Download pdf - SUBJECT: APPROVE FOR PUBLIC … 05-036b Set...Ayes: Directors Hayashi, Jaquez, Kaplan, Bischofberger, Peeples, Vice President Harper, President Wallace - 7 Noes: None - 0 Abstain:

ACTION MEMO

AC TRANSIT DISTRICT

Board of Directors

Executive Summary

Committees:

Planning Committee

External Affairs Committee

Board of Directors

D

□

GM Memo No. 05-036b

Meeting Date: March 16, 2005

Finance Committee

Operations Committee

Financing Corporation

D

D

□

SUBJECT: APPROVE FOR PUBLIC CONSIDERATION A PROPOSED FARE

RESTRUCTURE AND SET THE PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED FARE

RESTRUCTURE AT A DATE, TIME AND LOCATION TO BE DETERMINED BY THE

BOARD.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

D Information Only Briefing Item Recommended Motion

Adopt a motion establishing the proposed fare restructure and setting the public hearing

at a date, time and location to be determined by the Board.

BOARD ACTION: Approved as Recommended [x]

Approved with Modification(s) [ ]

Other

MOTION: HAYASHI/JAQUEZ to set a public hearing on Proposals 1 through 5 - proposed fare

restructure, on May 18, 2005 at 3:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. at a location to be determined by staff and

consider placing a parcel tax measure on the ballot in November 2005 (7-0-0-0).

a. Proposed fare restructure

Proposal 1: Buck-a-Ride and the elimination of all discount fare media.

Proposal 2: Raise base fare to $1.75 with corresponding increases in fare structure, transfer $0.50

and 1 use.

Proposal 3: Raise base fare to $2.00, transfer is free with 2 uses.

Proposal 4: Keep current fare structure and add a $20.00 weekly adult pass.

Proposal 5: Buck-a-Ride with continuance of youth and senior/disabled passes.

b. Consider parcel tax measure on ballot in November 2005.

Ayes: Directors Hayashi, Jaquez, Kaplan, Bischofberger, Peeples, Vice President

Harper, President Wallace - 7

Noes: None - 0

Abstain: None - 0

Absent: None - 0

The above order was passed on

March 16, 2005.

Rose Martinez, District Secretary

By

GM Memo No. 05-036b Subject: APPROVE FOR PUBLIC CONSIDERATION A PROPOSED FARE RESTRUCTURE

AND SET THE PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED FARE RESTRUCTURE AT A DATE, TIME

AND LOCATION TO BE DETERMINED BY THE BOARD.

Date: March 16, 2005

Page 2 of 8

Fiscal Impact: Potential additional fare revenue estimated at $8.0 million annually.

Additionally, there would be administrative savings of approximately $500K annually.

Background/Discussion:

Existing Fare Structure

AC Transit currently accepts cash aboard all buses, but also offers multiple fare media

including: 1) 10-ride and 31-day passes, 2) "eco-pass" programs with the University of

California (students and faculty) and the City of Berkeley (employees only), 3) Translink

and 4) transfers. Transfers are sold to all passengers for $0.25 and discounts are

available for senior and/or disabled passengers, as well as youth. The District's existing

fare structure and current prices are shown in Attachment 1.

Justification For Proposed Fare Structure

It has been almost three years since the District's fares have been adjusted. During

this time the local, state and national economies have continued to be mired in a

prolonged recession. The District has declared two fiscal emergencies (fiscal years

2003-2004 and 2004-2005), reduced service, reduced personnel, depleted its reserve

accounts and taken other actions to address revenue shortfalls. While there are signs

that the recession may be ending, projections for the East Bay continue to be less rosy.

The passage of Measure BB by the voters helped to reduce, but did not eliminate, the

revenue shortfalls the District continues to project. To deal with these shortfalls for the

2005-2006 fiscal year it is recommended that the District Board consider a restructuring

of the District's fare structure.

Proposed New Fare Structure

Staff is proposing that the District implement a pilot program to determine the impact of reducing cash fares and simplifying the fare structure. The pilot program would last no

longer than 4 months, but could be terminated prior to that date if fare collection data

indicates that the program is either not working or is working successfully and should be

established as the District's fare structure. If the pilot is not successful, the District

would return to a mixed media structure based on a base fare increase identified as

Proposal 2 in Attachment 1 (raising the base fare to $1.75 and $0.85 for

youth/senior/disabled, with corresponding increases in the offered magnetic fare

media). However, if the pilot is successful, staff recommends either extending the

program or adopting the fare re-structure as permanent. In any event, staff

recommends providing periodic reviews for one year while keeping Proposal 2 as the

back-up fare structure during this time while staff closely monitors the pilot program.

Proposal 2 would sunset after one year of implementation of the pilot program.

GM Memo No. 05-036b

Subject: APPROVE FOR PUBLIC CONSIDERATION A PROPOSED FARE RESTRUCTURE




Page 3 of 8

Under the proposed pilot program, the cash fare for adults would be reduced to $1.00

and $0.50 for senior/disabled and youth passengers. Discounts would be eliminated for

multiple rides (making the system more similar to BARTs pay-as-you-go system) and

payment would be required with each boarding (eliminating transfers). All existing non-

cash fare media, including transfers, would be discontinued, except for BART-to-Bus

transfers, selected 1-ride magnetic passes for use by social service agencies and

commuter check users. The BART-to-Bus transfer would be honored for a $0.25 credit

on the purchase of a full fare (making the fare $0.75 for adults and $0.25 for

youth/senior/disabled). While the primary impetus for this proposal is financial (staff

projections show that the proposal could net the District of over $8.0 million based on

conservative estimates) the proposal also addresses a number of issues as outlined

below. If accurate, this could significantly reduce, or even eliminate, the need to reduce

service in the next fiscal year.

Under the proposed new structure, the District expects to see the following benefits:

• Increase in fare revenue

• Decrease in fare evasion

• Decrease in administrative and production costs related to current fare media

• Reduction in driver/passenger conflicts related to fare issues

• Better ridership and fare elasticity data

• Increase in ridership

• Marketing potential related to a simplified fare structure

• Ease of transition to Translink

Passengers who currently use cash will see a significant reduction in their fares when

compared with Proposal 2. Additionally, based on a 180-day school year and 2 bus

trips per school day, youth patrons would spend $15 a month, the same as the current

Youth 31-Day pass (180 x $0.50 x 2 = $180). Senior/Disabled patrons, currently paying

$20 per month, would be able to take 40 trips per month before any increase is

realized.

Attachment 3 details the fiscal impact on both cash and 31-day pass patrons.

Attachment 2 details the potential annual revenue increase anticipated by the pilot

program. Actual receipts will depend on when the program is started. Ridership

numbers use actual figures from the National Transit Database (NTC) report for fiscal

year ending June 2004. Additionally, 7.8 million rides categorized as "daily UC pass"

and "daily other" have not been incorporated into the projections although staff believes

that these rides exist. Based on the proposal, these conservative estimates project

$49.5 million in farebox receipts, an increase of $8.0 million. Additional variances are

calculated for comparison purposes.

Pass production costs and commission discounts paid to external vendors total over

$500K annually. These costs would be eliminated in the proposed program.

GM Memo No. 05-036b





Page 4 of 8

Additionally, the costs to stock, distribute and account for pass and ticket sales would

be greatly reduced.

At the Board Workshop of February 16, 2005 some questions were raised regarding the

proposed fare re-structure including:

How will disabled persons, unable to handle cash, manage in the new fare structure?

(Long-term, the implementation of Translink and issuance of Translink cards solves

this. For the pilot, suggestions include keeping the Senior/Disabled monthly sticker as

a fare instrument.)

What about Title VI issue regarding multiple ride passengers? (Staff is fully aware of

Title VI and strives to address all aspects of this legislation in all fare proposals. Long-

term, Translink will provide options in delivering discounts to frequent users.)

What's the impact on Paratransit base fare? (The paratransit base fare is a blended

fare with a number of variables. Staff is currently evalutating the affects of the fare re

structure on this formula.)

What other transit agencies offer cash-only fare structrues? (Based on the APTA

datbase, only 4 other transit agencies offer cash-only fare structure. All 4 are

smalloperations with limited service between 3-6 routes. See Attachment 4.)

At the Board Workshop of March 2, 2005 the Board directed staff to consider, for the

March 16 Workshop, taking into consideration the following items:

• Eliminate the charge for transfers and to establish the transfer back to 90 minutes

and 2 rides

• Retain the current system and add a $20 weekly pass (unlimited rides)

• Continue passes for seniors and youth

• No changes to senior, disabled and youth fares

• A flat fare proposal with the continuance of the discount passes for the seniors and

youth

• Public involvement process

• More staff analysis

• Information on a coherent set of alternative proposals

• Additional data should be presented by staff before taking action on this item

• Explore the sale of passes on the Internet

In response to direction from the Board, three additional Fare Proposals have been

developed-#3, #4 and #5. Summaries of these proposals follow:

• Proposal 3: Raise base fare to $2.00 with a free 2-use transfer. While this proposal

raises the most revenue, over $8.6 million, it has a high potential for misuse and

GM Memo No. 05-036b





Page 5 of 8

fraud (example: Day Pass). Additionally, this places a disproportionate burden on

the cash-paying patron.

