Fitchburg staff presented a line-by-line summary of the transit service agreement with Madison’s Metro Transit on May 14, and commissioners used the session to press for clearer contract language on cost allocation, data reporting and partner protections.
Ross, staff lead, told the commission the 2024 agreement governs service and replaces the prior contract. Key points he highlighted included obligations for Madison to provide ADA-compliant paratransit within three-quarters of a mile of day routes, partner obligations for installing and maintaining bus stops, and an audited-share formula that allocates costs based on a partner’s bus hours and paratransit miles divided by the system total. Ross said the contract excludes debt service from expenses and described an automatic-adjustment mechanism that smooths partner payments year to year.
Commissioners asked whether operating expenses in the audited-share calculation should include items such as excess maintenance on new buses, litigation costs or depreciation. Ross responded that operating expenses generally capture maintenance, staff and fuel but that capital projects and debt service sit in separate buckets; commissioners asked staff to seek a clearer definition in negotiations. Members also pressed for better, more timely ridership and financial reporting than historically provided, noting recent improvements tied to new fare systems.
On governance and notice, commissioners warned against sudden service reductions like past changes to the D1 route and asked for reciprocal notice provisions that bind Metro as well as partners. They discussed alternatives to the current hours-based payment model — including paying by boardings at the stop — but concluded such a change could shift incentives and risk predictability for Madison’s budgeting.
Staff also discussed the contract’s renewal and termination mechanics: the term runs through Dec. 31, 2026, auto-renewed for five years on Aug. 1, 2025, and requires 180 days’ notice for partner termination (60 days if Metro assigns service to another operator). Commissioners asked staff to pursue clearer language about which expenses count in audited share, faster/more granular reporting, and reciprocal notice or contractual protections for partners.
The commission did not take a final vote but directed staff to compile recommended contract edits and reporting requirements for future negotiation.