Meet Randall Bryant: The youngest-ever chair of the DART board

Seven days after Randall Bryant was sworn in as the youngest-ever chair of the Dallas Area Rapid Transit board, the city councils of Farmers Branch and Highland Park voted to call a withdrawal election from the transit agency.

A day later? Plano called its own exit election after a unanimous 8-0 decision by its city council. Irving and, most recently, University Park have since called withdrawal elections, threatening a catastrophic loss in funding for the agency as their exit would cut DART’s sales tax revenue by close to a third.

Member cities have been locked in a tense and often standoff-ish fight over DART’s governance structures and funding inequities in recent years. Officials say taxpayers are contributing far more than they’re getting out and haven’t been given a fair voice on DART’s 15-member board, of which the City of Dallas holds seven seats. Legislative efforts supported by suburban member cities over the summer include House Bill 3187, the unsuccessful so-called “DART Killer” bill.

At just 38, Bryant’s new role marks his fifth time serving on a board, commission or committee representing the City of Dallas. He’s also previously served as the chairperson of the Dallas Black Chamber of Commerce and been a member of Dallas Citizens Council and the North Texas Commission. Since 2012, he’s owned and operated Politics United Marketing, a political and policy strategy firm that has managed 75 candidate campaigns, political action committees and referendums at local, state and federal levels.

His call to civic responsibility goes back to his early years in Hamilton Park, where his mother served as the youngest-ever president of the neighborhood civic league — notice a trend? The first time he ever took a train came with the opening of the Red Line and Park Lane Station in June 1996, when he took advantage of free fares to visit the Dallas Zoo and see his grandmother in Oak Cliff. That same grandmother consulted for then-Dallas mayoral candidate Ron Kirk and staffed for the Clinton Administration.

He faces an uphill battle as he and the rest of the DART leadership team race to reach agreements with member cities before March 18, the deadline for municipalities to call off exit votes.

Out of nostalgia, Bryant chose to meet us at Park Lane Station, where his relationship with transit began. With the whistle of a southbound train overhead, here’s what he had to say about the future of the second largest transit agency in the state.

Do you remember your first train ride?

I remember opening day right here. We took the Red Line down to the Dallas Zoo on opening weekend and had the experience. Seeing it from a young age, how impactful it was, living with great-grandparents in their 70s and 80s and being able to use a service like this to alleviate the pressure of them having to drive across town — for me, that was very important.

We just opened the Silver Line two weeks ago, and it was almost the exact same feeling, a fresh experience. The train was completely clean. Every new rider has a new perspective for us, and I think it’s important that we continuously keep up with the cleanliness and the safety and all those components that are very important to the first impressions of the rider’s experience.

When were you called to civil service?

My grandmother did a lot of that same work. She was a consultant for Ron Kirk when he first ran in 1995 and again, my grandmother lived in Oak Cliff. My great-grandparents, her parents, lived in Hamilton Park at the time. And at 7 years old, she walked into the house (where he lived) with a box of literature. And Hamilton Park is 750 homes, and she said, ‘Have the whole neighborhood flagged by Sunday.’ That was me at 7 years old.

I think for me, it really clicked when you could see how policy could be shaped and policy could be moved to impact the people that don’t even know people exist that are working on their behalf. I fully understand the people that are impacted the most, and the people that need the outcomes that we vote on the most, don’t even know a DART board exists. So for me, it is a true labor of love for the communities.

Cities like Plano and Irving have raised concerns over funding inequities, among other issues. Are they justified, in your eyes?

I think all issues are justified. I’ve tried my best to have an attentive ear to those issues. Even prior to the withdrawal elections, the No. 1 thing I said I want to accomplish in these two years was fundamental changes to our governance and funding structures. It takes collaboration with both DART and all of our member cities, not just the ones that potentially have high-level issues. We have to be considerate of the cities that are also going to be impacted. And so we can’t do things that try to solve issues for a number of cities, whether they’re the majority or the minority, but then penalize those that have been allies or supporters at the same time.

So that’s kind of a balancing effect. My approach has been to truly try to understand. I’ve met with the cities that have called for their withdrawal elections directly and am trying to continue that dialogue with them. Now, they’ve taken their measures, and they have said that they will rescind them prior to March 18, if some compromises are agreed upon. And I think right now, it’s just ensuring that we fully understand what it is that they are looking to get out of the system going forward.

Certain cities have taken issue with Dallas’ representation on the DART board. Is it time for a change?

When DART was first established in 1983, the governing structure was actually 25 board members. At that time, Dallas was contributing 78% of the funds to DART, so the other 12 suburbs were contributing 22%, and the board composition was only 60% for Dallas, 40% for the 12 suburbs. We didn’t hear anything about imbalancing of population inequities, of funding consummated to board governance and structure, and 42 years later, we are where those numbers have kind of leveled out a little bit more. DART had approved a resolution back during the session days to give more cities actual seats at the table. I actually wrote that one that the DART Board approved. So clearly, I’m showing some desire for a fundamental change, but ultimately, the state legislature has to enact that change.

Critics often point to crime as a major concern, What can DART do?

Let me deal with that one for just a second. DART moves about 170,000 people per day across 700 square miles and throughout 13 cities. We are essentially a moving city of 170,000 people. So (in 2024), we had three murders. Per capita, that’s less than any other city in DART, including Highland Park. When you look at those numbers, I get it, they are sensationalized at the moment. DART has riders, we don’t have residents. And so I think we need to be working collaboratively together on addressing some of the more systemic issues that then create opportunities for crime. And we’re going to continue to do our part, but it has to be more in collaboration with our cities where our riders originate from.

Where are you drawing your optimism from?

I think I have to just believe that this will all work out for the benefit of the people that we serve. And so I think that our member cities, the council members and the mayors and the managers that represent them, are taking a hard look at sources of revenue. They explicitly state this within their resolutions. All of them said that the state’s continual compression on their ability to grow their budgets is a fundamental element to why they are looking at these withdrawal elections. Nowhere in there do they say anything about ridership, crime, unhoused populations, the No. 1 thing that they pointed to is a funding source. I understand that. I’m cognizant of it, and I’m sensitive to it. I think right now, my focus is trying to figure out, how do we balance their desires for needing more revenue without limiting our abilities to operate or financially plan for the future?

This interview has been edited for clarity and brevity.