• Proposal 4: Keep the current fare structure and add a weekly adult pass. Staff

believes this proposal would most likely result in a decrease in fare box receipts

because it will most likely cause patrons from cash and 10-ride tickets to the weekly

passes. This occurred when the District introduced the $15 Youth 31-Day pass

and most of the sales resulted from the movement of patrons from non-discounted

cash and the 10-Ride tickets.

• Proposal 5: Proposal 1 ($1.00 base fare) with the continuance of Youth and

Senior/Disabled passes. This scenario assumes all other fare media is eliminated

except the Youth 31-Day and Senior/Disabled monthly passes. While significantly

less than the $8 million that would be generated by Proposal 1, the approximately

$6.1 million additional fare box revenue is a viable alternative in the short term.

The Youth and Senior/Disabled monthly pass continue to be deeply discounted and

subsidized by other riders.

Barring the acceptance of Proposal 1, staff recommends Proposal 5 in conjunction with

a November 2005 ballot measure that would place a $24.00 parcel tax for 5 years.

Although a parcel tax can only be used for the operation, maintenance and acquisition

of property for the District the passage of the measure may enable the elimination of

fares for youth. Proposal 5 would also be a 4-month pilot program subject to

termination at any point if found to be unsuccessful. If deemed unsuccessful, Proposal

2 would be implemented immediately. Should the Ballot Measure pass and Proposal 5

be deemed unsuccessful, then Proposal 2 would be implemented with free

transportation for youth as defined in the ballot measure.

Staff recommends the implementation of Proposal 5 on August 1, 2005 with the

acceptance of all other fare media through August 31, 2005 to allow patrons full use of

all 31-Day and 10-Ride fare media. On September 1, 2005, Proposal 5 would be fully

implemented with only Youth 31-Day, Senior/Disability monthly passes, and the 1-ride

magnetic passes social service agencies and the commuter check program. All other

patrons would pay per boarding. Should the November ballot measure pass, Proposal

5 would remain in effect till August 31, 2006. Starting September 1, 2006, all Youth

patrons would ride free in the Districts service area. The District would continue to sell

the Senior/Disability monthly pass. Should the ballot measure fail, staff recommends

implementation of Proposal 1 ($1.00 base fare, cash only) effective January 1, 2006,

with the continued sale of a Senior/Disability monthly pass.

Other Board recommendations included the inclusion of further analysis and additional

data. Staff is currently finalizing these figures and plans on presenting them at the

workshop.

GM Memo No. 05-036b





Page 6 of 8

Additionally, the Board asked about the following:

• Ensuring a robust public involvement process: Staff has distributed a

timeline/schedule to the Board that outlines a number of the steps staff intends to

take to ensure a full and robust public involvement process. Plans include

brochures, web-site, on-board and street signage, local press and public outreach

with strong staff support. Staff considers the public involvement process crucial in

any fare discussion and is dedicated to reaching and informing as much of the

public as possible.

• Marketing passes on the Internet: The costs to design and implement this e-

commerce project are considerable. Translink provides the long-term solution. To

bridge the gap between the implementation of Translink, staff developed and

posted a PDF order form on the web-site and accepts faxes of this form for order

fulfillment.

Resolution No. 2141

With respect to the issue of raising the District youth fare, attached for your information

is Resolution No. 2141, A Resolution Rescinding A Portion Of Resolution No. 2092 And

Committing the District To Maintain Discounted Passes For Youth, Seniors And The

Disabled Below What Is Required By Federal And/Or State Law, Contingent On The

Passage Of A Special Parcel Tax Measure On The November 2, 2004 General

Election, the companion resolution to Measure BB that addressed this issue.

Accessibility Advisory Committee Actions

On Tuesday, March 8, 2005, the committee reviewed GM Memo No. 05-036a and staff

responded to the committee's questions related to Proposals 1 and 2 to the

Accessibility Advisory Committee. The committee took two actions in response to the

two proposals—to oppose any elimination of non-cash fare media; and to oppose any

fare increase but if one is necessary (they) supported the fare structure of Proposal 2.

Implementation Date

Staff recommends that the District implement the proposed pilot program, Proposal 1,

on August 1, 2005. Due to the simplicity of the structure, required lead-times are

minimized and education of the public is the key implementation process. On August 1,

2005, the District would cease to accept fare media other than cash, 1-ride passes only

issued to social service agencies and the "eco-pass" programs the District is currently

contracted with. If Proposal 1 is unacceptable and another alternative is adopted

(either proposal 2, 3,4 or 5), the implementation date would be September 1, 2005.

GM Memo No. 05-036b

Subject: APPROVE FOR PUBLIC CONSIDERATION A PROPOSED FARE RESTRUCTURE AND SET THE PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED FARE RESTRUCTURE AT A DATE, TIME



Page 7 of 8

Evaluation of the Pilot Program

Due to the simplicity of the program, and the speed and accuracy with which the District

collects and counts its cash, feedback on the success of the program should be very

fast and quantifiable. Should the program succeed, staff recommends that the

structure be continued and incorporated into the Translink rollout. Should the program

fail, the fare structure in Proposal 2 would be implemented as soon as possible.

Setting the Public Hearing

A public hearing on the proposed fare restructure is required by Board Policy No. 163

and applicable law. Setting the date of the hearing for either May 4 or May 18. May 18

would provide more time to provide for public outreach prior to the public hearing. The

Board might consider whether to hold one public hearing at 2:00 p.m. or to have two

public hearings - one at 2:00 p.m. or a later time after the Board has completed its

regular business (e.g. 3:00 or 3:30) and another occurring at 6:00 p.m. In addition to

setting the time of the hearing, the Board needs to determine the content of the

hearing. It is recommended that the hearing consist of the consideration of a

restructured fare for boarding AC Transit buses based on whether the pilot fare is

adopted and/or the various alternatives contained in this memo. At a minimum the fare

proposal is #1 and #2. The Board needs to consider to what extent it wants to include

other proposals suggested at the March 2 meeting, i.e. proposals #3, #4, and #5. If the

pilot program, Proposal 1, is determined not to be successful, it can be eliminated at

any time within a four month test period, commencing on August 1, 2005. The fare

structure would immediately revert to the cash, 31-day pass, 10-ride ticket and transfer

figures shown as Proposal 2 in Attachment 1. (The public hearing notice will identify

the current fares and the proposed fare restructuring.)

Prior Relevant Board Actions/Policies:

GM Memo 03-225 dated August 6, 2003; Consider adoption of Resolution No. 2100

responding to comments regarding fare adjustments from the July 16, 2003 public

hearing and adopting fare changes effective September 1, 2003.

Attachments:

Attachment 1: Current Fare Structure, Proposals 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 with

Expected Impact on Farebox

Attachment 2: Detailed Expected Revenues from Proposal 1

GM Memo No. 05-036b





Page 8 of 8

Attachment 3:

Attachment 4:

Attachment 5:

Attachment 6:

Attachment 7:

Proposal 1 Impact on Cash Patrons and 31-Day Pass Patrons

APTA Transit Agencies: Base Fares

Cost Increases Over FY 01/02

Actions By AAC On Fare Proposal

Resolution No. 2141

Approved by: Rick Fernandez, General Manager

Deborah McClain, Chief Financial Officer

Kenneth Scheidig, General Counsel

Mary King, Assistant General Manager, Communication & External

Affairs

Clarence Johnson, Media Affairs Manager

Prepared by: Dan Lillin, Treasury Manager

Date Prepared: March 10,2005

Fare Proposal 1 vs. Current GM 05-036b Attachment 1

Proposals 1-5

NOTES

- Figures based on FY02/03 survey and FY 03/04 NTD.

- Assumes no ridership increase.


Proposals 1-5

NOTES

• Traditional fare increase.

- Assumes no movement between fare media.


Proposals 1-5

(IGINAL BASELINE

als for FY 03/04 G/L Bookings Current Fare Proposal 3 Increase % Increase

PROPOSAL 3: Raise base fare to $2.00, transfer Is free with 2 uses.

Cash

Adult

Transbay

19,645,247 $1.50

$3.00

$2.00

$4.00

Stralghtline

Increase

(Adult/TB net transfers)

Youth

Sr/Dis

Subtotal:

31-Day Pass/Monthly

Adult

Youth

Sr/Dis

Transbay

Subtotal:

"O-Ride Ticket

IRdult Youth/Sr/Dis

Transbay

Subtotal:

Transfers

4.8 million Issued on bus

Effect/shift in ridershlp

- 7.7% of riders use 3rd

bus to complete trip

(would be free trip)

NET INCREASE:

TOTAL FAREBOX:

18,445,247

3,218,202

617.894

22,281,343

1,580,173

692,832

3.594.270

5,867,275

1,220,500

41,454,026

$1.50

$0.75

$0.75

$0.25

$2.00

$1.00

$1.00

$0.00 ($0.25) -100.00%

(1,893,665)

8,680,941

50,134,967

- Assumes no movement between fare media.

- High fraud potential for misuse/resale of transfers.

- Potential movement of patrons to 31-Day pass.


