Off-Board Fare Payment Using Proof-of-Payment Verification (2012) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 1-117
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 1... ...
TCRP TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM SYNTHESIS 96 Off-Board Fare Payment Using Proof-of-Payment Verification Sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration A Synthesis of Transit Practice
|
From page 2... ...
George Bugliarello, President Emeritus and University Professor, Polytechnic Institute of New York Transportation Research Board University, Brooklyn; Foreign Secretary, National Academy of Engineering, Washington, DC James E Caponiti, Acting Deputy Administrator, Maritime Administration, U.S.DOT SECRETARY Cynthia Douglass, Acting Deputy Administrator, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Christopher W
|
From page 3... ...
TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM TCRP SYNTHESIS 96 Off-Board Fare Payment Using Proof-of-Payment Verification A Synthesis of Transit Practice Consultants THOMAS F LARWIN Lee Engineering San Diego, California and YUNG KOPROWSKI Lee Engineering Phoenix, Arizona S ubscriber C ategories Public Transportation · Finance Research Sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration in Cooperation with the Transit Development Corporation TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C.
|
From page 4... ...
TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM TCRP SYNTHESIS 96 The nation's growth and the need to meet mobility, environmental, and Project J-7, Topic SA-27 energy objectives place demands on public transit systems. Current ISSN 1073-4880 systems, some of which are old and in need of upgrading, must expand ISBN 978-0-309-22341-6 service area, increase service frequency, and improve efficiency to Library of Congress Control Number 2011941918 serve these demands.
|
From page 5... ...
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. On the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters.
|
From page 6... ...
Federal Transit Administration JARRETT STOLTZFUS Federal Transit Administration APTA LIAISON KEVIN DOW American Public Transportation Association TRB LIAISON JENNIFER A ROSALES Transportation Research Board Cover Figure: Phoenix Valley METRO light rail special event fare inspection shown using temporary queuing barriers (Courtesy: Phoenix Valley METRO)
|
From page 7... ...
Vlasak America and internationally, updating the information provided in the 2002 TCRP Report Senior Program Officer 80: A Toolkit for Self-Service, Barrier-Free Fare Collection. Transportation The subject is more complex than evasion rates.
|
From page 9... ...
Paul, Minnesota -- Metro Transit, 45 New York City, New York -- New York City Transit (NYCT) , 51 Phoenix, Arizona -- Valley Metro Rail, Inc.
|
From page 11... ...
and, per haps, handheld verification devices if the operator uses smart cards as part of its fare media. Use of off-board PoP fare collection allows convenient, quick, all-door passenger board ing for transit systems.
|
From page 12... ...
· PoP fare collection has been found to have application for BRT services, but whether it will prove to be cost-effective will largely depend on the loading volumes at the BRT stops/stations and the need for boarding at the rear doors to ensure a relatively high bus operating speed. · The management of the fare inspection function and control of fare evasion will sig nificantly benefit from collection of fare evasion data to permit disaggregate analysis (i.e., by time of day, day of week, and location)
|
From page 13... ...
San Francisco, California -- San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency Interviews with each of the seven resulted in identifying a set of common experiences. These experiences form a group of practices for other operators to consider, whether they use PoP fare collection today or are considering its future use: · Using a customer-oriented enforcement to fare payment rather than a traditional policing approach, · Implementing an agency-administered adjudication process, · Instituting an administrative process for payment of the fare evasion penalty, · Creating a focused fare inspection team with nonsworn officers, · Adding smart cards to the menu of fare media available for fare payment, · Employing PoP fare collection on BRT services, · Using independent management audits as an aid in reviewing an agency's PoP experience, · Expanding the provision of public information via the Internet and the YouTube online video, · Deploying a "show of force" on a new service using PoP fare collection, · Using sweeps (also referred to as blitzes, surges, or enhanced fare enforcement)
|
From page 14... ...
The case study interviews along with survey responses and the literature review produced questions for which no answers were found in available research. As a result, six areas deserving of additional research were identified: · The range of loading volumes that would result in PoP fare collection being a cost effective alternative; · The relationship among the evasion rate, rates of inspection, and penalty amounts; · A manual or guidelines for statistical analysis of fare evasion; · A transit smart card forum for PoP operators; · The cost-effectiveness of alternative adjudication processes; · The costs -- capital, operating, and maintenance -- of alternative off-board PoP fare collection and enforcement approaches.
|
From page 15... ...
