Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion (2022)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

A-1   A P P E N D I X A Case Studies

A-2 C O N T E N T S A-3 Introduction A-4 Bay Area Rapid Transit A-12 King County Metro A-19 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority A-28 Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority A-33 Metro Transit A-38 Metropolitan Transit System A-47 New York City Transit A-56 Regional Transportation District A-63 Sacramento Regional Transit A-69 San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency A-81 Sound Transit A-91 Sun Metro A-95 The Rapid A-99 TransLink A-103 TriMet A-116 Toronto Transit Commission A-135 Valley Metro A-145 Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

Case Studies A-3   Introduction The research team compiled case studies on the fare enforcement practices of the 18 transit agencies shown in Figure A-1. The case study for each agency was developed based on an initial phone survey with key agency personnel followed by additional communications, as warranted, and a review of agency-provided documents and other available information, including audit reports, legislative codes, court cases, websites, etc. The questions asked during initial phone surveys are available in Appendix B, “Survey Instrument.” The surveys and the follow-ups to them were affected by the COVID-19 pandemic because it was not possible to conduct visits on-site at each agency. As noted in the case studies, several agencies had suspended fare enforcement and/or fare collection during the pandemic and, con- sequently, during the time of the surveys and/or follow-up. Each case study includes a table summarizing information on fundamental topics such as fare collection and citation practices, fare enforcement personnel, and deployment, as shown Transit Agency Location Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) San Francisco Bay Area, CA King County Metro Seattle, WA LA Metro Los Angeles, CA Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) Boston, MA Metro Transit Minneapolis– Saint Paul, MN Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) San Diego, CA New York City Transit (NYCT) New York City, NY Regional Transportation District (RTD) Denver, CO Sacramento Regional Transit District (SacRT) Sacramento, CA San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) San Francisco, CA Sound Transit Seattle, WA Sun Metro El Paso, TX The Rapid Grand Rapids, MI TransLink Vancouver, BC, Canada TriMet Portland, OR Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) Toronto, ON, Canada Valley Metro Phoenix, AZ Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) Washington, DC Figure A-1. Agencies selected for in-depth research process.

A-4 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion in Table A-1. These summary tables are meant to provide a high-level understanding of each agency’s fare collection and enforcement approach for easy comparison across agencies. Following each table are the details of each agency’s practices and policies as discovered through the research process. In these detailed write-ups, special attention is given to unique practices at each agency and other topics considered instructive for other transit agencies. These case studies reflect the state of fare enforcement at the time of writing, which ranged from summer to fall 2020. However, fare enforcement programs are evolving rapidly. Changes in fare enforcement programs and/or related laws and court rulings may have occurred since these case studies were written. Bay Area Rapid Transit Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) is a heavy rail special-purpose transit district connecting the San Francisco Bay Area in California. BART is governed by a board of directors with represen- tatives from the original three-county service area of San Francisco, Alameda, and Contra Costa counties. An extension serving the San Francisco International Airport opened in 2003 bringing BART service to San Mateo County. In 2020, an extension to San Jose opened, extending service into Santa Clara County. Proof-of-Payment Inspection Authority and Ordinances In October 2017, the BART Board of Directors passed a proof-of-payment ordinance to reduce fare evasion. The ordinance went into effect on January 1, 2018, with a 1-month grace period in which warnings were issued instead of citations for first-time violations. Although the BART system is gated, BART estimates that it loses $15 million to $25 million to fare evasion each year. The ordinance requires passengers to present valid proof of payment if requested by authorized BART personnel anywhere within the demarcated paid area of the system, including on trains and train platforms. A subsequent ordinance established a civil administrative fine with a community service option for minors who evade fares. The proof-of-payment ordinance Table A-1. Case study framework. Agency Name, City, State Overview of Agency What transit services does the agency offer? Fare Collection Overview How and where are fares collected? Definition of Fare Evasion What is considered fare evasion? Fare Enforcement Overview How and where does fare enforcement take place? Fare Enforcement Personnel Who conducts fare enforcement, and what are their specific responsibilities and authorities? Fare Enforcement Deployment Where and how are fare enforcement personnel deployed? Fare Citation Practice What is the practice when an individual is found without a valid fare (e.g., zero-tolerance, inspector discretion, warning first, conflict avoidance, customer education)? Fare Evasion Penalties Are the penalties for fare evasion criminal, civil, or administrative? What are the potential consequences of evading fare? What avenues for resolution are available to the fare evader? Fare Enforcement Technology and Capital Investments What technology, infrastructure, or other capital investments has the agency employed to aid in the enforcement of fares?

Case Studies A-5   Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), San Francisco Bay Area, CA Overview of Agency BART operates a gated heavy rail system in the San Francisco Bay Area. Fare Collection Overview Passengers must tap their Clipper smart card or insert their BART magnetic stripe ticket to enter and exit the fare gate. All BART stations sell Clipper smart cards at ticket vending machines (TVMs). Passengers can add value to their Clipper cards at a TVM, online, at BART customer service offices, or through the retail network. TVMs at some stations also sell and load BART magnetic stripe tickets; however, the sale of BART tickets is being phased out. Because BART’s fare structure is distance-based, BART also has add-value machines inside gated areas, in case a passenger needs to add value to exit. Fare Enforcement Overview Passengers must use a ticket or their Clipper card to pass through fare gates and access the BART platform. BART employs fare inspectors to check passengers for proof of payment inside of the gated paid-fare area and on trains. BART police officers may be stationed at the fare gates to observe fare payment. BART police officers may request proof of payment when they have reasonable suspicion or during detention for another crime. Police officers may issue a fare evasion citation if they observe a passenger not paying. Each station also has a station agent present for assistance if needed, but station agents cannot request proof of payment or issue citations. Station agents may instruct a passenger without proof of payment who approaches a swing gate to pay their fare but are instructed not to apprehend fare evaders. Instead, station agents can contact BART police to intervene. Definition of Fare Evasion Any individual inside of a BART paid area must be prepared to provide proof of payment. BART Ordinance No. 2017-2 states: “Individuals in the paid area of the station or on a BART train are required to present a valid exit-coded BART ticket when requested by the District. Individuals who fail to present proof of payment shall be in violation of this ordinance. This violation is an infraction.” ‘Exit-coded’ means the media has sufficient value for the minimum fare and was processed properly to enter the paid area. The validity of the exit code is limited to a 4-hour window. Fare Enforcement Personnel BART has both fare inspectors and BART police officers to enforce fares. Both report to the BART Police Department. Fare inspectors can conduct proof-of- payment inspections in the paid-fare area. They are only able to conduct fare enforcement within the original BART District (Alameda, Contra Costa, and San Francisco counties). Fare inspectors are not able to conduct proof-of-payment inspections outside of the original BART District (San Mateo and Santa Clara counties). BART police officers can request proof of payment only when they have reasonable suspicion or if they have detained a passenger for another offense (e.g., creating a disturbance in the station). Fare Enforcement Deployment Fare inspectors conduct random fare inspections throughout the District such as at the bottom of escalators, at the elevators as people exit onto the platform, throughout the stations, on board trains, and in the station mezzanine before passengers leave the station area. When inspections are conducted on board, fare inspectors check every passenger from end to end of a rail car. As long as passengers are still within the fare gates, proof of payment can be requested. BART policy does not allow for discretion in inspection, and every rider is expected to be asked for proof of payment. If a station is too crowded to check everyone’s fares, fare inspectors will redeploy to a different station. In some stations with known evasion problems through service gates or by other means, BART may position police officers during peak periods to enforce fares. (continued on next page)