Proposals 1-5

- Most likely scenario is to cannibalize other ridership categories (ex. $15 Youth pass).


Proposals 1-5

NOTES

- Assumes all cash and 10-ride ticket patrons use cash.

- Assumes no ridership increase.

- Assumes no movement of current Youth/Sr/Dis cash/10-ride patrons to 31-Day/Monthly pass.

- Figures based on FY02/03 survey and FY 03/04 NTD.

ATTACHMENT 2: Data I lad E»naeted Ravnn jtn Proposal 1 GM Memo 0543Gb

ILocal Passenger Information for Fare Proposal 05

lOaHyRldmhlp WNTPfMOn-Board I | Annutl RMtnthlp 04NTD/03 On-Bwd

(IS.eO3.39S

19.668 J836

13.633.158

(2.982,303

(1.749303

(3.924^60

(445.819

(365.026

M.SQ4.9B8

S16238J33

»378569

(3.554.183

$2,373,434

tM.ou.tm

$1,697,018

(3,806,823

(432.445

(373.47S

(8409,710

SUBTOTAL LOCAL:

(38233 (34,16*

SUBTOTAL TRAKSBAY:

TOTAL FAREBOX:

5% wrtiwe*

$17^82275

$9,165,196

(2.501300

$2,614,168

U2JU.1S9

$1,662,028

$3,728,333

(423323

$365,774

$8,179,682

$eeo,96i

$2,079,139

$237,433

$154,010

$3,131,S4J

141.I74.3S4

$734,029 $2,709,836

(1.673261

$115,899

(8J32.02S

$9,000 $20,183

$2293

$1,681

133.4U

$18,922,115

$8,701,765

S2.3G9.642

$2,666,073

$1.574352

$3332.104

$401237

$348,523

$026,173

$1,969,710

$224,936

$145,904

S2.9U.724

(39,480.978

(695.396

$3.567213 $1.584247

$109,799

$4,»»,S3S

$8326

$19.t26

$2,173

$1,873

$31,700

$15,041,916

$7,734,802

$2.106327

$2,369,842

$77253,187

$1,399,602

$3,139,648

$356,655

$308,021

(S2M.92*

$276299

$875,427

$99,972

$64,848

$1,318,644

$33,778,887

S12362S9

$4,563,934

$3.8t6.440

(195,(69

$7,579

$17,001

$1,931

$1,688

Board of OlractoraDito: March IB, 2005

ATTACHMENT 3: Proposal 11mpact on Cash Patrons and 31-Dav Pass Patrons GM Memo 05436b

Ids*

1 Istal Ifittl isai IBs! Istal Isttl ictu

Currma

Propostt11

Prapowi2

$150

$100

$175

Board of Directors Date: March 16, 2005

Attachment 4: Transit Agencies with Cash Fare Only: per APTA database GM Memo 05-036b

TkKult Systun Kajm

op

2 BMtoCfM*Tranta

9 CommnlyAeOon (factorial TrtMl

4 Gtryl>uotlcTrtfttp6(tattonC«rponttion

5 CtoataCI*Mi*ndRa£onalTran»itAi«iority

Graate»CNv*!sfld Regional TreiwaAuOwrity

OratMOwtlmdRfSlonalTnntn Authority

S IAKETRAN 7 JactaomUaTnffiqiorta&enAuthorftr

8 Anttlopa Victor TranMAutrwnty

0 UrMoUttre

10 CutvwCttyMuniciprteinllMs 11 UonttMto&alint*

12 StttiUoricABgeJwBu*

11 MoowfliTlwtEtSyitOT

M Wrad C*tf*y Tr*rtM

1* MT

17 W*Ktin«¥>R^nnmlTrantpeiWI)on AutheflTr

18 Ne«YorkC(lyDtpKttneRtafTrtntpO«tt«on

10 SwOMgoTnslty

20 StnFrandieoeiTAraRtpMTrantitOitlnci

21 StttVaOtlntn*

23 8pnngS«HM*wTn)Kit0l«liict

23 lftUS3TrmrtS«vs»

24 Ptm*CounyDt|»tmsniotTnnn|)ortaaan

23 I

PnsCnt

oil

q

Cm Cost

HtpTaXtn.

Cc*orTkM

Ceu cm

Gut, a TUebI

Oea

p

CtnerTldM

090

«Mrt? Total.

CvlerTkM

Oat

tl, <4p{

Cum oniir. 3 nuiM vm ptntntntt v«Mct*t

No wit) t*». « oiy Utk

Day pti«. 9, 7, 10-nMMUM,

11-r»J« pau, momwy pttt Vtftugft tided offica only

Ttcketi, puM. G<rt)il«H»uMt

DiKCunHd KMd* punch pau. msfithly

No mbnta.no aty imk

EZ pnt (»«tduS)

Metro can) wm deoirU

Ctwwwlad Tokartt. LS* eXM C*Rt

Qtcourtad «»y wtt. enortttfy fwn

Ditcourtad )1-Oay. tforad nlua mag carat

Sup«'9««<r ptta. Sand vtlua ctrd

DOT reporting, ooat not rvn tny vttudei

DruourtM ttirtW p*1» v«lild on dottayt

BART-daeoumtdcatlt

Baoki cf 42 Uckett «««ttbta tt city Itsll

Nsvnstaa. nootylm*

Ctfflay> cempua icfvictt only

DOT, dsa not actuary run *ny vandal

y

Cnharty. Brattfo

Board of Directors Date: March 16,2005

Attachment 4: APTA Transit Agencies: Base Fares (sorted bv amount) GM Mem! 4336b

Culver City Municipal Bus lines

Santa Monica's Big Slue Bus

Puebto Transit

Jaokscnvffla Transportation Authority

Bu* Valley Ride

Decatur Public Transit System

South Bend Pubdc Transpcmtwn Corporation

Iowa Oty Transit

City Utfttias of Spnngfiekl, MO

LAKETRAN

SatanvKeiaer Transit

OtyLink Transit

Everett Transit

Intercity Transit

Muskingum Authority of Public Transit

Oaflarn Transit System

Golden Empire Transit District

Btoomington Public Transportation Corporation

Springfield Mass Transit Disirtct

Mtd County Transit Authority

Prtncs G4OfQ0*s County QopivtfTwni of Public WonXs & Tfsnspoftstton

Mmcjtiftflj City Tfsns^t System

VlsaSa City Coach

Tyler Transit

Blue Water Araa Transpartaticn Commission

Wttcttmaw Regional TiiiitsporlJitton Authority

Southwest OMo Regional Transit Authenty

Lake Erie Transportation Commission

Salni Ocud MetfcpoMsn Transit Commission

Memphis Area Transit Authority

NcnivaCk Transit System

Tcrrsnce Transit System

Santsota County Area Trenstt

Muncie Public Transportation Corporation

AppoICART

Cttpttst MAtropoliittfl Transportation Autnofity

Corpus Cnnst) RAQtonflJ TronsportQttcn Authority

Trt-8tete Transit Authority

Wlndhnm Rotten Tfsnstl Oistrtd

City of Fairfax CUE Bus

Chatham Area Transit Authority

Chelan-Dauglas PTBA O-irtk)

Ptma County Department of Transportation

JocksonviSe Transportation Authority

Metropolitan Bu* Authority

CityefGtendaleBeeene

Miarr4-Da6tt Transit Agency

Chapel nil Transit

Cambria County Transit Authority

New York City Department of Transportation

County ef Lebanon Transit Authority

City of East Chicago PubSc Transportation

Manatee County Area Transit

Central PugM Sound Regional Transit Authority

Southeast Transpcrtatten Authority


Attachment 4: APTA Transit Agencies: Base Fares (sorted bv amount) GM Memi 036b

CttyBuft of Greater Lafayette

Ames TrentH Agency

Dm Moint* MatrepoEtan Transit Authority

OweriSoorO1 Transit System

Traits* Authority et Laxingten-Fayetw UcttA County Government

Transit Authority ct River City

UMASS Transit ServiM

Ann AreerTrantportttten Authority

Capital Area Transportation Authority

Mas* Transportation Authority

Muskegen Ana Transit System

8O0in«W Tranttt Authority Regional 8enrica»