As a result, enforcement of fare payment through inspec- STUDY OBJECTIVES tion is a necessary function of PoP to ensure fare compliance. The enforcement relies on fare enforcement/inspection per- This synthesis collected data on existing transit operations sonnel who randomly ask riders to show proof-of-payment.
|
From page 16... ...
. As of early 2011, there were a total of 30 transit properties A tabular summary of the study's 33 survey respon- operating 91 routes in North America in which off-board dents indicating each agency's use of PoP is shown in Table PoP fare collection was used.
|
From page 17... ...
Paul, Minnesota Metro Transit · 1 1 Newark, New Jersey NJ Transit · 3 · New York City, New York MTANew York City Transit · 2 · Oceanside, California North San Diego County Transit District · 1 1 Ottawa, Ontario Ottawa Regional Transit Commission · 7 1 Phoenix, Arizona METRO Light Rail 1 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Port Authority of Allegheny County · · Portland, Oregon Tri-County Metropolitan District of Oregon # 4 1 Sacramento, California Sacramento Regional Transit District · 2 Salt Lake City, Utah Utah Transit Authority · 1 3 1 San Diego, California San Diego Metropolitan Transit System · · 3 San Francisco, California San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency # 6 1 San Jose, California Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority · 3 Seattle, Washington Sound Transit · 1 2 St. Louis, Missouri Bi-State Development Agency · 2 Toronto, Ontario Toronto Transit Commission · · 1 · Vancouver, British Columbia TransLink/SkyTrain # 3 1 1 York, Ontario York Region Transit/Viva · 5 BRT -- bus rapid transit, LRT -- light rail transit, MS -- modern streetcar, VT -- vintage trolley, HRT -- heavy rail transit, CR -- commuter rail.
|
From page 18... ...
Louis -- Bi-State Development Agency 1 Toronto Transit Commission 1 Vancouver TransLink/SkyTrain 1 York Region Transit/Viva 1 Total 17 12 1 2 1 REPORT ORGANIZATION Chapter two covers a literature review with a focus on TCRP Report 80: A Toolkit for Self-Service, Barrier-Free Fare The synthesis is organized as a summary of each of the fol- Collection. TCRP Report 80 was the most thorough research lowing three main tasks in chapters two, three, and four, effort on the subject of PoP fare collection when published respectively.
|
From page 19... ...
significant information is included in appendixes to the report: Chapter four presents in-depth summaries of what is hap- Appendix A: Survey Instrument pening with seven transit operators that use PoP for one or more routes in their respective systems. These seven cases Appendix B: Participating Agencies were selected to represent a sampling of regions having a diverse range of conditions with PoP fare collection experi- Appendix C: Example of Statutory Provisions Concernences to include bus and rail modes, differing geographical ing Fare Evasion Enforcement areas of North America, and a range in the length of time PoP has been in operation.
|
From page 20... ...
" and to "provide been organized into five groups as an aid to practitioners practical guidance to policy makers, planners, researchers, who have to deal with the variety of issues related to PoP and operating managers." In retrospect, TCRP 80 has been fare collection: found to accomplish this objective. It provides guidance that covers major aspects of PoP operations and enforcement, · Experiences with implementation, such as use of special field audits or surveys to augment · BRT applications, monitoring of evasion rates, development of inspection strat · Measuring fare evasion, egies to supplement the normal inspection process with tar · Managing PoP within the organization, and geted 100% sweeps, practices with regard to discretionary · Fare collection and fare evasion coverage in the media.
|
From page 21... ...
MEASURING FARE EVASION The National BRT Institute 2009 report prepared for the When the subject of PoP fare collection comes up, fare evaFTA includes a thorough discussion of the service charac- sion inevitably seems to be part of the discussion. Accurate teristics of BRT (5)
|
From page 22... ...
Paul) for the Hiawatha LRT managing subway fare evasion, an approach that also can and Northstar Commuter Rail lines, respectively; one for be applied where PoP fare collection is employed.
|
From page 23... ...