A-6 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion required prominent signage in all stations stating that being in the paid area without proof of payment was a citable offense. This information was also incorporated into the Code of Conduct posted in stations and on trains. In the lead-up to the proof-of-payment ordinance going into effect, BART also placed decals indicating the locations of paid zones at stations. BART also did a large media campaign to educate the public about the new ordinance and that lack of proof of payment could result in citations. These ordinances along with station hardening (discussed below) and fare gate modifications are part of a multipronged effect to reduce fare evasion. Although California Public Utilities Code 28766 authorizes the BART Board of Directors to regulate its transit facilities, including the implementation of civil administrative penalties for fare evasion, it only applies to the original District. Despite servicing five Bay Area counties, only three of those counties (e.g., San Francisco, Alameda, and Contra Costa) are part of the political BART special-purpose District. Thus, ordinances passed by the board of directors Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), San Francisco Bay Area, CA (Continued ) Fare Citation Practice Fare inspectors have no discretion if a passenger is caught without proof of payment and must issue a citation. In adopting the proof-of-payment ordinance, the BART Board of Directors required that every individual who cannot produce proof of payment to a fare inspector receive a citation to minimize potential discrimination. There is an exception when fare inspectors are conducting early morning train checks at the Embarcadero Station, where all trains traveling toward the East Bay are stopped and all passengers are required to show proof of payment. Everyone who does not have proof of payment must exit the paid area and properly process fare media before re- entering. Due to the high volume of passengers and train traffic, fare inspectors do not have enough time to issue citations. Everyone is treated the same; they are told to leave the paid area if they do not have proof of payment. BART police officers have the discretion to issue warnings or citations for fare evasion. Fare Evasion Penalties BART issues two types of citations: criminal citations by BART police officers and civil citations by fare inspectors. Per state law, juveniles are only issued civil citations. The fine amount is different for criminal and civil citations. Criminal citations that go through the court system can be as much as $250 and are set by each county's superior court. For civil citations, the maximum citation amount is $60 for juveniles and $120 for adults. Current fines are set at $55 for juveniles and $75 for adults. There are also options for community service. After a third civil citation in a rolling 12-month period, the citation escalates to a criminal citation (for adults). If an unpaid citation can be linked to an individual correctly, unpaid fines may be subject to collections and/or submission to the Franchise Tax Board to be withheld from future tax refunds or lottery winnings. Fare Enforcement Technology and Capital Investments Fare inspectors carry three devices: one device to issue citations, one to check Clipper cards, and one to check BART magnetic stripe tickets. The device to write citations enables the fare inspector to record and print a citation. BART is also looking to have the devices record the number of fares inspected since today fare inspectors use a handheld counter to try to track this information. In the last 5 years, BART has strengthened its station civil design criteria to incorporate measures to reduce fare evasion. These have included minimizing the number and raising the height of service gates. BART also worked with local fire departments to identify service gates that could be closed. Signage, alarms, and cameras have also been installed. BART has piloted new gate designs to minimize the ability of passengers to evade fares by hopping over, sliding under, or otherwise slipping through gates without paying.

Case Studies A-7   only apply within the District’s political boundaries. As a result, BART cannot enforce the proof- of-payment ordinance in San Mateo and Santa Clara counties without the adoption of the ordinances by those counties’ boards of supervisors. However, BART police officers can eject persons who violate proof of payment (all stations have signs indicating proof of payment is required inside the paid area) and do have the authority to issue criminal citations for fare evasion under California Penal and Public Utility Codes whenever they see someone enter or exit the paid area without properly paying the fare. Fare Enforcement Personnel, Inspection Process, and Deployment BART police officers and fare inspectors both play a role in BART’s enforcement of fares. BART has authorized fare inspectors who are a nonsworn classification within the BART Police Department and can issue civil citations for fare evasion. BART’s sworn police officers are responsible primarily for the safety and security of the system and may conduct fare enforce- ment in the event they observe fare evasion. Unlike BART police officers, fare inspectors are focused exclusively on fare enforcement. BART created the fare inspector job classification in 2018. When the proof-of-payment pro- gram was initially approved in 2017 by the BART Board of Directors, a pilot was conducted using community service officers, who are nonsworn personnel who perform various police services. When the BART Police Officers’ Association contract was renegotiated, the current classification of fare inspector was created, and community service officers were no longer used for fare inspections. BART has 18 fare inspectors with a budget of 20. The size of this team has been constrained by funding availability. Given the size of the system, BART would need sig- nificantly more fare inspectors to cover the entire District. Fare inspectors are required to have a high school diploma or passed a General Educational Development (GED) test and 2 years of verifiable direct public contact experience, which must have included interpreting and/or enforcing regulations or providing information and assistance to the public. The hiring process includes an oral panel. Once hired, fare inspectors complete 3 weeks of classroom training on de-escalation methods, unconscious bias, and evasive tactics (i.e., how to get away from someone if being attacked), in addition to policies, procedures, use of equipment, and BART system basics. Following classroom training, fare inspectors undergo field training that is extended as long as the fare inspector trainer feels is necessary for each fare inspector, with most in-the-field training lasting 4–8 weeks. Fare inspectors are unarmed and carry only pepper spray once they complete the training. They can wear a protective vest, although not all fare inspectors choose to wear one. BART’s operating procedures for proof-of-payment inspections do not allow for discretion in an inspection. When performing fare inspection either on trains or train platforms, the team of fare inspectors must ensure that all passengers are asked to produce proof of payment. Fare inspectors are deployed in teams of four or more in part to provide enough personnel to ensure all passengers are asked for proof of payment. When performing onboard fare inspection, fare inspectors will sweep the entire train one car at a time. Fare inspectors will enter the car using a sandwich approach where fare inspectors split up, entering the car through different doors, working their way through the car, and requesting proof of payment from every passenger until the fare inspectors meet in the middle of the rail car. This approach is used both on BART’s older two-door rail cars and on the new three-door rail cars. For proof of payment inspection on platforms, fare inspector teams are positioned at the bottom of the escalators or where a station elevator opens onto the platform. This ensures that