Duiutn Transit Authority

Kansas City Are* TfOMpcuuuon Authority

Ccty of AJbuQjucrquft Transit Department

Capital District Transportation Authority

CNY Centre

WtnstMvSatem Transit Authority

Start Ana Regional Transit Authority

Matro Rational Transit Authority

Greater Dayton Regional Transit Authortly

Greater Dayton Regional Transit Authority

Western Reserve Transit Authority

York Courtly Transportation Authority

Kncavffle Transportation Authority

Laredo Metro

Metropolitan Transit Authority of Hart* County

Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harts County

Port Arthur Transit

Waco Transit System

ChHtenden County Transportation Authority

Transportation Oistrict Ccmmissicn of Hampton Rood*

Transportation District Commission of Hampton Roads

dark County PubSc Transportation Benefit Area Authority

Spokane TrtnsH Authority

Champsign-Urbsrui Mas* Transit District

County of Lebanon Transit AuttMrity

Space Coast Area Transit

Krlsap Transit

Krtsap Transit

Eastern Contra Costa Transit Authority

Alexandria Transit Company

Escamtta Courtly Area Transit

Roaring Fork Transportation Authority

Vciuua County Transportation Authority

Chatham Are* Transit Authority

Redding Area Bu* Authority

Greensboro Transit Authority

Butttr Township-City Joint Municipal Transit Authority

Sartu Ctarlu Transit

Santa Fe Transit 8ervice*

Manatee County Area Transit

Ventura County Transportation Commission

Ctty of Buahead CrtyfButlhaad Area Transit System

Meroed Courtly Transit

Ltwton Area Transit System

Wildcat Transit University of New Hampshire

City of Dertton Transit System - UNK

Hazktton Pubiic Trantft

Long Beach Transit

Mcrtlebotio But Unw

Massachusett* Sty Transpertatien Authority

Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority

La Cmu Municipal Transit UHity

Montgomery County Transit Services

Toledo Area Regional Trans* Aulhortty

Crty of Modesto Transit tSvtatan

Rock Island County MetrepoSlan Mats Transit District

Tcpetta MatrcpoEtan Transit Authority

Bay Metro Transit Authority

VIA Metropetilan Transit


Attachment 4: APTA Transit Agency: Base Fares (sorted bv amount)

Washington MetropoUUn Area TnmtH Authority

PneSu Suncoast Transit Authority

J*amj-0a4» Transit Agency

Miarro-OMe Transit Agency

PatmTren

Gary PucKc Transportation Corporation

Enoianapous Public Transportftttfln Corporation

Transit Authority cf NwUwn Kentucky



Massachusetts Boy Transportation Authority

Battle Creek Transit

AMtfQ TfttftW

Metro Transit

Central Onto Transit Authority

Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority

Central Oklahoma Transportation and Parking Authority

MetropoUtsn Tuisa Transit Authority

Lone Transit District

ASocna Mstro Transit

Centra Area Transportation Authority

Memphis Ama Transit Authority

Fort Worth Transportation Authority

King County Department of Transportation

King County Deportment of Transportation


Pierce Transit

Charleston Area Regtontl Transportatton Authority

Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority

Transfer!

Dates Area R«pid Transit Authority

Drfas Area RtpvJ Transit Authority

Dallas Area Rapid Transit Authority

WSIUamsburg Area Transport

Waukesha Metro Transit

Lrvermem/Amader Valley TransH Authority

Cccft Ccmmuntfy Transit

Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada

Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority

Central Pugel Sound Regional Transit Authority

Plymouth MetrcJjik

Sou^west Metro Transd Commission

Springs Transit

Minnesota Vefley Transit Authority

Ancka County Transit

Westmoreland County TransH Authority

ItiW Mon Va!Ky Transit Authority

Antetope Vtfoy Transit Authority

OVNJTRANS

Port Authority Transit Corporation

Rod Rose Transit Authority

Dotftwsfo Tnvtsrt Cofpcrstfof)

San Jstcjcn Region*! T rantf District

Chaitotta Area TrwtsA Gyitem

Luzeme Courtly Transportation Authority

FoothSO Tifltiwt

NuJlhASSt Trsfuportfltion Contpcny

SunTran

Fresno Ama Expiass

Orange Courtly Transportation Authority

Riverside Transit Agency

University Transport System

Browtrd county OMston of Mass Transit

Regional Transit System

TALTRAN

BtrrnlrtgharrKt«fl«rsen County Transit Authortty

Greater Peorta Mass TransH Oistrtet

Fort VVayne ftj&Bc Transportation Corporation

GM Memf -036b


Attachment 4: APTA Transit Agency: Base Fares (sorted bv amount)

Nofth County Transit District

MoVOpOMBn AwmQI NaptQ TrSnSn

Metropolitan Atforttii Rapid Transit Authority

Chicago Tntnaa Authority

Chicago Transit Authority

Port Authority of Allegheny County

Port Authority cf Allegheny County

Pen Authortty cf Allegheny County

Westdvester County Department of Transportattcn

MISraukB* County Transit System

Peninsula Conidor Joint Powers Board

Maryland Transit AdministratiQn

Msrytarid Transit AdrftiriistrBbGn

Maryland Transit Administration

Afaimeda-Cettfra Costa Transit District

Central Contra Costa Transit Authority

Sacramento Regional Trans!) District

S41UBITM11I0 Regional Transit Dtstnct

Santo Clua VaSey Transportation Authority

Santa Clara VaasyTransportaticn Authority

SarteOraE Metropolitan Transit District

City of Dotrett Department of Transportation

Suburban MociEty Authority for Regional Transportation

Bi-SM» Development Agency

Regional Transportation Commission

New Jersey Transit Corporation

Pert Authority cf New York and New Jersey

Greater Ctevttand Regional TransM Authority


Cumbertand-Oauprtin-HarrtiBurg TrantS Authority

WMHomspcrt Bureau of Transportation

Greater Lyrtchburg Transit Company

GRTC Transit System

Transportation District Commission of Hampton Rosds

Modxson Metro Transit System

Niagara Frcnfier Transportation Authority

Niagara Frontier TrartsportattCft Authortty

Tompidfts Consolidated Area Transit

Pose Suburban Bui Division

Son Diego TrtTJay

MetropcSton Transit Aumorlty

Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Lerrigh and Northampton Transportation Authortty

Utah Transit Authortty

Utah Transit Authortty

Berks Area Reading Transportation Authority

City Of Vaneb-Transfiertatten DMston

tnterurban Transit Partnership

New Jersey Transit Corporation

TrtCounty Metropolitan Transportation District c» Oregon

Trt-Ccvnty Matropoliun Transportation District of Oregon


Ctty of Phoenix Public Transit Department

FairfleWSuisun Transit System

Son Francisco Boy Area Rapid TntnsH District

Son Frandsoo Municipal Railway San Franciseo Murridpoi Railway

San Francisco Municipal Ro^rway

Son Mateo County Transit District

Santa Barbara Metropolitan Transit District

SimlValtay Transit

South Coast Area Transit

Los Angelas County M«tiopc!iUn Transportation Authority

Los Angelas County MetrcpoSUn Transpoimiuii Authottty

Los Angelas County Metrcpc&an Transportoticn Autheftty

Regional Transportation Dlttrtct

Reflional Transportation Dt*tnct

Greater Bridgeport Transit Authortty

NcrwaftTronsa District

036b


Attachment 5 GM Memo 05-036b


20%

18%

16%

14%

12%

10%

H Cost per vehicle mile

ID Cost per vehicle platform hour

FY 2002-03 FY 2003-04 FY 2004-05

Board of Directors Date: March 2, 2005


To: Deborah McClain, Chief Financial Officer

From: Mallory Nestor-Brush, Accessible Services Manager

Re: Actions by AAC on Fare Proposal

As requested the following actions were taken by the Accessibility Advisory

Committee during their meeting on March 8, 2005:

Motion: Oppose any elimination of non-cash fare media (unanimous)

Motion: Oppose any fare increase but if one is necessary (we) support the fare

structure of Proposal 2 (5 yeas, 1 abstention)

The actions taken by the AAC were based on GM Memo 05-036 (a), dated

March 2, 2005.

Thank you for attending the meeting.


Summary

Additional Revenues

Increase in Fare Revenues

$429,016

26%

Lost Revenues $517,158


ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT

RESOLUTION NO. 2141

A RESOLUTION RESCINDING A PORTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 2092 AND

COMMITTING THE DISTRICT TO MAINTAIN DISCOUNTED PASSES FOR YOUTH,

SENIORS AND THE DISABLED BELOW WHAT IS REQUIRED BY FEDERAL

AND/OR STATE LAW, CONTINGENT ON THE PASSAGE OF A SPECIAL PARCEL

TAX MEASURE ON THE NOVEMBER 2, 2004 GENERAL ELECTION

WHEREAS, the Board of Directors adopted Resolution No. 2092, on June 18,

2003, increasing fares for various categories of riders, including passes for youth,

seniors and the disabled, effective December 2003.

WHEREAS, the passes for youth, seniors and the disabled were scheduled to

increase by an additional five dollars ($5.00) in December 2003, but implementation of

that increase was continued to June 2004, pending a proposal to provide financial

assistance to the District through the use of pension obligations bonds; and

WHEREAS, despite the District's inability to use pension obligation bonds, the

Board adopted Resolution No. 2134 on June 16, 2004, further deferring the proposed

increase in youth, senior and disabled passes until January 2005; and

WHEREAS, the Board of Directors has placed on the November 2, 2004 general

election ballot a special tax measure to increase its existing parcel tax by $2 per parcel

per month and extended for ten years; and

WHEREAS, the District is required by federal regulations to implement a "half

fare" program for elderly and disabled passengers as set forth in 49 C.F.R. section

609.23, and is further required by California law to offer the same fare reductions to

qualifying disabled passengers as to elderly passengers, as set forth in Public Utilities

Code section 99155 (b); and

WHEREAS, if said special tax measure passes, the necessity to increase the

youth 31-day pass, and the monthly passes for seniors and disabled, by five dollars

($5.00) to help fund the operation and maintenance of the District's bus service may not

be necessary unless unforeseen events require the need for the increase.

