1. FARE STUDY UPDATE Operations & Customer Service Committee September 9, 2014 1

2. Summary of Internal & External Outreach Findings 1.Results of Focus Groups Internal – bus operators & fare inspectors External – customers & government officials 2.Feedback from Public Engagement Community Based Organization meetings Public Meetings Other (webpage, phone, comment cards) 2

3. Focus Group Research Objectives 3 As a component of the Fare Study initial phases, a series of research efforts were conducted to identify opportunities for improving the fare structure and fare media across a range of internal and external stakeholders. Objectives of this research included: –Current perceptions, knowledge and issues with both fare structure and fare media –Identifying opportunities for improving the fare structure and fare media To address these objectives, RTD conducted focus groups amongst four key stakeholder groups: –Fare inspectors, selected by Fare Enforcement management, held on July 14 th –Customers, through the customer panel, held on July 16 th –Bus Operators, as assigned by Bus Operations management, held on July 22 nd –Local Governments/TMOs/TMAs, attendees at the quarterly meeting on July 24 th Following the customer focus group, RTD conducted an online survey with its RTD Online Customer Community to gather more customer perceptions on fare media and fare structure –An online survey was made available for one week, beginning July 21 st. –An excellent 82.4% response rate was achieved, with 164 of 199 invited participants providing input before the deadline of July 28 th.

4. Most users only understand the services they use the most and are uncertain about services and/or discounts they don’t use. Consider distance, vehicle type and number of stops as acceptable reasons for fare structure differences. Information on light rail fare structure predominantly comes from TVMs and system maps. Most users only understand the services they use the most and are uncertain about services and/or discounts they don’t use. Consider distance, vehicle type and number of stops as acceptable reasons for fare structure differences. Information on light rail fare structure predominantly comes from TVMs and system maps. See a level of fare structure complexity that few others do. The combination of customer education and fare enforcement duties are made difficult by the fare structure complexity. Feel that available training leaves significant gaps in fare structure comprehension among many operators. Simplification was highly desired. See a level of fare structure complexity that few others do. The combination of customer education and fare enforcement duties are made difficult by the fare structure complexity. Feel that available training leaves significant gaps in fare structure comprehension among many operators. Simplification was highly desired. Being current riders this group expressed familiarity with the current fare structure. Tendency to characterize the current fare structure as “usable,” “logical,” and “fair.” Distance, number of stops, cost of operation and area served were indicated as the factors differentiating service levels within the current structure. Being current riders this group expressed familiarity with the current fare structure. Tendency to characterize the current fare structure as “usable,” “logical,” and “fair.” Distance, number of stops, cost of operation and area served were indicated as the factors differentiating service levels within the current structure. Feel confident that they understand the fare structure, but are unable to explain why fares differ to customers. Feel that fare non- compliance is generally intentional, rather than a lack of understanding of fare structure among customers. Do not feel as though the current zone structure for light rail fares is obeyed or enforceable. Feel confident that they understand the fare structure, but are unable to explain why fares differ to customers. Feel that fare non- compliance is generally intentional, rather than a lack of understanding of fare structure among customers. Do not feel as though the current zone structure for light rail fares is obeyed or enforceable. Local government meeting attendees generally refer constituents to RTD for questions regarding the fare structure. Many indicated they refer to the RTD website for information. Many indicated the light rail zone structure resulted in confusion among their constituents. Fare level, rather than fare structure, were better understood by meeting attendees. Local government meeting attendees generally refer constituents to RTD for questions regarding the fare structure. Many indicated they refer to the RTD website for information. Many indicated the light rail zone structure resulted in confusion among their constituents. Fare level, rather than fare structure, were better understood by meeting attendees. Fare Structure Attitudes by Audience 4 Customer Panel Online Customer Community Fare InspectorsBus OperatorsGovernment Officials

