What’s being sold as a harmless planning document is actually a blueprint to fundamentally reshape how West Mesa residents live and move about their city. The MesaCONNECTED Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Plan has been in the works since 2021. Funded by a federal grant from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the plan covers a five-mile “transit corridor” in West Mesa and is intended to guide future land-use decisions in that area. At first glance, it appears benign, seemingly focused on growth and beautification. City officials repeatedly emphasize that it is not a transit plan and does not initiate any specific projects. However, taken as a whole, MesaCONNECTED lays the groundwork to transform West Mesa into what is effectively a 15-minute city (or even a 5-minute city, by their own standards) without explicitly using that label.
The plan draws inspiration from communities in Oregon and California, as well as Arizona’s own Tempe Cul-De-Sac neighborhood, all of which follow planning models that prioritize density, transit-oriented development, and reduced automobile use. The stated goal is to create fully walkable areas centered around “transit nodes” while making existing transit easier to access. The section of West Mesa encompassed in the plan includes major hubs such as Mesa Riverview, the Asian District, Mesa Community College, Banner Desert Medical Center, Downtown Mesa, and surrounding areas.
A central objective of the plan is to increase density and place housing closer to employment to “reduce vehicle miles traveled” (pg. 5). This is not a neutral goal. It assumes driving is a problem to be corrected rather than a freedom to be preserved. In a city like Mesa where families rely on personal vehicles for work, school, church, medical care, and more, designing communities to deliberately discourage driving punishes the very behavior that allowed the city to grow in the first place. Rather than responding to how residents already live, the plan attempts to reshape daily habits by making driving less practical and alternative modes more “convenient.”
During the plan’s initial phase, the city collected public feedback to help shape its direction. At a Mesa City Council Study Session on December 4, 2025, officials claimed the plan reflects what the public wants. However, Councilmember Taylor acknowledged that survey participation was extremely low relative to the number of residents contacted, so low that the results are inherently skewed. It is misleading and dishonest to claim broad public support. Most Mesa residents likely have no idea this plan exists, let alone that it could influence future development decisions affecting their neighborhood.
Despite repeated assurances that this is not a transit plan by city officials, the vision is inseparable from “future transit investments” and long-term projects (pg. 2). The framework assumes higher-capacity transit will be built eventually, and that land-use decisions today must be shaped to support it tomorrow. This pattern is familiar nationwide: a so-called “non-binding” study plan establishes justification for density, rezoning, and infrastructure changes, to make expensive transit projects appear inevitable rather than optional.
All of these ideas come from the concept of a 15-minute city which aims to keep any daily necessity within a short walk, bike ride or transit ride. While marketed as convenience, this model opens the door to government overreach by centralizing daily life into tightly managed zones. International examples show how easily these concepts can move from theory to enforcement. In parts of England, residents have already faced fines for driving outside designated areas, demonstrating how mobility “suggestions” can evolve into mobility restrictions.
The plan openly seeks to “limit sprawl” (pg. 36), framing the true American dream as a problem. Larger homes, private yards, safer neighborhoods, affordable housing, and the freedom to come and go as they please is painted negatively. Restricting outward growth concentrates density, raises costs, and pushes people into cramped apartments where they will “own nothing and be happy.” The plan embraces this model, aiming for a 5-minute city: homes, jobs, shops, and services all packed into tightly controlled nodes (pg. 38), compressing daily life into a series of crowded, artificial districts. So not even a 15-minute city is sufficient.
Although the Mesa City Council was scheduled to discuss the TOD plan earlier this January, heavy opposition from residents and activists led to its removal from the agenda. That victory should not invite complacency. Study plans signal direction. They show where the city intends to go long before binding votes are taken. Mesa residents should remain vigilant. These plans resurface quietly, often rebranded and reframed. Community engagement is essential to ensuring that centralized, coercive planning models do not take root in Mesa under the guise of “connectivity” or “choice.”
Help Protect Freedom in Arizona by Joining Our Grassroots Network
Arizona needs to have a unified voice promoting economic freedom and prosperity, and the Free Enterprise Club is committed to making that happen. But we can’t do it alone. We need YOU!
Join our FREE Grassroots Action List to stay up to date on the latest battles against big government and how YOU can help influence crucial bills at the Arizona State Legislature.
Recent Comments