NOW THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit

District does resolve as follows:

SECTION 1. The five dollar ($5.00) increase in the 31 day pass for youth, and

the monthly passes for seniors, and the disabled, authorized by Resolution No. 2092

and deferred by Resolution No. 2134 shall be rescinded and the rate for the 31 day

pass for youth and the monthly passes for seniors and the disabled shall remain as

Resolution No. 2141 Page 1


shown in Exhibit A if the special tax measure authorized by Resolution No. 2135 is

approved by the voters at the November 2, 2004 general election.

SECTION 2. Any future fare increases for youth, seniors and the disabled will be

discounted at a rate below any discounts required for these groups by any provision of federal or state law.

SECTION 3. The findings in the Whereas clauses set forth in this resolution are

specifically incorporated as the basis for the action reflected in Section 1.

SECTION 4. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its

passage by four affirmative votes of the Board of Directors.

RESOLUTION NO. 2141 WAS PASSED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of September 2004.

/J A Joe Wallace, President

Attest:

Rbsje^Martinez, District Secretary

I, Rose Martinez, District Secretary for the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District,

certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted at a Regular Meeting of

the Board of Directors held on the 1st day of September 2004, by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Director Peeples, Vice President Harper, Directors Bischofberger,

Kaplan, Jaquez, President Wallace

NOES: None

ABSENT: None ,-v ~ .

ABSTAIN: None J4>

, Ro§e' Martinez, District Secretary

Approved as to Form:

neth C. Scheidig, General Counsel

Resolution No. 2141 Page 2


Resolution 2141

Exhibit A

\^^^

...... .%".-", v.lriv

Illi^llilîa^^ tV'BPi: îllil}*^^ Zitl

III

No Changes to Cash Fares. Senior/Disabled Monthly Sticker -mm

10-RideTicket5(formfirirPasses") feijii^-iîfe Vh ̂ ?^&Biii'?«

31 -Day TiCketS (formerly Masses")

B»i® fe ̂ a

Handout at the Budget Board Workshop

on 3/16/05 - GM Memo No. 05-036b

Fare Change Public Hearing Outreach Schedule (Draft, 3/16/05)

Setting the public hearing:

2/16 & 3/2 Hold Board discussions

3/16 Set public hearing for 5/18

Notifying the public & seeking maximum public input:

March

3/30 Post news story on Web site (w/links to proposal & comment form)

3/31 Send e-News message to all bus-line subscribers (w/links to proposal &

comment form) (1st)

April

4/11 -22 Brief bus operators and customer services staff on fare proposal

4/15 Compile public comments to date (distribute to Board) (1st)

4/18 Issue press release to encourage advance news stories

4/20 Publish legal notices (1st)

4/25 Augment Web site with Spanish and Chinese versions of proposal

4/27 Post car cards on all buses

4/27 Stock brochures (trilingual) on all buses (w/info on making comments by

mail, email, fax, and voicemail)

4/27-5/4 Distribute brochures to community sites

4/27 Activate on-hold message for 51 I/AC Transit call queue (inviting callers to

ask for brochure or visit Web site)

4/29 Update public comments compilation (distribute to Board) (2nd)

May

5/4 Publish legal notices (2nd) 5/11 Publish legal notices (3rd) 5/11 Send e-News message to all bus-line subscribers (w/links to proposal &

comment form) (2nd) 5/13 Update public comments compilation (distribute to Board with hearing

packet) (3rd) 5/9-17 Publish hearing announcement in local newspaper calendar sections

5/9-18 Distribute brochures in person at key transit stops

5/16 Issue press advisory

5/18 Hold public hearing

5/27 Produce final compilation of comments and staff responses (distribute to

Board with 6/1 meeting packet)

June

6/1 Adopt fare change (if any)

(Note: If Board makes its decision later than 6/1, and chooses an all-cash option, implementation

would need to move to 9/1 (with the grace period to use TriMunit media extending to 9/30).

V. Wake, Marketing & Community Relations, 3/16/05

U:\Victoria's files\Fares&Fareboxes\Fare change 05\Fare PH Outreach Plan.doc

Fare Change Critical-Path Schedule (Original draft 2/16/05, revised 3/2/05 & 3/16/05)

Setting the public hearing:

2/16 & 3/2 Board discussions

3/16 Board sets public hearing for 5/18

Notifying the public*:

3/30 Brochure text approved

4/5 Design complete

4/18 Translations complete

4/19 To print

4/27 On buses

Board decision:

5/18 Public hearing

6/1 Board approves pilot program (with Proposal #2 as backup)

Implementing pilot program**:

Notifying the public of(l) new fare structure effective 8/1; (2) last date

for 10-ride & 31-day ticket purchase 8/1; (3) last use of tickets 8/31:


6/8 Design complete


6/21 To print

7/5 On buses

Notifying vendors to cease 10-ride and 31-day tickets as of 8/1, and monthly

S/D stickers as of 8/10:

6/6 Send notification letter

6/20-25 Last 10-ride & 31 -day ticket deliveries to vendors

7/20-25 Last S/D monthly sticker deliveries to vendors

Pilot program in effect:

8/1 Implementation (with grace period to use old fare media)

9/1 Full implementation (grace period ends 8/31)

10/24 Initial analysis & decision to begin preparations for

implementing Proposal #2

11/7 Final decision to continue or end pilot program

(see over...)

U:\Victoria's files\Fares&Fareboxes\Fare change 05\Copy of Fare05 CritPath 0302.doc

Implementing Proposal #2 (if needed)***:

Notifying the public of(l) new fare structure effective 1/1; (2) tickets &

stickers on sale as of 12/20:


11/7 Design complete


11/22 To print

12/5 On buses

Producing new tickets & S/D stickers:

11/7 Design complete

11/8 To print

12/6 Received

Notifying vendors to resume sale of tickets and S/D stickers as of 12/20:

11/15 Send notification letter

12/13-19 Deliver new tickets and stickers to vendors

Proposal #2 in effect:

1/1 Implementation

♦producing & distributing the brochure is the critical path item. The many other printing, Web

site, press, and outreach tasks can be scheduled within this timeframe.

♦♦producing & distributing the brochure and notifying the vendors are the critical path items. The

many other printing, on-board & street signage, Web site, press, outreach, and farebox

reprogramming tasks can be scheduled within these timeframe (including possible production of a

magnetic-strip ticket for Commuter Check/Wage Works employee-benefit-program participants

only).

♦♦♦producing the brochure and the new tickets are the critical-path items. The many other

printing, on-board & street signage, Web site, press, outreach, and farebox reprogramming tasks

can be scheduled within these timeframes.

V. Wake, Marketing & Community Relations, 3/16/05

UAVictoria's files\Fares&Fareboxes\Fare change 05\Copy of FareO5 CritPath 0302.doc

flBELSON 510 527 2071 p.2

Correspondence pertaining to

GM Memo No. 05-036b on 3/16/05

March 15,2005

To: Members of the AC Transit Board of Directors

From: Janet Abelson

I am writing this letter as an individual and as a parent to let you know my concern about the possible change in fare instructions for AC Transit. I urge you to retain the current 10-ticket and monthly fares for youth. Forcing youth to use either cash or Transhnk will

create a number of problems: • It will increase theft as students will be forced to carry cash. • There are not many places for the students to obtain the exact change and

it will make it difficult for students to find the correct change.

• It will reduce school attendance because families may not have funds at the end of the month after paying an increased price for sending their

children to school.

• It will decrease the number of riders on the bus as students won't have the

bus fare. .

• Students may have a problem getting home from school if they lose their

bus fare or it is stolen.

• It will slow down the buses as students try to get the fare from their friends or other people on the bus as the students enter the bus.

Younger students do not yet have the skills necessary to handle money reliably. The proposed change would create an obstacle to school attendance. I say this both as a

parent whose children took the bus to school and as a member of the school community who worked to find funding for those children who couldn't get home from school

because they had no money.

Thank you for your consideration.

March 14,2005

To: Members of the Board of Directors of AC Transit

RE: Proposed Fare Increase and Change in the Method of Fare Payment

From: Janet Abelson, AC Transit Accessibility Advisory Committee Chair

At the last meeting of the AC Transit Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC), we

discussed the proposed fare increase and the reduction in the number of fare instruments.

If we had to choose between the two proposals to change fares, we would prefer option

number two. We are very concerned about the negative impact of reducing the fare

payment instruments to just cash and Translink. Both of these methods present

accessibility issues for the disabled and senior communities.

Cash is difficult and/or impossible for many disabled and senior riders to obtain and

handle. Locations that will change paper money into coins are few and far apart. Coins

can be hard to manipulate or even impossible for some members of the disabled

community, especially those without the use of their hands or those who are unable to

add and subtract.

Translink equipment is not even being included at the bus entrance used by riders in

wheelchairs on the Van Hool buses and the other entrance is not wheelchair accessible.

Drivers often just let passengers in wheelchairs ride for free rather than carry a Translink

card to and from the fare device.

The reduction in the number of fare instruments would make the system less accessible.