As an example, this document is associated with fare collection -- and the public attention that included in Appendix E fare evasion receives: · Fare Enforcement Process Manual -- NJT, 14 pages.
|
From page 24... ...
ORGANIZATIONAL AND PERSONNEL ASPECTS OF Table 1, in chapter one, listed the survey respondents and THE FARE ENFORCEMENT FUNCTION showed the diversity of services on which PoP fare collection is used by the 30 North American transit operators that The fare enforcement function was found to be largely carwere surveyed. Each of the 30 operators relies on off-board ried out by agency employees, in some cases with assistance fare collection for at least part of its services where PoP is from other local agencies or through contracts with private used.
|
From page 25... ...
fare enforcement and agencies employing contract private employees. The average number of inspectors per $100,000 When it comes to monitoring fare evasion, counts are confor the two operators with contract private employees ducted in a variety of ways.
|
From page 26... ...
Agencies ISSUED That Set Goals Range Average Ratio of Number of Citations to Number of Warnings Issued n % Fare evasion rate goals 11 2.15% to 15% 3.8% 10.0 or over 2 11.1 4.09.9 4 22.2 Inspection rate goals 8 3.5% to 25% 9.6% 1.03.9 5 27.8 The survey inquired as to recent actions taken to reduce Less than 1.0 7 38.9 fare evasion. Table 11 indicates that the primary action Total responding agencies 18 100.0 is implementation of a special sweep involving 100% inspection of riders; 75.9% (22 of 29)
|
From page 27... ...
Weekly Monthly Quarterly Annual Other Baltimore -- Maryland Mass Transit Administration Yes l l l Buffalo -- Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority Yes l Calgary Transit Yes l Charlotte Area Transit System Yes l Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority No Dallas Area Rapid Transit Yes l Denver -- Regional Transit District Yes l Edmonton Transit System Yes l Eugene -- Lane Transit District Yes l Everett -- Community Transit No Houston -- Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County Yes l Las Vegas -- Regional Transit Commission of Southern Nevada Yes 1 1 1 1 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority Yes 1 MinneapolisSt. Paul -- Metro Transit Yes 1 Newark -- NJ Transit Yes 1 1 New York City -- MTANew York City Transit Yes l OceansideNorth San Diego County Transit District No Ottawa Regional Transit Commission Yes 1 Phoenix -- METRO Light Rail Yes 1 Portland -- Tri-County Metropolitan District of Oregon Yes 1 Sacramento Regional Transit District Yes 1 Salt Lake City -- Utah Transit Authority Yes l San Diego Metropolitan Transit System Yes l San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency Yes l San Jose -- Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Yes l Seattle -- Sound Transit Yes l St.
|
From page 28... ...
A similar chart was developed for the TCRP fare evasion and inspection rates were collected from 22 Report 80 data and is displayed in Figure 5. As with current of the operators using PoP fare collection.
|
From page 29... ...
inspection rates -- 2011. evasion rates is shown, mostly for inspection rates greater reporting issues related to measuring fare evasion that than 15%.
|
From page 30... ...
ing are the definitions of evasion and inspection rates becomes a 100% sample and the definition of fare used in this study: evasion rate becomes. Fare evasion rate -- The percentage of passengers Fare evasion rate (100% inspection)
|
From page 31... ...
LEGAL ASPECTS AND ADJUDICATION TABLE 17 FARE EVASION CITATION ADJUDICATION The 30-plus years of North American experience with Adjudicator n % PoP have demonstrated the increasingly significant role of Superior court 5 16.7 the adjudication function. Included here is a discussion of Municipal court 11 36.7 these subjects: the different legal authorities underlying fare enforcement, penalty schedules for evasion, percentage of County/province court 9 30.0 fine revenue received by the operator, procedures for issuing Agency 8 26.7 warnings and citations, and the use of judicial and adminis- Total responding agencies 29 trative procedures to adjudicate citations issued.
|
From page 32... ...
State/provincial law 11 37.9 Regional/county/local ordinance 11 37.9 There were several comments about fare evasion uniquely related to a particular system: Total responding agencies 29 Multiple responses allowed; percentages do not add to 100%. · "We use an exclusion process.
|
From page 33... ...
