Good.
The Federal Transit Administration told the Metropolitan Transit Authority in a letter last week that the civil rights review, which began in February, is complete. In July, the FTA informed Metro that it was deficient on two out of 12 requirements.
The agency needed better documentation in order to prove that recent fare and service changes, like the introduction of the electronic Q Fare Card, did not disproportionately affect low-income and minority customers. The FTA also told Metro that it needed to improve services to customers with limited English skills.
All transit agencies that receive federal money must comply with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and undergo periodic reviews of how its services affect low-income and minority communities.
Metro’s civil rights program has been deemed “in compliance” until September, 2012. At that point, the agency will have to submit a new report to the federal agency.
One focus of the review was recent changes to the Metropolitan Transit Authority’s fare policy. Metro eliminated free route transfers for cash customers in early 2008. It later raised its basic fare from $1 to $1.25.
Metro told reviewers that the implementation of the Q card actually benefited low-income customers by automating discounts. Customers get five free rides on the card after 50 paid rides.
Metro also said that under the previous fare system, customers who could pay large sums up front got bigger discounts. The Q card system offers discounts to all riders, but more frequent riders—who tend to be low-income and minority—get more frequent discounts.
Just a thought here, but since Metro’s fare structure has been the subject of discussion lately, it seems to me that increasing the frequency of the free rides that Q cards can accumulate might be a decent way of reducing the cost of riding for low-income folks. Maybe for every other 50 paid rides you get 10 freebies instead of five, or something like that. I think the idea of rewarding total number of rides rather than an amount of up-front cash is a good one, and if the goal is to keep fares from getting too onerous for lower income riders, that’s the way to go. You could even index the number of free rides given to the fare, so that for the true frequent riders, the cost per ride never really goes up. Greg has an alternate suggestion to achieve the same goal. What do you think?