This would mean that more disabled riders would be unable to use the fixed route system

and would be forced to use the paratransit system. This would increase costs for AC

Transit and give disabled riders less freedom in traveling.

We urge you to eliminate the consideration of alternative number one as you go to public

hearing on this matter. Monthly passes and tickets for individual rides are very important

to the senior and disabled communities, as well as others, especially youth.

Thank you for your consideration.

RBELSON 510 527 2071 p.l

FAX

Voice: 510-891"485i^

Fax: _

From: Janet Abelson

Voice: 510-525-7709

Fax: 510-527-2071

Message:

Please distribute to members of the Board of Director before the March K,

2005 Board Meeting. The topic is setting a hearing for fare increases. The

.mcsrage-ts^rem^hÂCJraasit-AtctiSsibilily Adyismy Committee. Thanks.

MAR-02-2C05 WED 09:55 AM CITY OF SAN PfiBLC FAX ND. 5!02357G59 ?. 02

El C« rr i to

Hern

P i f. o I r

Hictmonil

AC tmntix

BART

('until CuM

County

>V a >! C A t

ivccmc !»•#I CMfra Crate TrompciMttea Mm>wy Cenmtn**

March 2,2005

AC Transit Board of Directors

1600 Franklin Street

Oakland, CA 94612

Re: Proposed Fare Restructure - Comments presented to the Board on 3.2.05

Dear Board of Directors:

As you know, the West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee staflf has been working on the Low-Income Student Bus Pass program with AC Transit and many other stakeholders over the past few years. We are still committed to the program, and it is ineluded in the transportation sales tax renewal ia Contra Costa County (Measure J) that was passed by the voters in November 2004. Unfortunately, Measure J does not start until 2009, so the program (unless funded by another source) will not be reinlroduced until that time.

We understand that the Board will be considering a proposed Pilot Program for fare restructuring and setting a public hearing date today. The following are staff's comments regarding the Pilot

cc:Board of Directors General Manager

General Counsel

District Secretary

hearing date:

1.

ic

2.

3.

Many people using the passes - especially the youth - will be making more than one trip (home to school) each day. Therefore, the cost of bus travel will increase, not decrease. While the cost of a single trip may be slightry lower, the cost of multiple trips will clearly be higher man a $15 monthly pass.

We understand that the Low-Income Student Bus Pass program evaluation for the second year is scheduled to come to the AC Transit Board in April. Prior to approving any changes to the pass program, it may be beneficial for the Board to hear the second year evaluation of the program.

Finally, even a four-month Pilot Program, as proposed, may set a precedent for the future of passes, particularly the Low Income Student Bus Pass. If the Pilot Program is implemented and deemed "successful" after four months, the opportunity to reintroduoe the student pass will be eliminated.

We hope that the AC Transit Board will carefully examine aJJ of the facts related to the use of bus passes and do further evaluation of the impact of eliminating the pass system. Additionally testimony on how the elimination of passes may adversely affect students, seniors, and the disabled may provide further information before the Board moves forwaid with the public hearing.

rtant issue.

Sincerely,

Lisa Hammon, Managing Director

cc: WCCTAC Board (meeting packet mailing)

Tt.1. J10.U5.J0J5 ♦ Iah 5I0.2J5.70SJ

ACTION MEMO

AC TRANSIT DISTRICT

Board of Directors

Executive Summary

Committees:

Planning Committee

External Affairs Committee

Board of Directors

D

GM Memo No. 05-036a (Revised)

Meeting Date: March 2, 2005

Finance Committee D

Operations Committee □

Financing Corporation □

SUBJECT: APPROVE FOR PUBLIC CONSIDERATION A PROPOSED FARE

RESTRUCTURE AND SET THE PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED FARE

RESTRUCTURE FOR MAY 4, 2005 AT A TIME AND LOCATION TO BE

DETERMINED BY THE BOARD

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

□ Information Only □ Briefing Item Recommended Motion

Adopt a motion establishing the proposed fare restructure and setting the public hearing

for May 4, 2005 at a time and location to be determined by the Board.

Fiscal Impact: Potential additional fare revenue estimated at $8.0 million annually.

Additionally, there would be administrative savings of approximately $500K annually.

Background/Discussion:

Existing Fare Structure

AC Transit currently accepts cash aboard all buses, but also offers multiple fare media

including: 1) 10-ride and 31-day passes, 2) "eco-pass" programs with the University of

California (students and faculty) and the City of Berkeley (employees only), 3) Translink

BOARD ACTION: Approved as Recommended [ ]

Approved with Modification(s) [ ]

Other

[To be filled in by District Secretary after Board/Committee Meeting]

The above order was passed on

, 2005.

Rose Martinez, District Secretary

By

GM Memo No. 05-036a


AND SET THE PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED FARE RESTRUCTURE FOR MAY 4, 2005

AT A TIME AND LOCATION TO BE DETERMINED BY THE BOARD

Date: March 2, 2005

Page 2 of 5

and 4) transfers. Transfers are sold to all passengers for $0.25 and discounts are

available for senior and/or disabled passengers, as well as youth. The District's existing

fare structure and current prices are shown in Attachment 1.

Justification For Proposed Fare Structure

It has been almost three years since the District's fares have been adjusted. During

this time the local, state and national economies have continued to be mired in a

prolonged recession. The District has declared two fiscal emergencies (fiscal years

2003-2004 and 2004-2005), reduced service, reduced personnel, depleted its reserve

accounts and taken other actions to address revenue shortfalls. While there are signs

that the recession may be ending, projections for the East Bay continue to be less rosy.

The passage of Measure BB by the voters did reduce, but did not eliminate, the

revenue shortfalls the District continues to project. To deal with these shortfalls for the

2005-2006 fiscal year it is recommended that the District Board consider a restructuring

of the District's fare structure.

Proposed New Fare Structure

Staff is proposing that the District implement a pilot program to determine the impact of

reducing cash fares and simplifying the fare structure. The pilot program would last no

longer than 4 months, but could be terminated prior to that date if fare collection data

indicates that the program is either not working or is working successfully and should be

established as the District's fare structure. If the pilot is not successful, the District

would return to a mixed media structure based on a base fare increase identified as

Proposal 2 in Attachment 1 (raising the base fare to $1.75 and $0.85 for

youth/senior/disabled with corresponding increases in the offered magnetic fare media).

However, if the pilot is successful, staff recommends either extending the program or

adopting the fare re-structure as permanent. In any event, staff recommends providing

periodic reviews for one year while keeping Proposal 2 the back-up fare structure

during this time while staff closely monitors the pilot program and recommends action

accordingly. Proposal 2 would sunset after one year of implementation of the pilot

program.

Under the proposed pilot program, the cash fare for adults would be reduced to $1.00

and $0.50 for senior/disabled and youth passengers. Discounts would be eliminated for

multiple rides (making the system more similar to BART's pay-as-you-go system) and

payment would be required with each boarding (eliminating transfers). All existing non-

cash fare media, including transfers, would be discontinued, except for BART-to-Bus

transfers and selected 1-ride magnetic passes for use by social agencies. The BART-

to-Bus transfer would be honored for a $0.25 credit on the purchase of a full fare

(making the fare $0.75 for adults and $0.25 for youth/senior/disabled).

While the primary impetus for this proposal is financial (staff projections show that the

proposal could have a positive net financial impact on the District of over $8.0 million

GM Memo No. 05-036a




Date: March 2, 2005

Page 3 of 5

based on conservative estimates) the proposal also addresses a number of issues as

outlined below. If accurate, this could significantly reduce, or even eliminate, the need

to reduce service in the next fiscal year.

Under the proposed new structure, the District expects to see the following benefits:

• Increase in fare revenue

• Decrease in fare evasion

• Decrease in administrative and production costs related to current fare media

• Reduction in driver/passenger conflicts related to fare issues

• Better ridership and fare elasticity data

• Increase in ridership

• Marketing potential related to a simplified fare structure

• Ease of transition to Translink

Passengers who currently use cash will see a significant reduction in their fares when

compared with Proposal 2. Additionally, based on a 180-day school year and 2 bus

trips per school day, youth patrons would spend $15 a month, the same as the current

Youth 31-Day pass (180 x $0.50 x 2 = $180). Senior/Disabled patrons, currently paying

$20 per month, would be able to take 40 trips per month before any increase is

realized.

Attachment 3 details the fiscal impact on both cash and 31-day pass patrons.

Attachment 2 details the potential annual revenue increase anticipated by the pilot

program. Actual receipts will depend on when the program is started. Ridership

numbers use actual figures from the National Transit Database (NTC) report for fiscal

year ending June 2004. Additionally, 7.8 million rides categorized as "daily UC pass"

and "daily other" have not been incorporated into the projections although staff believes

that these rides exist. Based on the proposal, these conservative estimates project a

$49.5 million farebox, an increase of $8.0 million. Additional variances are calculated

for comparison purposes.

Pass production costs and commission discounts paid to external vendors total over

$500K annually. These costs would be eliminated in the proposed program.

Additionally, the costs to stock, distribute and account for pass and ticket sales would

be greatly reduced.