What was learned was that there are no differences in how severity is treated among the seven PROOF-OF-PAYMENT FARE COLLECTION OPERATIONS types of offenses with any of the operators. Other than enforcement, two particular operational aspects Related to the civil versus criminal aspects was how repeat of PoP were of interest in the survey: ways the operators offenders are treated.
|
From page 34... ...
· Signs mark fare paid areas (but only in subway stations)
|
From page 35... ...
The vast majority of dents indicated that they provide one or more ways to puroperators offer the following fare media: single-ride ticket, chase fare media in this manner. Table 28 indicates that monthly pass, and day pass.
|
From page 36... ...
By U.S. mail 11 37.9 The versatility of the TVMs is demonstrated by the Via Internet 17 58.6 range of fare media issued, as reported by 29 operators At third-party outlets throughout region 25 86.2 and shown in Table 30.
|
From page 37... ...
mail 2 18.2 Via Internet 6 54.5 · The fare evasion trend for their transit property was At third-party outlets throughout region 8 72.7 acknowledged to be generally stable (Table 33) - Agency office(s)
|
From page 38... ...
On the negative side, 18.8% (6) of the responTABLE 35 dents believe that the public's overall feelings are modRIDERS' FEELINGS OF SAFETY AND SECURITY erately negative toward PoP fare collection.
|
From page 39... ...
Paul, 2004 LRT 12.3/19.7 19 10,322 Metro Transit Minnesota 2009 CR 40/64 6 710 New York City, New York MTANew York City Transit 2008 BRT 17/27.2 69 21,200 Phoenix, Arizona METRO Light Rail 2008 LRT 20/32 28 12,600 Bus n/a n/a 167,333 San Francisco Municipal San Francisco, California 1993 LRT 35.5/57 33 42,447 Transportation Agency Streetcar 6/9.6 8 7,002
|
From page 40... ...
relies on PoP fare collection. Metro Rail tickets and passes are available at all rail stations.
|
From page 41... ...
lieu of eliminating the PoP fare collection system. FIGURE 9 NFTA patrons purchasing fares from TVMs.
|
From page 42... ...
Tickets may be purchased NFTA police officers in train patrol units inspect the from vending machines at any station, but be sure Metro Rail stations and platforms, enforce rules and regula FIGURE 10 NFTA Metro fare inspectors checking customers for PoP.
|
From page 43... ...
Fare Compliance and Inspection Fare evasion is a civil penalty until an individual has two or more unpaid "active" fare evasion violations; then A Metro Rail fare evasion rate chart is presented every month it becomes a criminal offense. The individual can then be to the board.
|
From page 44... ...
The initial LRT start-up was in 1996, and the system has grown incrementally since, with the most recent addition an Off-board PoP is used for fare collection on the regional extension to the Green Line in December 2010. The present commuter rail, Trinity Railway Express (TRE)
|
From page 45... ...
For customers, there are public information signs Fare Media Used and Availability announcing PoP on arrival at the station platform, on the platform, and on the train. An example of a post-mounted DART's fare structure is divided into four categories defined sign is shown in Figure 14.
|
From page 46... ...
State Legislation Related to Fare Enforcement and Evasion In 2003, DART was the beneficiary of state legislation that created two statutes related to fare enforcement: One deals with the enforcement of fares, including definition of a fare evasion offense and the associated penalty; the second allows the agency to employ civilian fare enforcement offi cers with specific prescribed authorities. A summary of the two statutes is provided here: (a)
|
From page 47... ...
ited to issuing fare evasion citations, DART police officers are readily available for assistance with disruptive patrons 5. Prohibited Conduct -- Identifies the consequences of or issues requiring police intervention.
|
From page 48... ...
These lines and following fare evasion characteristics: the Blue, Gold, and Green Lines are also collectively referred to as "Metro Rail." · LRT had generally lower evasion than the TRE - During the day, the range for LRT was 2.1% to 3.9%, These high-capacity services combine to form a network whereas the TRE ranged between 2.7% and 6.3%.
|
From page 49... ...
exclusive transit facility conOrange Line BRT structed in the former Southern Pacific Railroad right-of way and 1.0 mi (1.6 km) of city streets using 60-ft (18.3-m)
|
From page 50... ...