A-8 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion fare inspectors can ask every passenger as they get off the escalator or elevator for proof of payment. In the case of crush loads on station platforms where inspection of all passengers cannot occur, fare inspectors will adjust their approach accordingly, such as by switching to riding trains and performing onboard inspections or redeploying to a different station. Fare inspectors may also be positioned in the station mezzanine, requesting proof of payment from passengers who have disembarked before they leave the station area. Every weekday early morning (before approximately 7 a.m.), about half of the fare inspectors are deployed to Embarcadero Station, the busiest station in the BART system. For these deploy- ments, fare inspectors stop every BART train departing Embarcadero Station for the East Bay and conduct onboard inspections of the entire train. If anyone on board does not have proof of payment, they are instructed to leave the station and re-enter after purchasing a valid fare. Fare evaders are not ticketed during these weekday morning inspections due to the impact issuing citations would have on completing the morning inspections and keeping trains on time. BART has found that this approach is very effective at getting nonticketed, nondestination passengers off the trains because Embarcadero Station is the final San Francisco station and all trains head- ing east must pass through the station before entering the Transbay Tube. BART has found that most nonticketed passengers are heading toward the East Bay in the morning, and this process aims to get those passengers off trains before trains reach the East Bay and return to San Francisco full of morning commuters coming into San Francisco. These checks of the first 13 East Bay bound trains of the day are conducted early in the morning and discontinued by 7 a.m. Trains at this time heading east are only partially full, and fare inspectors can conduct proof-of-payment inspections on an entire train in less than 5 minutes, minimizing disruptions to the train schedule. Fare inspectors may request support from BART police officers. Fare inspectors are outfitted with radios that connect them directly to police dispatch should a police officer be needed to issue a criminal citation, such as for the third proof-of-payment violation within a 12-month period. During early weekday morning inspections at Embarcadero Station, fare inspectors are supported by BART police officers standing by on the train platforms to assist if needed. In addition to providing support to fare inspectors during early weekday morning inspec- tions, BART police officers may be positioned at fare gates and service gates to observe fare evasion. Unlike fare inspectors, BART police officers can stop a passenger that they see evading fare (e.g., hopping a fare gate, leaving through an emergency exit, etc.). BART police officers may also request proof of payment from an individual if the BART police officer initiated con- tact with the individual for another reason (e.g., creating a disturbance in the station), and/or if they develop reasonable suspicion. While BART police officers may check fares in specific instances, they do not regularly carry fare media inspection devices. If a BART police officer makes contact with an individual, the police officer may conduct a National Crime Information Center (NCIC) check for outstanding warrants and missing person information. Starting in 2022, under the Racial and Identity Profiling Act, BART will need to start collect- ing demographic information on all police interactions in compliance with a California state law requiring that law enforcement agencies report these data to the California Department of Justice. BART only collects demographic information for individuals cited by fare inspectors or BART police officers. The new state law will apply to all stops by BART police officers and will not apply to inspections by fare inspectors. Fare Evasion Citations BART issues two types of citations: civil administrative citations and criminal citations. The first and second proof-of-payment violations within a 12-month period by an adult receive a

Case Studies A-9   civil citation, which can be issued by a fare inspector. For the third or subsequent proof-of- payment violations within a 12-month period by an adult, a BART police officer will issue a criminal citation. Per state law, minors evading fare or violating the proof-of-payment ordinance may only receive civil citations. Civil citations for proof of payment are the same in the original three counties in the District and are processed by the same citation processing company as parking violations. The citation processing company handles all administration of civil citations, including appeals. Civil violators have 28 days from citation issuance to pay the fine, submit a waiver to per- form community service instead of paying the fine, or request an appeal of the citation. Under California Public Utilities Code Section 28766, the maximum civil citation fine for adults is $120; the maximum civil citation fine for minors is $60. Current BART civil citation fines are $75 for adults and $55 for minors. Instead of paying the fine, civil violators can opt to perform community service. The commu- nity service option is 8 hours for civil violators. Civil violators get to select any organization they choose to perform their service with and have to submit a signed letter verifying the completion of the service on letterhead from the selected organization. Most citations are not paid; approximately 10% of proof-of-payment citations are paid, and few individuals opt to complete community service. If payment, a community service waiver, or an administrative hearing request is not received within 28 calendar days of the issuance of the citation, an additional late fee of $20 is assessed. The individual then has 28 additional days to pay the fine plus the late fee or perform community service instead of paying the fine and late fee. After 56 days, unpaid fines may be submitted to the Franchise Tax Board. The Franchise Tax Board may withhold the fine from future state tax refunds and/or lottery win- nings if the citation processing company can correctly link an individual to a social security number. Although the unpaid citations may be subject to collections, the board of directors has instructed BART to forward them to the Franchise Tax Board rather than have the cita- tion processing company collect them. One challenge for processing unpaid civil citations is that proof-of-payment violators give false information. Although according to BART Ordi- nance No. 2017-2, knowingly providing false information to a BART police officer or Dis- trict employee engaged in proof-of-payment inspections is subject to a criminal citation, fare inspectors regularly receive false names and contact information, making correctly linking citations to individuals challenging. Criminal citations are handled by the superior court system in the county in which the cita- tion is issued. Fines for criminal citations are set by each county superior court and can be up to $250. Station Hardening and Other Fare Evasion Control Strategies In addition to introducing proof-of-payment inspections, BART has recently emphasized the pursuit of other fare evasion control strategies, such as new design guidelines and station hardening (i.e., making stations physically more secure and fare evasion more difficult). BART has revised its BART Facilities Standards to incorporate design criteria to reduce fare evasion for future station modernizations and extension stations. Much of BART’s existing infrastructure was designed in the 1950s and 1960s with the aim of making system access easy to draw people away from driving. Until recently, fare evasion was not a consideration in BART’s station design. As BART has matured and regional needs have shifted, BART is continuing to revisit the original design theory to make stations and other facilities less conducive to unauthorized entry as part of station modernization and hardening.

A-10 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion One such design shift has been minimizing the number of service gates. BART analyzed egress locations across the system and evaluated the amount of egress necessary. Working with local fire departments, BART was able to identify service gates that could be closed com- pletely or redesignated as emergency exits. For emergency exits, signage, alarms, and cameras have been installed to help deter passengers from misusing these gates. At some stations with known evasion problems, a BART police officer may be stationed by the service gates to deter fare evasion and cite fare evaders. BART has also increased the number of side access gates with electronic locks that prevent the gates from swinging open freely. Now, these gates can be kept in a locked position but can be opened by either a station agent or centrally from dispatch in the case of an evacuation safety issue. BART has also relocated some gates to more conspicuous locations, such as next to station agent booths to help deter evaders who are now in the line of sight of BART staff. BART is also working to change station configurations to enclose elevators in the paid area of its stations. At some stations, elevators go from an unpaid area directly to a paid platform area. As other station upgrades are made, BART is updating station configurations to eliminate this issue, although such redesigns may not be possible at all stations. BART also has an elevator attendant program through a partnership with Urban Alchemy. While the program’s primary purpose is to address unwanted behavior such as drug use or graffiti in elevators, it also poten- tially serves as a deterrent to would-be fare evaders. The program places attendants from local community-based organizations in elevators in downtown San Francisco stations. Attendants sit on a barstool in the elevator during all revenue hours and make sure no one misuses elevators, in addition to providing a friendly customer service presence. The elevator attendants are not allowed to ask for proof of payment or to enforce fare payment. The cost of the program is shared between BART and the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (Muni) which shares the elevators at those stations. As part of station hardening, BART has also raised the height of fencing to a uniform 60 inches (5 feet). Fencing has been raised in downtown San Francisco and other select stations to deter hopping into the paid area at nongate locations. By July  2020, BART completed station hardening at 28 stations, with plans to complete another 10 stations by July 2021. Fare Gate Design and Modifications BART has been exploring upgrading its 600 fare gates systemwide to a new, less fare-evasion prone solution. As part of this process, BART developed and tested various prototypes for poten- tial new fare gates, conducted an international benchmarking process, and released a request for expressions of interest in September 2020 to guide the development of requirements and maximize features of off-the-shelf products. As part of this effort, BART is assessing the potential benefits, challenges, and feasibility of several alternatives. The assessment includes examining the following: • Design concepts for the fare gates; • Interfacing the fare gates with BART’s physical infrastructure; • Interfacing the fare gates with BART’s computer systems and future Clipper 2.0 payment system; and • Contractual terms and conditions: Allocation of risks, liabilities, and responsibilities among the contracting parties. As part of the process, an in-house team at BART designed multiple potential new fare gate prototypes that have been piloted at different stations throughout the system. At Richmond

