In the third of a four-part webinar series by the San Jose State’s Mineta Transportation Institute, keynote speakers Emma Huang and Joshua Schank shared their research on free transit.
The webinar focused on how lack of access to affordable mobility is connected to the lack of access to opportunities.
The speakers present fareless transit as a solution to improve equity for underserved communities.
Huang is a senior consultant at InfraStrategies LLC, a global advisory and management consulting firm focused on infrastructure project development, according to the Mineta Transportation Institute’s website.
Huang said her research highlighted three strategies that would help low-income people.
These strategies focused on charging no fares during non-peak hours, road pricing for drivers with personal vehicles and alternative transportation solutions.
“Low-income individuals can get funds to spend that is not limited to using on transit,” Huang said. “The idea here is to provide maximum flexibility and mobility options for those that need them the most.”
Schank, who is the Managing Principal at InfraStrategies LLC and a research associate at the Mineta Transportation Institute, addressed popular concerns against fareless transit such as the source of funding and long-term sustainability.
“Most U.S. transit agencies are actually kind of like Los Angeles Metro in the sense that a lot of their budget is not coming from fares and they are a small amount of their overall budget package,” Schank said.
He said another concern was related to the houseless population using public transportation as temporary housing or shelter.
Schank questioned if the lowest income citizens should be charged to ride transit.
“There's going to be homeless people on public transit as long as you have a homeless problem in your society,” Schank said. “To me, the marginal benefit of charging fares with respect to reducing homeless people on trains and buses does nothing to actually address the homeless problem.”
He said conflicts can arise over fare prices, sometimes leading to transit operators experiencing verbal or physical assault.
Schank said fareless transit would decrease the friction that often comes with fare enforcement.
“We did find [at the Los Angeles Metro] that over 50% of the assaults that were occurring to transit operators were fare related,” Schank said. “Operators are instructed, at Metro, not to enforce the fares beyond saying their fare is $1.75. There's no other instruction beyond that but they often feel obligated to enforce the fare.”
He said transit operators’ safety can benefit from fareless transit pilot programs, which some communities have already instated.
“It's faster for people to get on the bus. There's a user and operational benefit where the operator [does not have] a potential continuous conversation with someone to quote the fare,” Schank said. “Instead of trying to figure out multiple payment systems, it's more efficient because the rider just gets on and doesn't have to deal with that headache.”
Huang discussed the issue of funding that is common with fairless transit programs.
She said there are alternative ways to address the funding gap such as sales, tax adoption and property tax.
Schank urged politicians to advocate for free transit and plan to implement it in their communities.
“New York hasn't quite gotten there but they got big hurdles to advocate on behalf of riders of the transit system and protest members of the assembly,” Schank said. “Often, elected officials who profess to be in favor of improving equity promote policies that do exactly the opposite.”
Huang said the Area Transit Agency is an existing program that stands out to her as a program to emulate.
“[The Area Transit Agency] has a fabulous program right now and probably has had it for the longest [time]. I'm not sure if it's been properly documented and whether they have a study of it, but that is something I would be excited to look at,” Huang said.