It was also noted that the Red Line stations, as well as the LACTC's Blue Line stations, Basis for Decision to Use Proof-of-Payment Fare were to be designated "paid areas" with the TVMs placed Collection off-platform. Proof-of-payment fare collection was initially decided on as Now, 25 years later, all of LA's high-capacity transit lines part of the early development decisions related to LA Met- have been designed to use PoP fare collection.
|
From page 51... ...
" Compared with other operators, LA Metro maintains FIGURE 17 LA Metro reduced-fare day pass. a diverse set of information brochures on various aspects FIGURE 18 LA Metro column-posted public information sign alerting passengers to PoP on Orange Line at entrance to BRT platform.
|
From page 52... ...
42 FIGURE 19 LA Metro overhead public information sign alerting passengers to PoP on Orange Line BRT platform. FIGURE 20 LA Metro public information sign reminding users to TAP.
|
From page 53... ...
and 16.4% for the Orange Line. The basis for going to a modified PoP system was con firmed by the LA Metro Board of Directors in February The board's policy objective is to limit fare evasion to less 2008, when it approved a Metro Rail Gating project in which than 2%.
|
From page 54... ...
In addition, the staff report noted that there were other benefits to gating: "accurate, exact time boarding/disembarkation data; facilitation of fully functional distance basedfare programs; facilitation of new programs and revenue opportunities in combination with national credit card issuers." By early 2011, the gates were in place but were open in both directions. Several associated smaller capital projects have accompanied the gating: FIGURE 21 Handheld verification device used by LA Metro sheriff's deputy assistants for fare inspection of TAP cards.
|
From page 55... ...
Division 10 of the Public Utilities Code and shall not apply to minors. (The entire Penal Code statute and the Sections Of interest in this case study are two services on which 99580 through 99582 of the California Public Utilities Code PoP fare collection is employed: the Hiawatha LRT line and are contained in Appendix D.)
|
From page 56... ...
46 FIGURE 22 Metro Transit Hiawatha LRT line map.
|
From page 57... ...
is dependent on time of day, FIGURE 24 Metro Transit single-ride ticket. except for downtown zones, which are $0.50 at all times.
|
From page 58... ...
those that relate to the fare collection function include Go-To Card readers allow users to check card balances. "About Metro Transit," "How to Ride Light Rail," "How Card balances may also be checked remotely via phone or to Ride the Northstar Line," "About Go-To Cards," "Ticket website.
|
From page 59... ...
Hiawatha Line -- For the Hiawatha light-rail line, Metro Tran sit has set a "compliance goal" of 95%; in the first 5 months Fare Compliance and Inspection of 2011 operations exceeded the goal, with an average 99.3% fare compliance. Whereas most agencies report on the numTransit police officers carry handheld verification devices bers of evaders, or fare evasion, Metro's use of the term "com(also referred to as MPVs)
|
From page 60... ...
Some recommendations from the audits are outthe Hiawatha Line was somewhat lower than that reported of-date and others have been acted on. The recommendaby Metro Transit police at the time (99% in 2007)
|
From page 61... ...
The SBS stops have A decision to use PoP for SBS routes was based on the objective special shelters with TVMs (locally called MetroCard Fare of enhancing the operating speed of the service by allowing Collectors, or MFCs)
|
From page 62... ...
The PoP fare collection applied to the SBS routes but not to the local routes. All SBS riders required a printed receipt.
|
From page 63... ...
This situation has been resolved Prior to beginning revenue service on the two SBS routes, by NYCT having a verbal policy that the local bus service will extensive public information efforts were put into place. accept PoP receipts as payment; there are about 400 cases of A campaign was launched to inform riders of the new offthis each day of the 60,000-plus SBS riders.
|
From page 64... ...
NYCT's process of creating a fare inspection force was Heavy loads are experienced on the SBS routes every day, arduous and included recruiting, interviews, and background and the inspectors have developed ways to inspect despite checks for each potential candidate. The new hires had to the crowds.
|
From page 65... ...
Before Studies Fare Inspection and the Use of Discretion For purposes of measuring performance, NYCT completed The NYCT prepared an SOP on the "Use of Discretion When special studies of fare evasion rates on the SBS routes prior Enforcing Fare Evasion Rules on MTA NYCT Bus Routes." to PoP implementation (32, 33)
|
From page 66... ...