Case Studies A-11   Station, for instance, BART piloted a stacked configuration fare gate that added an upper set of paddles to the existing fare gate paddles. BART also piloted a higher barrier concept to reduce push-throughs and jumping at Fruitvale Station. Later, BART piloted a prototype pneumatic swing-style gate. In September 2019, the board of directors unanimously voted to adopt the swing-style barrier gate design, shown in Figure A-2, as the standard design for new fare gates. BART is in the process of identifying funding and engaging vendors as part of the request for expressions of interest to support the eventual systemwide fare gate replacement project. In the meantime, BART retrofitted existing fare gates at several stations, including all down- town San Francisco stations, with a modification that applies greater pressure to fully closed gates. The concept was first piloted at the Embarcadero Station. Although the fare gate closes at normal pressure in order to present no new risk to passengers, once fully closed, additional pressure is applied to prevent would-be fare evaders from forcing the gate open. Fare Policy and Fare Collection Technology BART accepts the Bay Area’s regional contactless smart card, Clipper. Clipper cards are sold and can be reloaded at TVMs outside of the paid area at all BART stations, in addition to online, at BART customer service offices, or retail locations across the region. Some TVMs also sell and load BART magnetic stripe tickets; however, the sale of BART tickets is being phased out. BART is working to make Clipper the only fare product available for purchase at BART stations, but it continues to accept BART tickets for station entry and exit. To enter a station, a passenger must have sufficient stored value funds to pay the minimum fare. Because BART is distance-based, BART has installed add-value machines inside of the gated area, in the event a passenger needs to add value to a Clipper card or BART ticket to exit. Some stations have add-value machines that are cash only, while others have add-value machines that accept credit cards. For passengers who enter and exit the same station, BART has an excursion fare to prevent passengers from riding without paying for the trip. The excursion fare is $6.20 (for a Clipper card) or $6.70 (regular adult paper ticket). It allows passengers to tour the BART system for up to 3 hours. Passengers who want to exit shortly after they enter must see a station agent to avoid the excursion fare. Source: BART. Figure A-2. Prototype of BART swing-style fare gate.

A-12 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion BART has made changes to its fare policies for its Clipper program to help reduce fare evasion: • BART no longer allows a negative balance. Once BART installed add-value machines at all stations, it no longer allowed Clipper cardholders to carry a negative balance. If a passenger does not have sufficient funds on their Clipper card to exit the station, they must visit an add- value machine within the paid area of the station and add funds to complete their journey. • BART increased the minimum balance for trips originating at an airport station. Given the airport surcharge, BART recently instituted a different, higher minimum balance require- ment for entries at the San Francisco International Airport and Oakland International Air- port stations. • BART incentivizes and promotes Clipper smart card adoption. BART continues to push passengers using BART magnetic stripe tickets toward using Clipper by instituting a sur- charge on BART tickets and discontinuing the distribution of BART tickets at an increasing number of stations. In addition to the operation and maintenance simplifications that Clipper provides, the system is less susceptible to fraud than the BART tickets (e.g., splicing magnetic stripe tickets). To address concerns about passengers using someone else’s discount card, BART has imple- mented a few strategies. For discount cards, fare inspectors and BART police officers can request proof of identification to verify that the card belongs to the individual because each discount card must be registered to an individual. If the passenger does not have proof of eligibility (e.g., driver’s license) at the time of inspection, the individual can submit proof of eligibility through the appeals process. BART also encourages the use of photo smart cards. Recently, BART has worked with institutions to issue pass programs on photo ID cards compatible with the Clipper system. The Clipper cards for persons living with a disability are also issued with the individual’s photo and name. BART staff has also been considering different color lights to indicate the type of discount card used at a fare gate. The fare gates have a light that illuminates when a discount card is used, but it does not differentiate between the types of discount cards (and not all cards are recognized as a discount cards). Video Surveillance and Body Cameras BART has an extensive security camera network across its system. BART operations staff monitors closed-circuit televisions (CCTVs), but not continually. They have conducted studies to log different types of fare evasion, define issues, and measure fare evasion rates. In the past, BART had used some analytical software to assist in monitoring the video feed. In response to the board of directors’ 2018 Surveillance Technology Ordinance, concerns with facial rec- ognition software, and the software’s ineffectiveness, BART has discontinued its use of this software. All BART police officers and fare inspectors, as well as community service officers and ambas- sadors who are not involved in fare enforcement, wear body cameras per BART Police Depart- ment Policy 451. The body-worn cameras are intended to assist officers in the performance of their duties by providing objective, unbiased videos and audio records of each contact and/or incident. All interactions are recorded with body-worn cameras. The Office of the Independent Police Auditor regularly monitors the body camera recordings to identify any issues. King County Metro Metro is a department of King County, Washington State’s most populous county, and home to the City of Seattle along with 35 other jurisdictions. Metro operates water taxi and bus services. Metro also operates the Seattle Streetcar on behalf of the Seattle Department of

Case Studies A-13   King County Metro, Seattle, WA Overview of Agency King County Metro (Metro) operates water taxi and bus services, including bus rapid transit (BRT)-style RapidRide. Metro also operates the Seattle Streetcar on behalf of the Seattle Department of Transportation and the Link light rail and Sound Transit Express bus services in King County on behalf of Sound Transit. Fare Collection Overview In general, passengers board through the front door and pay on board the bus with cash, ORCA smart card, Transit GO Ticket, paper transfer, or paper ticket/pass. Passengers paying with cash or a paper ticket can request transfers that also serve as proof of payment on services with all-door boarding. RapidRide routes, as well as regular bus lines operating in downtown Seattle along the 3rd Avenue transit corridor, are all-door boarding. On services with all-door boarding, passengers who enter through rear doors without proof of payment must proceed to the front of the bus to tap their ORCA cards or pay cash and receive proof of payment. Some RapidRide stops are equipped with platform ORCA smart card validators that passengers can tap before boarding. Passengers can purchase fares online, by mail, at authorized fare retailers, at TVMs, or using the Transit GO Ticket app. Water taxi passengers can pay fares in cash, or by tapping an ORCA card on a validator held by a crew member, using the Transit Go app, or purchasing a ticket at a TVM and depositing it into a farebox. On Seattle Streetcar, passengers may purchase a paper ticket at a pay station, use the Transit GO Ticket app, or tap their ORCA card at the validator located at each Streetcar station. Definition of Fare Evasion Fare evasion is defined as “failure to pay a fare,” and “failure to produce proof of payment . . . including . . . a validated fare payment card.” This means that even if passengers have a valid pass if they do not tap their card, they are considered to be evading fare. “Failure to depart the bus or other mode of public transportation when requested” is also a citable offense. Both are defined under the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 35.58.580. Fare Enforcement Overview On the bus, operators may state the fare once if someone boards without paying the fare and the operator feels safe in doing so. The operator does not have a role in fare enforcement. This is a safety precaution because fare disputes are a major contributor to operator assaults. The official agency policy is to never refuse service to anyone. RapidRide routes and buses operating downtown along 3rd Avenue are operated as proof of payment with fare enforcement. Seattle Streetcar operates as proof of payment but does not employ fare enforcement. Metro personnel may inspect fares but do not issue notices of violation. Fare Enforcement Personnel Metro contracts with a private company to provide security officers to perform fare enforcement. These fare enforcement officers (FEOs) are authorized to request proof of payment and issue warnings, notices of violation, and 12-hour expulsions related to fare evasion. Fare Enforcement Deployment Metro has seven patrol areas, consisting of its six RapidRide routes and one downtown proof-of-payment segment for local buses, and tries to distribute fare enforcement hours relatively equally across them. Metro does consider what areas historically have shown higher evasion rates and will provide some additional enforcement on those routes. Due to equity concerns, Metro ensures that the difference in hours enforcement personnel are deployed on routes with the highest and lowest rates of fare evasion is no more than 10%. (continued on next page)

