said. “It saves a lot of people from needing a car. Please vote no for this consolidation.”

Cindy Lee of Jordan testified that she rode the SouthWest bus to a job in downtown Minneapolis for 30 years.

“Our rides were safe, comfortable, and riders watched out for each other,” she said. “I called my fellow riders my bus buddies. I would not want to see that level of service change with any kind of merger.”

As testimony wrapped up, legislators chimed in and asked several questions.

Rep. Brad Tabke (DFL-Shakopee) said he appreciated the passion everyone in the room displayed for public transit. He noted that the savings the consolidated operation would generate could help Metro Transit expand service throughout the Twin Cities.

Rep. Lucy Rehm (DFL-Chanhassen) spoke in opposition to HF-4111.

“I’m very concerned about a plan to dismantle something that we’ve had in our community for years,” she said. “I’ve received hundreds of emails from my constituents. In the suburbs and exurbs, we have different needs. I don’t think Metro Transit can be as nimble and adapt to what we need out here. I think this bill warrants a lot more discussion, and I will not be supporting it.”
At the meeting’s conclusion, Rep. Koznick defended the work behind HF-4111.

“I know that change is difficult,” he said. “But as you know, this is a data-driven proposal … that was not taken lightly. I know that taxpayers are watching, and they expect better from us.”

The motion to refer the legislation to the Ways and Means Committee was adopted on a voice vote, with a couple members voting no.

The companion bill in the Minnesota Senate is SF-4326 and has been referred to the Transportation Committee for consideration.