The use of PHOENIX, ARIZONA -- VALLEY METRO RAIL, INC. PoP fare collection was decided on several years into the (METRO LIGHT RAIL)
|
From page 67... ...
Fare Media Used and Availability As for fare collection system alternatives, no formal anal- PoP experience on METRO Light Rail indicates that 38% ysis was performed. The development team recognized that of the riders primarily rely on day passes.
|
From page 68... ...
The instead, manages the function by contract with two separate machines accept bills and coins, credit and debit cards, and organizations: enforcement within the city of Phoenix is provide coin change. performed by the city of Phoenix Police Transit Bureau; for the two East Valley cities, it is performed by a private conPublic Information Regarding Proof-of-Payment System tractor.
|
From page 69... ...
59 FIGURE 36 Phoenix Transit Bureau Police assistant inspecting for PoP on METRO Light Rail. FIGURE 37 Fare inspector within the East Valley cities inspecting for PoP on METRO Light Rail.
|
From page 70... ...
its Transit Bureau, no changes were required to allow police assistants to enforce fares on METRO Light Rail. HowPrivate Security for the Cities of Mesa and Tempe ever, both the cities of Tempe and Mesa revised their city ordinances to allow fare enforcement by a private company Within the East Valley cities of Tempe and Mesa, the inspec- other than their police.
|
From page 71... ...
In addition, special procedures used to handle crowds at Fare Compliance and Inspection sporting events at the two venues include temporary queuing barriers (shown in Figure 39) and positioning fare inspectors The fare inspection rates vary on the two geographic sectors at the station entries to inspect for fare payment before an of the LRT line.
|
From page 72... ...
Clipper Cards allow stored value as well as passes sit utilization rates in the United States. The Muni Metro (e.g., a month)
|
From page 73... ...
SFMTA is aware of this evasion issue and has posted signs on all rear doors of buses at eye level: "STOP, ENTER THROUGH FRONT DOOR ONLY." In addition, SFMTA has implemented enforcement FIGURE 41 Rear-door stanchion-mounted verification device initiatives to control the problem. on SFMTA bus for tagging Clipper Cards.
|
From page 74... ...
also a fare receipt." The 2010 survey also found that approximately 33% of When entering a light rail subway station, the faregates are customers paid cash and received either a paper transfer/fare activated by tagging with the Clipper Card. Passengers with receipt from the operator as PoP (on buses and at light rail a paper transfer/fare receipt must pass by the station agent, surface stops)
|
From page 75... ...
organization. The first step in this transition was hiring a · How do you board a Muni vehicle on the street or at an Muni manager of the PoP function who initially visited outside Muni station, excluding West Portal Station?
|
From page 76... ...
The scope was comprehensive and and training of the SFPD Muni Response Team, included the program's "planning and evaluation; staffing Metro station agents, and SFMTA fare inspecand deployment; internal controls related to citations; pas- tors "to ensure appropriate and timely law enforce senger service reports, and staff incident reports; and other ment practices." issues related to fare enforcement." 7. Fare Evasion Fine Structure -- six recommendations The 105-page audit report also included a 29-page let- related to enhancing the penalties to create greater ter with 59 specific recommendations (39)
|
From page 77... ...
; documentation to receive special Clipper Cards that entitle · 26% -- Invalid transfer or fare receipt; them to a discount.
|
From page 78... ...
Smart card technology also is limited by the inability of Fare Enforcement Policy Changes Being Considered Clipper Card readers on vehicles to communicate wirelessly in real time with card databases. If customers add value Based on the 2009 in-depth analysis of fare evasion, a numonline to their cards, the new value cannot be updated auto- ber of management practices have been, or are being, implematically on the card or the card readers on vehicles.
|
From page 79... ...
Special Event Operations · Section 7.2.102. Passenger Conduct Regulations.
|
From page 80... ...
TABLE 39 CASE STUDY OPERATORS: SUMMARY OF ENFORCEMENT AND ADJUDICATION ASPECTS Fare Enforcement Fine Amounts Personnel for Evasion, Is Fare Evasion Fine Revenue Department/ Entity Adjudication First Offense/ Offense Civil Retained by Responsible for Police Operator Forum Maximum or Criminal? Operator (%)
|
From page 81... ...