A-14 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion Transportation and the Link light rail and Sound Transit Express bus services operating in King County on behalf of Sound Transit. In 2009, Metro and six other transit providers in the Seattle region launched the ORCA card- based fare collection system that allows passengers to use a smart card to pay their fares. Single rides paid using an ORCA card provide passengers with a 2-hour transfer valid on all regional transit services regardless of the operator (excluding Washington State Ferries). In 2016, Metro introduced the Transit GO Ticket mobile app that is visually validated. Although some of Seattle’s other transit providers also use the Transit GO Ticket app, Transit GO Tickets are non- transferable between services. The region is currently working to design and implement a new account-based fare collection system that will include a virtual ORCA card and accept mobile wallets, eliminating the need for a separate mobile ticketing app. In 2010, Metro launched its BRT-style service branded as RapidRide and introduced proof- of-payment inspections for that service. All-door boarding is allowed for all passengers with proof of payment. Passengers paying with ORCA and boarding at stops without an off-board ORCA validator may board through any door but must proceed to the front of the bus to tap the validator (there are no validators at rear doors). To facilitate off-board fare payment for ORCA passengers, Metro installed platform validators at key RapidRide stops. Metro installed addi- tional ORCA validators along the 3rd Avenue corridor when Metro bus services were rerouted to the corridor from the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel. Between 1990 and 2005, Metro operated a bus service under downtown Seattle in the 1.3-mile- long Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel. In 2005, the tunnel was temporarily closed for con- struction to accommodate Sound Transit’s Link light rail service. The tunnel reopened in 2009 when Link light rail operations began. In 2019, buses using the tunnel were moved to surface King County Metro, Seattle, WA (Continued ) Fare Citation Practice Customer service is the first goal of FEOs. Per Metro policy, everyone is granted a warning on their first fare evasion contact, but FEOs have the discretion to not issue a violation or warning under extenuating circumstances based on their training and best judgment. Any fare enforcement interactions that occurred outside of the past 365 days are not considered when evaluating whether an individual receives a warning or a violation. After the first fare evasion contact within the last 365 days, the protocol is for adult passengers to receive an administrative violation; juveniles are allotted two warnings before a violation is issued. Metro no longer issues civil citations for fare evasion to decriminalize fare evasion. Fare Evasion Penalties Metro issues administrative violations for fare evasion. Metro administratively resolves violations in-house. There are five options to reduce fines or seek non- fine resolutions. These include lowering the fine paid if it is paid within a shorter period, adding value to an existing smart card instead of paying a fine, enrolling in a reduced-fare program if eligible instead of a fine, and performing community service instead of a fine. Metro is exploring implementing a case management approach for repeat fare evaders who are unable to take advantage of existing alternative options. Fare Enforcement Technology and Capital Investments FEOs use a handheld validator that is a ruggedized Android smartphone for performing fare enforcement. Although Metro has a fare enforcement database, FEOs cannot access it directly in the field and must call dispatch to request information. Violations result in the issuance of a paper notice of violation and are logged in the electronic system. Metro is transitioning to a new system that will provide real-time access to the fare enforcement database in the field. FEOs will also be able to enter an individual's information to issue a warning or violation and print notices of violation.

Case Studies A-15   streets. To optimize service while operating on surface streets, Metro introduced all-door board- ing with proof-of-payment inspections and off-board payment on the rerouted buses. Metro also extended bus-only hours on 3rd Avenue. Fare Enforcement Personnel and Deployment When Metro introduced RapidRide in 2010 with all-door boarding and off-board fare pay- ment, Metro also introduced proof-of-payment fare inspection on those routes. Metro contracted with a private company to provide security officers to perform fare enforcement. In 2020, Metro has 35 FEOs who perform fare enforcement on six BRT routes and roughly 2 miles of down- town transit corridor along 3rd Avenue from Prefontaine Way to Broad Street; these 35 FEOs are supported by 10 administrative and support personnel. While some of these routes provide 24/7 service, fare enforcement is conducted between 5 a.m. and 11 p.m. The submitted fiscal year 2021 and 2022 Biennium Budget includes a 10% reduction to the contract. Under the new budget, staffing has been reduced to 28 FEOs and 8 support personnel. Fare enforcement teams are assigned to a given route or patrol area each day. Metro has seven patrol areas: the 3rd Avenue corridor downtown and the six BRT-style RapidRide routes. Fare enforcement deployment hours are distributed roughly evenly across the seven patrol areas, with some additional enforcement along the routes that have historically shown higher evasion rates. Once deployed, a team of two FEOs boards a bus with one FEO entering through the front door and one FEO entering through the rear door. The FEOs systematically inspect everyone on board, working their way to meet in the middle. This systematic inspection process pre- vents profiling or biased inspection. On occasion, not everyone on board will be inspected. For instance, if both FEOs separately encounter passengers without proof of payment, each FEO will stop to issue a warning or notice of violation and they may not meet before the next stop. If one FEO stops to issue a warning or notice of violation, the other FEO continues working through the bus to meet up with the FEO engaged with a passenger. Once the entire bus has been inspected, the FEOs disembark at the next stop and board the next vehicle on the same route. Metro does not have a target inspection rate for its FEOs, but each team is expected to board about 35 vehicles a day. Total inspection numbers vary based on vehicle loads. Seattle Streetcar does not have dedicated FEOs. In late 2018, the Seattle Department of Trans- portation consulted with Metro about the possibility of using Metro’s FEOs on Seattle Streetcar to provide a security and fare enforcement presence and collect fare usage data. Metro offered to provide two FEOs for 4 hours daily, 7 days per week. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, the Seattle Department of Transportation had renewed interest in using FEOs as a security presence on Seattle Streetcar. Metro provided information on the different levels of service that could be provided along with cost-related information. Discussions have been put on hold. When an FEO encounters a passenger without proof of payment, the passenger is asked to provide their identification so the FEO can contact dispatch and check for any previous history with fare enforcement. All passengers who have previously had a fare enforcement contact are tracked in a database. Previous encounters with fare enforcement determine whether passengers are issued a warning or notice of violation. Adult passengers who have failed to produce proof of payment within the last 365 days receive a notice of violation. Juveniles are allotted two warn- ings before a notice of violation is issued. All passengers are granted a warning on their first fare evasion contact. FEOs have the discretion to not issue a notice of violation or warning under extenuating circumstances. For example, if a vehicle is completely full and a passenger boards through the back door and cannot feasibly make it to the front of the vehicle to pay the fare, or if their ORCA card transaction history shows that they consistently tap every day when they board, the FEO may choose not to issue that passenger a warning or notice of violation.