At the Board Workshop of February 16, 2005 some questions were raised regarding the

proposed fare re-structure including: How will disabled persons, unable to handle cash,

manage in the new fare structure (Long-term, the implementation of Translink and

issuance of Translink cards solves this. For the pilot, suggestions include the extended

acceptance of August stickers, mailing future month stickers directly to disabled patrons

or printing special stickers that would be valid for the pilot program.); Title VI issues

regarding multiple ride passengers (Staff is fully aware of Title VI and strives to address

GM Memo No. 05-036a




Date: March 2, 2005

Page 4 of 5

all aspects of this legislation in all fare proposals. Long-term, Translink will provide

options in delivering discounts to frequent users.); Paratransit base fare (The

paratransit base fare is a blended fare with a number of variables. Staff is currently

evaluating the affects of the fare re-structure on this formula.); What other transit

agencies offer a cash only fare structure? (Based on the APTA database, only 4 other

transit agencies offer a cash only fare structure. All 4 are small operations with limited

service between 3-6 routes. See Attachment 4.).

Implementation Date

Staff recommends that the District implement the proposed pilot program on September

1, 2005. Due to the simplicity of the structure, required lead-times are minimized and

education of the public is the key implementation process. On September 1, 2005, the

District would cease to accept fare media other than cash, 1 -ride passes only issued to

social services and the "eco-pass" programs the District is currently contracted with.

Evaluation of the Pilot Program

Due to the simplicity of the program, and the speed and accuracy with which the District

collects and counts its cash, feedback on the success of the program should be very

fast and quantifiable. Should the program succeed, staff recommends that the

structure be continued and incorporated into the Translink rollout. Should the program

fail, the fare structure in Proposal 2 would be implemented as soon as possible.

Setting the Public Hearing

A public hearing on the proposed fare restructure is required by Board Policy No. 163

and applicable law. Setting the date of the hearing for May 4 will provide sufficient time

to provide public notice of the hearing. Although there will be public outreach prior to

the public hearing, it is anticipated that there will be a significant amount of public

comment. The Board might consider whether to hold one public hearing at 2:00 p.m. or

to have two public hearings on May 4th - one at 2:00 p.m. or a later time after the Board has completed its regular business (e.g. 3:00 or 3:30) and another occurring at 6:00

p.m. In addition to setting the time of the hearing, the Board needs to determine the

content of the hearing. It is recommended that the hearing consist of the consideration

of a restructured fare for boarding AC Transit buses based on a pilot fare of $1.00 per

boarding, except the per boarding fare for Seniors/Disabled/Youth would be $0.50, and

the elimination of transfers and other discount media and passes. If the pilot fare is

determined not to be successful at any time within a four month test period,

commencing on September 1, 2005, it may be eliminated and the fare structure would

immediately revert to the cash, 31-day pass, 10-ride ticket and transfer figures shown

as Proposal 2 in Attachment 1. (The public hearing notice will identify the current fares

and the proposed fare restructuring.)

GM Memo No. 05-036a




Date: March 2, 2005

Page 5 of 5

Prior Relevant Board Actions/Policies:

GM Memo 03-225 dated August 6, 2003; Consider adoption of Resolution No. 2100

responding to comments regarding fare adjustments from the July 16, 2003 public

hearing and adopting fare changes effective September 1, 2003.

Attachments:

Attachment 1:

Attachment 2:

Attachment 3:

Attachment 4:

Attachment 5:

Current Fare Structure, Proposal 1 and Proposal 2 with

Expected Impact on Farebox

Detailed Expected Revenues from Proposal 1

Proposal 1 Impact on Cash Patrons and 31-Day Pass Patrons

APTA Transit Agencies: Base Fares


Approved by:

Prepared by:

Date Prepared:

Rick Fernandez, General Manager

Deborah McClain, Chief Financial Officer

Kenneth Scheidig, General Counsel

Dan Lillin, Treasury Manager

February 16, 2005

ATTACHMENT 1: Current Fare Structure. Proposal 1 and Proposal 2 with expected impact on farebox . ,^~ 2/24/05 ' umrtirsions ol w *menis.xls

ORIGINAL BASELINE

(Actuals for FY 03/04

CASH

Adult

Transbay

G/L Bookings

19.645,247

Totals Current Fare Proposal 2 Increase % Incraase

$1.50

$3.00

$1J5

$3.50

$0.25

S0.50

16.67%

16.67%

(Adult/TB net transfers)

Youth

Sr/Dis

Subtotal:

31-Dav Pass/Monthly

Adult

Youth

Sr/Dis

Transbay

Subtotal:

10-Rlde Ticket

Adult

Youth/Sr/Dis

Transbay

Subtotal:

Transfers

Issued on bus

TOTAL FAREBOX:

18,445,247

3,218.202

617.894

5.609.193

2.440,795

2,429.500

1.605,420

1,580,173

692,832

3,594.270

Annual Issued

4,882,000

22.281.343

12,084.908

5.867.275

1.220,500

41,454,026

$1.50

$0.75

$0.75

360.00

$15.00

$20.00

$100.00

$15.00

$7.50

$30.00

$0.25

$1;75

$0.85

$0.85

$7000

$15.00

$20.00

$116.00

$1746 $8:50

$35.00

S0.50

$0.25

$0.10

$0.10

$10.00

$0.00

$0.00

$16.00

16.67%

13.33%

13.33%

16.67%

0.00%

0.00%

16.00%

$0.25 100.00%

Strafghtllno

Increase

3.274,208

0

3.074,208

429.094

82.386

3.585.687

934,866

0

0

1.191,733

1.220,500

6,952,705

Proposal 1

$1.00

$2.00

$0.50

$0.50

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

Farobox

Receipts

34,066.483

5,637.563

6.504.908

3.296.360

% Decrease % Decrease

tfrotn current) tfrom Proposal 2)

33.33%

33.33%

33.33%

33.33%

42.86%

42.86%

41.18%

41.18%

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

49,505,314

ATTACHMENT 1: Current Fare Structure, Proposal 1 and Proposal 2 with expected impact on farebox

ATTACHMENT 2: Detailed Expected Revenues from Proposal 1 2/24/05

©-versions of otu>ehm«nj_jdj

Local Passenger mformatiaa

$34,066,483 $33,044,489 $32,363,159 $27,253,187

$6,504,908 $6,309,760 $6,179,662 $5,854,417 $5^03,926

SUBTOTAL LOCAL:

iTransbay Passenger Information for Fare Proposal 05 |

$5,507,395 $5v342,173 $5,232,025 $4,956,655

$35,223 $34,166 $33,462 $31,700

$8,811,831

$7,579

$17,001

$1,931

$1,668

$28,178

SUBTOTAL TRANSBAY:

TOTAL FAREBOX:

ATTACHMENT 2: DrtaBod EmwcXcd R<

In, ACHMENT 3: Proposal 1 Impact on Cash Patrons and 31-t Pass Patrons /05

e-versions of attachmflhts.xls

Cash

Current

Proposal 1

Proposal 2

Trios

1

$1.50

$1.00

$1.75

Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total

ATTACHMENT 3: Proposal 1 Impact on Cash Patrons and 31-Day Pass Patrons

.c Only: p., flPTA -Hab.il

r

' ;■ ■■"■■>: ; .,■■:;■■;.:;■■■■ -^

■■"■■>: ' i" *■ -:- ." .!"i . ■". ■; ' m ..'■■■;,:■.. :;■>■ •,;.■..■ ■■■;■■.■.■: ■

Retrtag Fort Trtreportttlaft AuSwfty

Him Cmt Trend

CenomfA *afa> Rtgbml TremJ

Owv ̂ M" Tremportlten CorponSofi

..'■.

■'■: .'■-':.':!i

BinctMt

BMtogOnwt

w OmM R*9tond Ti

UKETRAN

Ir»«« Mm>tr

U

9«a Uartnitlg Esa B>a

KTi!l

IS U«m Tranal

N*w Yorh Ctl D«|W(ttn«f< ol T

HmDkgsfnbf

Sin FnndRO g««niRtpU Irml Dtitjkt

MT

ttf Usn

UMAS8 Trend StnM

P1|mOU9>

Cnrnr

NvwYoit

SinDkgo

OaUlM

3lrdV.hr

i

TikrTremll

Mbntlug dna TnmiiM

Tucm

Tifct

OH

OH

OH

fl

CA

CA L»A»gafc*CA

CA

CA

CA

sc

NY

CA

CA SanFm<n.CA

CA SMVlkr.CA

a.

AZ

TX

vA

xAZ

in

ia

ISO

129

on

OSS

170

100

on

ooo

on

on 100

13*

is

i»

on

joo

190

123

125

OS

100

IS!

073

Day pats. S. T, 104U* tekttt.