Fare Enforcement Position Title Powers? METRO Light Rail (Phoenix)
|
From page 82... ...
properties operate 91 routes that use PoP fare collection. The management of the fare inspection function and the The survey results are organized into nine functional areas: control of fare evasion will significantly benefit from collection of sufficient fare evasion data to permit disaggregate 1.
|
From page 83... ...
Proof-of-Payment Fare Collection Operations -- To ing the number of cases that are currently required to be facilitate enforcement of fare payment, 70% of the adjudicated in the Superior Courts." operators designate the station platform areas as "paid zones." Instituting an administrative process for payment of the fare evasion penalty -- Consistent with an in-house adjudi 6. Fare Media and Fare Purchase Options -- All the cation process, the same operators offer an administrative operators accept single-ride tickets on their PoP ser- process for payment of the fare evasion penalty.
|
From page 84... ...
Another and use PoP fare collection depends on whether all-door study, performed for LA Metro in 2007 but not called an boarding is necessary. audit, had objectives similar to those of an audit and provided a useful review of fare evasion on Metro's high-capac- The relationship among the evasion rate, rates of inspecity routes.
|
From page 85... ...
How does alternative off-board PoP fare collection and enforcement the industry keep up with the rapidly changing technologi- approaches. One of the primary data gaps uncovered in this cal aspects of smart cards?
|
From page 86... ...
HIT -- Handheld inspection terminals NJT -- New Jersey Transit HOV -- High-occupancy vehicle NYCT -- New York City Transit HRT -- Heavy rail transit NYPD -- New York Police Department LACTC -- Los Angeles County Transit Commission PoP -- Proof-of-payment fare collection LA Metro -- Los Angeles County Metropolitan Trans- POST -- Police Officers Standards and Training certiportation Authority fication program LRT -- Light rail transit RPTA -- Regional Public Transportation Authority (Phoenix) , also called Valley METRO LRRT -- Light rail rapid transit (terminology as is used in Buffalo)
|
From page 87... ...
SOP -- Standard operating procedure TTC -- Texas Transportation Code SSBF -- Self-service, barrier-free fare collection TVM -- Ticket vending machine, or also referred to as fare vending machine TAB -- Transit Adjudication Bureau (MTANYCT) UTA -- Utah Transit Authority (Salt Lake City, Utah)
|
From page 88... ...
and P Straus, "Muni Metro Goes POP: Imple 14.Niagara Frontier Transportation Metro System, Inc., "Job menting Proof of Payment Fare Collection on Muni Description, Metro Fare Inspector," Revised Dec.
|
From page 89... ...
28.Metro Transit, Light Rail SOP #1100.01, "Fare Enforce- 36.City of Tempe Ordinance, Chapter 22, Article VIII, ment," May 2009. "Transit." 29.Metropolitan Council, Hiawatha Light Rail Fare Compli- 37.City of Tempe Ordinance, Chapter 26, Article I
|
From page 90... ...
, "Metro Rail Fare Evasion Rate (Trend)
|
From page 91... ...
ment Officers, 2 pp. California Public Utilities Code, Section 99580-99582: Utah Transportation Authority, Amended and Restated Chapter 8, Administrative Enforcement for Fare Evasion Ordinances, May 2009, 24 pp.
|
From page 92... ...
Its purpose is to make practical information available to transit operators using PoP fare collection and to those considering its use. To assist TCRP in this study, please complete the following questionnaire regarding PoP operations within your agency.
|
From page 93... ...
: 3. What is your agency's experience with PoP fare collection?
|
From page 94... ...
No FARE INSPECTION CHARACTERISTICS 10. How many inspectors are used for PoP fare enforcement (i.e., full-time equivalents in your agency's budget)
|
From page 95... ...
: 18. Who adjudicates the citations given for fare evasion?
|
From page 96... ...
: ENFORCEMENT AND PENALTIES -- Part 1 21. What are the financial penalties for fare evasion offenses (including court costs)
|
From page 97... ...
This % of annual total citation/fine revenue: __________ This dollar amount per citation: ____________________ Other (please describe) : __________________________ FARE EVASION FOR PoP ROUTES -- Part 1 PLEASE NOTE: We understand the nature of certain sensitive data being collected.
|
From page 98... ...