A-16 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion Metro’s contract with the security firm that provides the fare enforcement personnel includes minimum training requirements for FEOs. FEOs undergo 2 weeks, or 80 hours, of class- room training. Classroom training requirements include basic security operations, verbal judo (de-escalation techniques), and defensive techniques. New FEOs go out with Metro Training Officers for on-the-job training to learn the particulars of fare enforcement on Metro. Each FEO participates in between 160 and 240 hours of on-the-job training with a field training officer. Although the minimum on-the-job training is 4 weeks, the training typically takes longer, extend- ing up to 6 weeks. New FEOs do not go out on their own or with another new FEO until they have been signed off by the Training Officer and Training Manager. In a recent renewal of Metro’s contract with the security provider, Metro identified additional training related to equity and social justice that would be required for FEOs. One addition is training designed to educate personnel on how to approach encounters with youth fare evaders (i.e., taking into account different levels of cognitive development and response behaviors), which was created in partnership with Strategies for Youth, a policy and training organization focused on improving police/youth interactions. Another addition is training on how to provide mental health first aid in the event the FEO encounters someone experiencing a mental health crisis. Metro’s Equity and Social Justice Manager also provides training to help FEOs under- stand unconscious bias, best practices for interacting with people of limited financial means, and best practices for interacting with communities of color. Focus on Customer Service and Education In 2018, the King County Auditor’s Office conducted an audit and provided a report on RapidRide Fare Enforcement: Efforts Needed to Ensure Efficiency and Address Equity Issues. The audit identified enforcement outcomes that conflicted with King County’s equity and social justice goals. In response to the audit, Metro has made a conscious effort to shift the fare enforce- ment culture to a more customer service and education-oriented approach. Previously, FEOs tended to think of their first responsibility as upholding the law and holding passengers account- able for paying their fares. Metro has found that approaching fare enforcement from a customer service perspective improves compliance, and those inspected are more likely to provide legitimate names, addresses, and phone numbers to FEOs. Bringing the adjudication process in-house is part of Metro’s more customer-friendly resolution process that provides alternative options for resolution. In response to community concerns and confusion about the presence of enforcement per- sonnel on board vehicles, Metro has also launched educational campaigns to let passengers know about the roles of FEOs and that they are not police officers or Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents. These campaigns have been launched in many different languages, with onboard signage displaying information in the nine languages most commonly spoken in King County. King County is a sanctuary government and does not coordinate with ICE or similar groups. FEOs have the words “Fare Enforcement” prominently written on their uniforms. Fare Evasion Notices of Violations The 2018 audit of RapidRide fare enforcement identified negative impacts that civil infrac- tions processed through the court system were having on passengers with no or low incomes. Previously, a passenger cited for not having proof of payment was required to pay a fine or go to court. If they did not pay the fine or appear in court, the maximum fine was automatically applied, and unpaid citations were sent to collections, which can have a detrimental impact on individuals’ credit ratings and hinder their ability to get housing or employment. Further, the audit found that people experiencing homelessness or housing instability received nearly 25% of

Case Studies A-17   citations issued between 2015 and 2017 and that these individuals may not have the ability to pay a $124 citation. The findings from the audit were a major catalyst in changing Metro’s viola- tion and fare enforcement approach to find a “right-sized” resolution for fare evasion and align the penalties for fare evasion with the infraction of not paying a $2.75 fare. In response to the 2018 audit, Metro chose to bring the fare violation life cycle fully in-house in 2019. King County determined that under the Revised Code of Washington (RCW), Metro could process citations for fare evasion through the district courts or resolve citations adminis- tratively (now referred to as notices of violation) in-house. The King County Council amended Chapters 28.96 and 2.16 of the King County Code to enable Metro to use an alternative process to resolve fare violations and to administer that process in-house, effectively decriminalizing fare evasion and separating it from the court system. Bringing the violation resolution process in-house allows Metro to better manage the equity outcomes of the fare enforcement process. In-house administration costs Metro slightly less than the $330,000 Metro previously spent per year to have district courts adjudicate fare evasion citations. As part of bringing the resolution process in-house, Metro also reduced the fine and intro- duced alternative resolution options. RCW 35.58.585 authorizes Metro to establish a schedule of fines and penalties for civil infractions for fare evasion. A passenger who receives a notice of violation has five options for resolving the violation: • Pay the penalty fine (reduced from $50 if paid within 90 days to $25 if paid within 30 days of the violation). • Add value to an existing ORCA card ($25 in general, $10 for ORCA LIFT, youth, or Regional Reduced-Fare Permit cards). This option is only available to passengers once per calendar year and is not available for employer-provided cards. • For those who qualify, enroll in ORCA LIFT (requires qualification based on income), obtain a youth card, or obtain a Regional Reduced-Fare Permit card (for seniors, people with dis- abilities, and Medicare cardholders). • Perform 2 hours of community service. • Appeal the violation within 45 days. Although the nonmonetary option for resolving a fine by completing community service is valuable, it may not be a realistic option for an individual experiencing crises, mental health issues, disabilities, etc. As Metro continues to revise its fare violation program, providing options for cases like these or for passengers who have accumulated a significant number of violations are being considered. Metro is working to develop a case management approach to address the needs of these individuals. Metro is also considering sustainable options to provide fully subsidized fares for no- and very low-income passengers to help ensure everyone riding has a fare product that meets their needs and financial means. Metro is looking into ways to get fully subsidized passes into the hands of those who need them while reducing barriers to access, such as needing to go to a homeless shelter to obtain a ticket. Two working groups are proceeding in parallel to create regional products that could meet this need, although staff recognizes there will always be those who are not open to receiving help or services and may not be assisted by this effort. Despite these changes, the proportion of violations resolved remains low but is trending in the right direction. The resolution rate of fare enforcement citations was less than 3% when cita- tions were processed through the District Court. That rate has increased to just less than 11% now that adjudication occurs in-house. Processing the new administrative violations in-house instead of through the courts makes it easier to identify the root causes of the low resolution rate. Affordability continues to be the number one reason violations are not resolved. Metro has

A-18 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion concluded that meaningfully addressing the issue of affordability for its most impoverished and vulnerable passengers is a community concern, not just a transit issue. Community Engagement Many of Metro’s public education efforts have been developed in conjunction with long- standing community partners. Transportation advocacy groups, the Seattle–King County Coalition for Homelessness, Puget Sound Sage, and One America all provided input when Metro brought the fare enforcement adjudication process in-house. The input of these com- munity organizations helped Metro understand the perspective of the communities that they serve, including people experiencing homelessness and immigrant and refugee communities. Their input also helped Metro understand how changes to the fare enforcement process might be received by these communities and develop resolution options that consider different groups’ financial means. Metro staff continues to work closely with these partners to define, evaluate, and refine alternative resolution options to better meet the needs of these passengers and Metro. Metro also engaged with these community organizations and others when developing their public education campaign aimed at countering misinformation about ICE agents on Metro vehicles. Partnering organizations helped ensure that translations for the nine most widely spoken languages in the county were provided both in printed materials and during outreach events. These efforts helped make sure that all Metro riding communities know what fare enforcement is and what they can expect to see and experience when fare enforcement personnel board a vehicle. Social Justice and Equity Focus A focus on equity and social justice is integrated across all of King County’s work, supported by the county’s Equity and Social Justice Office and guided by the King County Equity and Social Justice Strategic Plan 2016–2022. This commitment at the county level gives Metro’s fare enforcement program a structure to work within and helps to define the lens through which Metro approaches issues. Metro is working with its security provider to ensure that FEO training addresses best prac- tices for working with these populations and their mobility needs. For vulnerable populations, FEOs are trained to ask different questions if these passengers lack proof of payment. FEOs focus their questions on “what happened to your ORCA card? How can we get you a new one?” versus “Why didn’t you pay your fare?” Metro has also applied an equity and social justice lens when determining where to focus its fare enforcement efforts. In assigning fare enforcement teams, Metro considers what areas have historically had higher fare evasion rates and adjusts FEO deployments to provide addi- tional enforcement on those routes. However, Metro has a guideline for the deployment of fare enforcement personnel that balances the desire to focus on areas with higher evasion rates with an understanding of the equity concerns around focusing too exclusively on enforcement within certain communities. Metro ensures that the difference in hours enforcement personnel are deployed on routes with the highest and lowest rates of fare evasion is no more than 10%. Current Technology Limitations and Future Plans Metro has a fare enforcement database that runs on Microsoft Access. The fare enforcement database contains information on passengers’ prior encounters with FEOs, including warn- ings and notices of violation. This information is used to determine whether individuals should