IOÛi ptnA pm,

Tata*, to* Bljt Cwd

COT rapBrtkvj. *>*■ «« nn anv «*Nd»a

Otan><M hndl can «ai an Mltri

WRT-«teninMea«i

Da«ka ef 42 ackata ««afa«at it CNV hal

Col*o« campM Mnrica oHy

DOT, *« rat Kfialy ran any v*HdM

i*4*

I o

3"

O

Q

o Ol

u

Troosury APTA Transit Agencies: Base Fares (sorted bv amount) 2/15/05

Base Fares xls

Transit System Name City State Urbanized Area/Location

Effective

Date of Adult

Base Fare

Date of Next

Change to Aduil

Base Fare

Adult

Base Fere

Minritturn Transfer

Surcharge to Same

Mode

Maximum Transfer

Surcharge to Same

Mode

Minimum Transfer

Surcharge to Other

Fixed-Route Mode

Maximum Transfer

Surcharge to Other

Fixed-Route Mode

Transfers

Issued by

Machine

Pennsylvania Department of Transportation

City of Vallejo-Transpertattcn Division

Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District


Loudcun County Transrl

Wesl Coast Express

West Coast Express

Virginia Railway Express

Broward County Division of Mass Transit

Rock Island County Metropolitan Mass Transit District

Maryland Transrl Administration

MTA Metro-North Railroad

Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority

Potomac and Rappahanneek Transportation Commission

North County Transit District

MTA Long I stand Rail Road

Southern California Regional Rail Authority

Agertce Metrcpolitaine de Transport

Gotden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District

San Francisco Municipal Railway

Port Authority of New York and Mew Jersey

Southeastern Permsylvanfa Transportation Authority

Corpus Chrisli Regional Transportation Authority

GO Transrl

GO Transit


AKamonl Commuter Express

Southern Teton Area Rapid Transit

Washington State Ferries

City of Ottawa OC Transpo

Soctete de Transport de Montreal

Sooiete de Transport de Montreal

San Diego Transit Corporation


Toronto Transit Commission


Toronto Transit Commtssion


San Diego Metropolitan Transit Development Board

Treasury

Cily and County of J« i Department of Transportation Servicos

Southeastern Portnsytvunio Transportation Authority

Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority



Calgary Transit

Calgary Transit

Edmonton Transit System



Victoria Regional Transit System

City of Ottawa OC Trenspo

New York City Department of Transportation

MTA New York City Transit

MTA Now York City Transit

MTA Stolen Island Railway

MTA Long Island Bus


South Florida Regional Transportation Authority

Central Pugot Sound Regional Transit Authority

Communtly Action Regional Transit

Eagle County Regional Transportation Authority




Creator Vancouver Transportation Authority

Delaware Area Transit Agency

City of Saskatoon

Monterey-Salinas Transit

North County Transit District

Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority

Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority




Pert Authority of Allegheny County


Wastchester County Department of Transportation

Milwaukee County Transit System

Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board




Atamoda-Ccntra Costa Transit District

Central Centra Costa Transit Authority

Sacramento Regional Transit District

Sacramento Regional Transit District

Santa Clara Volley Transportation Authority

Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority

Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District

City of Detroit Department of Transportation

Suburban Mobility Authority for Regional Transportation

Bi-Stote Development Agency

Bi-State Devotopment Agency

Regional Transportation Commission

Now Jersey Transit Corporation

Port Authority of New York and New Jersey



Cumberland-Dauphin-Harrisburg Transit Authority

Wiliiamsport Bureau of Transportation

Greater Lynchburg Transit Company

GRTC Transit System

Transportation District Commisston of Hampton Roods

Madison Metro Transit System

Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority

Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority

Tornpkins Consolidated Area Transit

Pace Suburban Bus Division

Son Diego Troltsy

Triangle Transit Authority

Treasury

Metropolitan Transit, ̂

Washington Metropcfitan Moa Transit Auihorrty

Lehtgh and Northampton Transportation Authority

Utah Transit Authority

Utah Transit Authority

Dorks Aroo Reading Transportation Authority

City of Vattejo-Transportattan Division

tnterurban Transit Partnership

Now Jersey Transit Corporation

Trt-Ccunty MebcpoStan Transportation District of Oregon

Trf-Ccunty MetropoSUm Transportation District of Oregon


City of Phoerdx Pubte Transit Department

Fairfleta/Sirtsun Transit System

San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District

San Francisco Municipal Railway

San Francisco Muntapal Railway

San Francisco Municipal RoiKvay

San Matoo County Transit Distrtcl

Santa Barbara Metropolitan Transit Distrtcl

Sfml Valley Transit

Souft Coast Area Transit

Los Angetes County Metjcpc&m Transportoticn Authority

Lo» Angeles County MetropcEten Transportation Authority

Los Angetes County Metropcaan Transportation Authority

Regional Transportation District

Regional Transportation District

Creator Bridgeport Transit Authority

Norwat* Transit District

Washington MelrepoHan Area Transit Authority

Plrmtlas Suncoast Transit Aulhcrtty

Miami-Dado Transit Agency

MlomJ-Dade Transit Agency

PatrnTran

Gary Pu&Qc Trunspcrte&on Corporation

tnoltnupoQs PubSc Transportaifcn Corporation

Transit Authority of Northern Kentucky



Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authortty

Bane Creek Transit

Metro Transit

Metro Transit

Central Ohio Transit Authority


Control Oklahoma Transportation and Parking Authority

Metropolitan TuJsa Transit Authority

Una Transit District

Altoona Metro Transit

Centre. Area Transportation Authority

Memphis Area Transit Authority

Fort Worth Transportation Authority

King Cotmty Department of Transportation



Pierce Transit

Charleston Area Regional Transportation Authortty

Control Florida Regional Transportation Authority

Transfer!

Donas Area Rapid Transit Authority

DaBas Area Rapid Transit Authority

DaOas Area Rapid Transit Authortty

WBHomsburg Area Transport

Wmikesha Metro Transit

Uvormore/Amodor VaBey Transit Authortty

Gtemfalo Transit

Cobb Community Transit

Regional Transportation Commission cl Southern Nevada

Central Pugel Sound Regional Transit Authority

Control Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority Ptyrrouth Matrotink

Southwest Matrp Transit Commission

Springs Tronsfl

Minnesota VaBey Transit Authority

Anofca County Transit

APTA Transit Aqenclos: Baao Faros (sorted bv amount)

Treasury

Westmoreland County m 1 horny

Mid Men Valley Transit M. t Antelope Valley Tronsa Authority

OMNITRANS

Port Authority Transit Corporation

Red Rose Transit Authority

Delaware Transit Corporation

San Joaquin Regional Transit District

Connecticut Transit

KaJitniazoo Trsrtspcitstfon Division

New Jersey Transa Corporation

Charlotte Area Transit System

Luzeme County Transportation Authority

FoclhHl Transll

Northeast Trsrtsportitrofl Company

SunTran

Fresno Area Express

Orange County Transportation Authority

Riverside Transit Agency

University Transport System

Broward County Division of Mass Transit

Regional Transit System

TALTRAN

QirmlnghonvJerTeison Ccunty Transit Authority

Greater Peoria Mass Transit District

Fort Wayne Pubtlc Transportation Corporation

CilyBu* of Greater Lafayette

Ames Transit Agency

Des Monies Metropolitan Transit Authority

OwcrtSDGTO Trftnsf SyStfrfli

Transit Authority of Letdnoton-FayeHe Urban County Government

Transit Authority of River CBy

UMASS Transit Service

Ann Arbor TnnspcstnUon Authority

Capital Area Transportation Authority

Mass Transportation Authority

Muskegon Area Transit System

Sagfnaw Transit Authority Regional Services

Dulttth Transit Authority

Kansas City Area TnuisporMrcn Aatnortty

CHy of ATbuojveniue Transit Department

Capital District Transportation Authority

CNYCentro

WtnstmvSntem Transit Authority

Stark Ana Regional Transit Authority

Metro RcgJamJ Tmiisit Authority

Greater Dayton Regfctntl Transit Authority

Greater Oaylon Regjenil Transit Authority

Western Reserve Transit Authority

York County Transportation Authority

KnoxvOTa Transportation Authority

Cittbus

Laredo Metro

Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County

Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County

Port Arthur Transit

Waco Transit System

Chittenden Courtly Transportation Authority

Transportation District Commission: of Hampton Roads

Transportation District Comrnrssim of Hampton Roods

Clark County PuWc Transportation Benefit Area Authority

Spokane Transit Authority

Champaign-Urbana Uos Transit Otstrtct

County of Lebanon Transit Authority

Space Coast Area Transit

Kltsap Transll

Krtsop Transit

Eastern Centra Costs TransR Authority

Alexandria Transit Company

Escambia County Ares Transit

Roitring Fork Transportation Authority

Votusla County Transportation Authority

Chatham Area Transit Authority

Redding Area Bus Authority

Greensboro Transit Authority

Butter TownsMp-City Joint Municipal Transit Authority

&aittB Ctsrfta Transit

Santa Fe Transit Services

ManalM Courtly Area Transit

Ventura County Transportation Commission

CRy of Bullhead CNy/Buflhcad Area Transit System

Mereed County TrentR

Lawton Area Transit System

Wildcat Transit Unhersny of New Hampshire

Coy of Denten Transit System - LINK

Hazteien Puttie TransH.

APTA Transit Agencies: Base Faros (sorted by amountl 2/1 &05

Bnse Fstesuls

Attachment 5 Gf amo 05-036a


20%

18%

16%

14%

12%

10%

□Cost per vehicle mile

SI Cost per vehicle platform hour

FY 2002-03 FY 2003-04 FY 2004-05