Is a regular fare evasion performance report provided to your agency's management and/or policy board?
|
From page 99... ...
Multiple ride pass (paper) Stored-value fare card Other
|
From page 100... ...
Via Internet [ ] At third party outlets throughout region [ ]
|
From page 101... ...
If your agency uses stored-value cards do your transit passengers receive a printed receipt when accessing your system (i.e., on routes using PoP fare collection)
|
From page 102... ...
Multiple ride pass [ ] Stored value fare card -- new [ ]
|
From page 103... ...
(Rank high to low...note: not all answers have to be selected) Fare evasion rate increasing Security concerns expressed by passengers System image was suffering in the media Passenger perceptions that there was little or no enforcement Revenue loss Policy makers lost confidence in effectiveness of PoP Cost-effectiveness was eroding Passenger volumes were too high Passenger volumes were too low OBSERVATIONS/OPINIONS REGARDING PoP 60.
|
From page 104... ...
Are there reports or surveys available that summarize the opinions and perceptions of PoP fare collection? (Select all that apply)
|
From page 105... ...
When complete, this Synthesis will provide the most up-to-date information on the state-of-practice in North America with regard to proof-ofpayment fare collection. We will make sure that you receive a copy of the final report.
|
From page 106... ...
96 APPENDIX B Participating Agencies Baltimore, Maryland -- Maryland Mass Transit Administration Buffalo, New York -- Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority Calgary, Alberta -- Calgary Transit Charlotte, North Carolina -- Charlotte Area Transit System Cleveland, Ohio -- Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority Dallas, Texas -- Dallas Area Rapid Transit Denver, Colorado -- Regional Transportation District Edmonton, Alberta -- Edmonton Transit System Eugene, Oregon -- Lane Transit District Everett, Washington -- Community Transit Honolulu, Hawaii -- Honolulu DTS Rapid Transit Division Houston, Texas -- Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County Las Vegas, Nevada -- Regional Transit Commission of Southern Nevada Los Angeles, California -- Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Memphis, Tennessee, Memphis Area Transit Authority MinneapolisSt. Paul, Minnesota -- Metro Transit Newark, New Jersey -- NJ Transit New York City, New York -- MTANew York City Transit Oceanside, California -- North San Diego County Transit District Ottawa, Ontario -- Ottawa Regional Transit Commission Phoenix, Arizona -- METRO Light Rail Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania -- Port Authority of Allegheny County Portland, Oregon -- Tri-County Metropolitan District of Oregon Sacramento, California -- Sacramento Regional Transit District Salt Lake City, Utah -- Utah Transit Authority San Diego, California -- San Diego Metropolitan Transit System
|
From page 107... ...
97 San Francisco, California -- San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency San Jose, California -- Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Seattle, Washington -- Sound Transit St. Louis, Missouri -- Bi-State Development Agency Toronto, Ontario -- Toronto Transit Commission Vancouver, British Columbia -- TransLink/SkyTrain York, Ontario -- York Region Transit/Viva
|
From page 108... ...
(A) Unauthorized use of a discount ticket or failure to present, upon request from a transit system representative, acceptable proof of eligibility to use a discount ticket, in accordance with Section 99155 of the Public Utilities Code and posted system identification policies when entering or exiting a transit station or vehicle.
|
From page 109... ...
(A) Unauthorized use of a discount ticket or failure to present, upon request from a system representative, acceptable proof of eligibility to use a discount ticket, in accordance with Section 99155, and posted system
|
From page 110... ...
(a) For a period of 21 calendar days from the issuance to a person of the notice of fare evasion or passenger conduct violation, the person may request an initial review of the violation by the issuing agency.
|
From page 111... ...
In addition to any other requirements of employment, a hearing officer shall demonstrate those qualifications, training, and objectivity prescribed by the issuing agency's governing body or chief executive as are necessary and which are consistent with the duties and responsibilities set forth in this chapter. The hearing officer's continued employment, performance evaluation, compensation, and benefits shall not be directly or indirectly linked to the amount of fare evasion or passenger conduct violation penalties imposed by the hearing officer.
|
From page 112... ...
102 APPENDIX D Example Performance Report
|
From page 113... ...
103 APPENDIX E Example of a Manual and Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.