Case Studies A-19   receive a warning or a notice of violation if they are inspected and cannot produce valid proof of payment. However, because the fare enforcement database is network-based rather than cloud- based, FEOs must call dispatch and ask dispatch to look up a passenger in the database to deter- mine the individual’s fare evasion history and whether the individual should receive a warning or a notice of violation based on previous interactions with fare enforcement. In addition, due to the network nature of the current system, FEOs issue paper warnings and notices of violation and must manually enter them into the system each day after return- ing from the field. This is problematic for individuals who receive a notice of violation and call Metro immediately after their interaction with fare enforcement to resolve their violations. Violations may not appear in the system for at least 24 hours, making it impossible to work with the individuals to resolve the violations immediately. Especially with hard-to-reach popu- lations, Metro staff wants to be able to respond to them right away, but the network database precludes this. These technology and functionality limitations were identified in the 2018 audit conducted by the King County Auditor. At that time, Metro had initiated a project to replace the devices to increase productivity. However, after accounting for the cost of the ruggedized devices, service, and constant advancements in technology that would make them outdated within a few years, Metro decided that continuing to use the current ruggedized Samsung Android smartphone devices issued to FEOs is the fiscally responsible decision. Under the current hardware agree- ment, Metro can acquire a new phone (last year’s model) every year at no cost for each active line, allowing regular upgrades to the phones and ensuring that the hardware will remain com- patible with the Android-based ORCA smart card fare validation and citation mobile apps as the apps are updated as well. Further, damage to phones has been minimal because Metro procures Military Specification (MILSPEC) cases to protect them. In addition, if a phone is damaged, Metro can request a new one at no cost instead of sending it out for service, which could take weeks to get the phone back. All told, this decision will save Metro $125,000. However, Metro is transitioning to a new cloud-based system that will allow FEOs to look up a passenger’s fare enforcement history in real time in the field. The new system will also allow FEOs to print notices of violation straight from an FEO’s device using a connected thermal printer. The cloud-based system will make new warnings and violations available in real time in the fare enforcement database. This way, if a passenger calls to resolve a violation shortly after receiving it, staff will be able to see the violation in the database and can work with the individual to resolve it immediately. The new system requires significant configuration before it will be ready to implement, and the COVID-19 pandemic has reduced resources available for the effort at this time. The region is designing and implementing the next-generation ORCA system. As this work progresses, Metro is providing input regarding current fare enforcement challenges with the current system. Integration between next-generation ORCA and Metro’s fare enforcement data- base is not planned, but they may eventually tie together in some way so that information can be more efficiently cross-referenced. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority LA Metro is a multimodal transportation agency that provides local, rapid, express, and BRT services, and six light rail and heavy rail lines. Metro also funds 27 local transit agencies and the region’s Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) paratransit service and has a lead role in planning, coordinating, designing, building, and programming bus, rail, highway, and other mobility-related projects for Los Angeles County.

A-20 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LA Metro), Los Angeles, CA Overview of Agency LA Metro is a multimodal transportation agency that operates bus, light rail, heavy rail, and BRT services in Los Angeles County. Fare Collection Overview On most buses, fares are paid at fareboxes using cash or TAP (Transit Access Pass) smart cards. Two BRT routes and two Rapid bus routes allow all-door boarding. On the Orange BRT route, fares must be paid using a TAP card at platform validators before boarding. On the Silver BRT route and two Rapid bus routes with all-door boarding, TAP passengers may enter through any door and tap the validator; passengers paying with cash must board through the front door and purchase and load a TAP card at the farebox. Heavy rail lines are gated and passengers are required to have a TAP card and tap to enter fare gate turnstiles. At most light rail stations, passengers are required to have a TAP card and to tap at platform validators before boarding. Underground light rail stations are gated, and all passengers enter through and tap at fare gate turnstiles. TAP vending machines are available in rail and BRT stations to purchase TAP cards and add value and fare products. As of September 2020, the TAP card is available in Apple Wallet on iPhone and Apple Watch. A physical TAP card can also be transferred to Apple Wallet. Definition of Fare Evasion Metro’s Customer Code of Conduct requires passengers to pay all applicable fares and fees and to show proof of payment upon request by a Metro representative. Evading payment of a Metro fare is prohibited. The Code of Conduct lists behaviors that constitute fare evasion and defines the fare- required zone. Fare Enforcement Overview Bus operators observe fare payment and request fares if passengers board without paying. Metro’s fare compliance officers, who can check fares and issue citations, conduct fare enforcement at stations and on trains on the proof-of-payment rail system and at fare gate turnstiles at gated stations (primarily on heavy rail lines). Although fare enforcement on bus services is not a primary focus for fare compliance officers, they may conduct fare enforcement at bus stops and terminal stations for BRT and Rapid bus routes with all-door boarding. Fare Enforcement Personnel Fare compliance officers are Metro employees who are deployed for fare compliance but are also able to issue citations for any other Code of Conduct violation. Metro has a contract for law enforcement services with the Los Angeles and Long Beach Police Departments and the LA County Sheriff’s Department. These agencies do not conduct fare enforcement, but they may be called in to assist with difficult passengers or passengers refusing to provide information for a citation. Fare Enforcement Deployment Fare compliance officers are deployed primarily to rail but may also inspect BRT and Rapid bus services with all-door boarding when enough personnel are available. Fare compliance officers are usually deployed to terminal and hub stations where most passengers board. In some cases, fare compliance officers are deployed using data from Transit Court and Operations to identify hot spots where passengers are not tapping. At light rail stations, fare compliance officers are generally stationed near validators, as passengers enter the platform. At heavy rail stations and underground light rail stations, fare compliance officers are stationed at fare gate turnstiles. On both light and heavy rail, fare compliance officers also inspect fares on platforms, which are part of the fare-required zone.

Case Studies A-21   Fare Evasion The Metro Customer Code of Conduct adopted in 2010 and amended in 2018 defines fare payment requirements as follows: • Patrons who ride Metro vehicles or use Metro services must pay all applicable fares and fees • Patrons shall show proof of payment of fare upon request by a Metro representative The Code of Conduct expressly prohibits fare evasion and further defines fare evasion as including the following: • Boarding a Metro vehicle or entering a Metro facility platform or other fare-required zones, without proof of valid fare media or without paying the fare upon boarding a Metro bus; • Duplicating, counterfeiting, altering, or transferring any nontransferable fare media without Metro authorization; • Placing anything other than valid fare media into a farebox, ticket machine, pass reader, or other fare validation or collection device; • Falsely representing oneself as eligible for a waiver or a special or reduced fare, or obtaining fare media by making a false or misleading representation; • Refusing to show proof of valid, validated, unexpired fare media upon request by a Metro representative; patrons shall show identification upon request for accurate completion of citation data entry per posted policies; • Misusing fare media with the intent to evade payment of a fare; • Unauthorized use of a discount ticket or failing to present upon request by Metro or within 72 hours thereafter, acceptable proof of discount eligibility to use a discount ticket and show identification per posted policies; • Boarding through a rear bus door to avoid payment of fare; • Entering a Metro vehicle or facility when any penalty, fee, or assessment for violation of the code is past due or during any exclusion period; and • Entering a Metro vehicle or facility in such a way as to bypass or avoid any fare-required zone barriers such as media collection or validation machines or Metro representatives col- lecting fares. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LA Metro), Los Angeles, CA (Continued ) Fare Citation Practice Fare compliance officers try to educate passengers about fare requirements and get them to pay instead of issuing a citation. Passengers without a valid fare may be issued a warning or a citation and/or have a fare deducted from their TAP card on the spot using the mobile phone validator, at the fare compliance officer’s discretion. Fare Evasion Penalties Fare compliance officers issue civil administrative citations for fare evasion. The fine levels are $75 for adults and $40 for minors. Individuals may be excluded from the service for escalating periods after a third citation in 12 months. Metro offers alternative resolution options, including community service, a payment plan, or eligibility for a penalty reduction to apply to the fare evasion fine upon successfully completing Transit School. Fare Enforcement Technology and Capital Investments Fare compliance officers use mobile phone validators to check TAP fares, issue electronic citations, print citations, and deduct fares from TAP cards on the spot. The first heavy rail line opened as proof of payment in 1993. In 2008, Metro began gating all heavy rail stations and some light rail stations by installing turnstiles in response to concerns about fare evasion in the ungated proof-of-payment system. Metro completed “locking the gates” (i.e., latching the turnstiles) at its heavy rail stations in 2013.