5. Paper tickets and passes cause issues when value cannot be recovered when damaged or lost. Expected RTD use and convenience of a fare media option are the largest influences on media choice. Some customers can’t buy a monthly pass at the beginning of the month, and wind up spending more on their trips as a result. Monthly passes encourage additional discretionary trips and other fare media types like 10-Ride Tickets inhibit additional use beyond what was purchased. Paper tickets and passes cause issues when value cannot be recovered when damaged or lost. Expected RTD use and convenience of a fare media option are the largest influences on media choice. Some customers can’t buy a monthly pass at the beginning of the month, and wind up spending more on their trips as a result. Monthly passes encourage additional discretionary trips and other fare media types like 10-Ride Tickets inhibit additional use beyond what was purchased. Currently have difficulty enforcing bus fares due to issues with each type of fare media. Transfers are a frequent source of confusion and conflict between customers and drivers. Discount fare products also cause conflict between drivers and customers ineligible for these discounts. Currently have difficulty enforcing bus fares due to issues with each type of fare media. Transfers are a frequent source of confusion and conflict between customers and drivers. Discount fare products also cause conflict between drivers and customers ineligible for these discounts. Awareness of the most commonly used fare media types are high among current riders, cash, 10-Ride and Monthly Pass were known by nearly all respondents, zone receipts, discount fare products and smart card were the least recognized terms. Being predominantly frequent riders, online community members tend to use monthly passes and 10-Ride tickets. Awareness of the most commonly used fare media types are high among current riders, cash, 10-Ride and Monthly Pass were known by nearly all respondents, zone receipts, discount fare products and smart card were the least recognized terms. Being predominantly frequent riders, online community members tend to use monthly passes and 10-Ride tickets. Different fare media types have different impacts on what can be easily enforced. Different fare media options provide different levels of fare evasion opportunity. Fare inspectors are generally satisfied that something has been paid when inspecting monthly passes and 10-Ride tickets and do not attempt to enforce zone compliance. Validators do not aid in easily determining the station at which the validation occurred, inhibiting their ability to know if a validated fare media is truly valid. Different fare media types have different impacts on what can be easily enforced. Different fare media options provide different levels of fare evasion opportunity. Fare inspectors are generally satisfied that something has been paid when inspecting monthly passes and 10-Ride tickets and do not attempt to enforce zone compliance. Validators do not aid in easily determining the station at which the validation occurred, inhibiting their ability to know if a validated fare media is truly valid. Transfers were thought to be a source of difficulty for their constituents. Local government meeting attendees generally refer constituents to RTD for questions regarding the fare structure. Many indicated they refer to the RTD website for information. Both smart media and Eco Pass are seen as potential ways to address fare media issues. Issues with cash fares, including the requirement for exact change and reduced speed of boarding with cash fares were explored. Transfers were thought to be a source of difficulty for their constituents. Local government meeting attendees generally refer constituents to RTD for questions regarding the fare structure. Many indicated they refer to the RTD website for information. Both smart media and Eco Pass are seen as potential ways to address fare media issues. Issues with cash fares, including the requirement for exact change and reduced speed of boarding with cash fares were explored. Fare Media Challenges by Audience 5 Customer Panel Online Customer Community Fare InspectorsBus OperatorsGovernment Officials

6. Public Engagement Participation Website comments: 350 Public meeting participants: 150 Community based organization meeting participants: 50 Written comment cards: 30 Phone comments: 10 6

7. Themes from Public Feedback Affordability –Fares are too high especially for low-income, seniors, and ADA communities –Travel to the airport needs to be affordable for airport employees Light Rail Zones –Confusion on how they work and how they are enforced Transfers –Ineffective, confusing and outdated 7

8. Themes from Public Feedback Fare Media / Technology –Ticket vending machines are hard to use –Desire for reloadable smartcards Pass / Discount Programs –Confusion regarding low-income pass program and a desire to simplify requirements –Desire for an EcoPass type program for individuals not associated with a business or college Education –Trip Planner should include fares 8

9. Themes from Public Feedback Bus & Rail System Integration –Simple transfers between bus and rail –Cost of trips on bus vs. rail –Migrating population (more seniors, low- income and minorities in the suburbs) may require individuals to take longer trips with multiple modes Ridership –Encourage and increase ridership with simple and affordable fares 9

10. Next Steps Work with CH2M Hill to develop alternative fare structures for evaluation –Include public and internal feedback to develop alternatives that address the major issues Begin planning for the next round of public engagement to present alternatives and preliminary findings 10