A-22 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion The Code of Conduct also establishes a penalty schedule for offenses for specific fare viola- tions, which are discussed below under the Fare Evasion Penalties. Fare Enforcement by Mode LA Metro operates four types of bus services: Local, Rapid, Express, and BRT. On most bus services, passengers board through the front door and the bus operator observes fare payment and, if necessary, asks passengers to pay the fare. On the Silver BRT Line and two Rapid bus routes with all-door boarding, passengers paying with TAP may board through all doors; pas- sengers paying with cash must board through the front door and purchase and load a TAP card at the farebox. On those routes, fare payment is based on an honor system that requires pas- sengers boarding through the rear door to tap at rear-door TAP validators. The Orange BRT Line has all-door boarding and passengers must use a TAP card and tap at validators positioned as the passenger enters the platform before boarding. Although fare enforcement on buses is not a primary focus for fare compliance officers, they do conduct fare enforcement at bus stops and terminal stations for BRT and Rapid bus services with all-door boarding when enough fare compliance officers are available. These inspections are primarily conducted off board and are more to provide a uniformed presence to deter fare evasion than to provide active enforcement because vehicles are crowded and Metro does not want to hold up service for fare inspections. LA Metro’s rail system includes heavy rail and light rail with a combination of proof-of- payment fare collection and gated stations. TAP cards are required to pay all rail fares. All heavy rail and underground light rail stations are gated. Light rail includes underground, at grade, and elevated stations and all but two of the gated light rail stations are shared with heavy rail. Ungated light rail stations have proof-of-payment fare collection and enforcement. Metro’s first heavy rail line (the Red Line) opened in 1998 with proof-of-payment fare collection. In 2008, as a result of concerns about fare evasion in the ungated proof-of-payment rail system, Metro began installing turnstiles at all heavy rail stations and underground light rail stations. Metro completed “locking the gates” (i.e., latching the turnstiles) at its heavy rail stations in 2013. Pas- sengers experiencing problems at the turnstiles can use “Gate Help” to get immediate assistance directly from Metro Rail Operations. Gate Help allows Rail Operations to monitor situations and unlatch turnstiles remotely if necessary. Before locking the gates, Metro had to convert ticket machines completely to TAP and discontinue issuing paper tickets. Metro also had to work with Metrolink, the commuter rail agency serving Los Angeles County and Southern Cali- fornia, to issue TAP-enabled Metrolink tickets. All Metro stations have video surveillance of turnstiles, TVMs, and validators, primarily to provide security for the equipment. Videos are also used in reviewing complaints. Metro also has video analytics for fare evaders and other suspicious behaviors, to identify problem stations with high evasion levels. The video analytics software does not include facial recognition. Fare Enforcement Personnel LA Metro employs a staff of civilian transit security officers, who are referred to as fare com- pliance officers, to check passengers for proof of payment. The fare enforcement function is part of System Security and Law Enforcement. Fare compliance officers are overseen by senior fare compliance officers, who have shift supervisor responsibilities and report to sergeants who report to transit security lieutenants. The fare compliance officer rank was created in 2017 when Metro’s law enforcement contract was restructured. Previously, Metro contracted exclusively with the LA County Sheriff’s Depart- ment (LACSD), which also provided civilian security assistants for fare enforcement (see next

Case Studies A-23   section). Metro now contracts with the Los Angeles and Long Beach Police Departments and the LA County Sheriff’s Department for law enforcement services. As such, it made sense to bring civilian fare enforcement in-house, enabling sworn law enforcement officers to focus on safety and security and policing of the system. Fare compliance officers are uniformed and wear high-visibility vests, but they are not sworn police officers and do not have the authority to detain or arrest. Fare compliance officers are issued a radio, handcuffs, a baton, pepper spray, a ballistic high-visibility vest, and badges iden- tifying them by name and as Transit Security and Metro employees. A fare compliance officer is an entry-level, civilian position that requires a guard card, but no law enforcement or security training is required before applying. Fare compliance officers are hired and trained by Metro. Applicants must meet some basic qualifications; take a written test, an oral exam, a physical agility test; and undergo a background check, psychological test, and medical check. Before hiring, fare compliance officers are interviewed by the department head. Once hired, they must complete an onboarding session required of all Metro employees and a Metro Academy program specifically designed for fare compliance officers, which includes 350 hours (about 8 weeks) of training. Fare compliance officers then spend about 8 weeks with a field training officer, who evaluates their job performance using daily evaluations to assess how they handle situations and engage with the public, before approving them for a 1-year pro- bationary period. Field training officers must have 18 months of experience as fare compliance officers. When field training officers are not training, they work as fare compliance officers. Fare compliance officers can issue citations for fare violations as well as any of the other violations identified in the Customer Code of Conduct, such as rules governing commercial activities, disorderly conduct, civility, compliance, and cooperation in a Metro facility or vehicle, as well as parking at Metro facilities. Fare compliance officers have no other specific respon- sibilities, although they may assist with offloading at the end of a rail line, to make sure that everyone gets off the train and taps again before reboarding. As part of Metro’s Transit Action Plan, fare compliance officers work in conjunction with various groups, contacting partner organizations when they notice individuals who appear to be experiencing homelessness. The daily roll call includes some kind of training, such as how to address a recent incident. In one meeting, following a domestic dispute incident, Metro staff highlighted how to respond, including role-playing. Refresher training is also provided through in-service training. Law Enforcement Restructuring Until 2017, fare enforcement was conducted by LACSD security assistants through a contract that covered all transit security and policing services, including fare enforcement. LACSD’s security assistants were civilians hired to do fare enforcement. In 2017, Metro’s contracted law enforcement services were restructured. At that time, Metro entered into a multiagency law enforcement services contract with the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD), Long Beach Police Department (LBPD), and LACSD, to provide a “consistent and reliable law enforcement presence to assure the safety of Metro’s riders and employees” by increasing the number of law enforcement personnel, improving response times, and improving contract compliance through performance metrics and accountability measures. Each of the three law enforcement agencies is responsible for specific services and locations within their jurisdictions. The three law enforce- ment agencies do not provide fare enforcement, but fare compliance officers can get immediate law enforcement support (e.g., with difficult passengers). With the restructuring, fare enforcement was brought in-house for several reasons. LACSD was no longer responsible for Metro’s entire service area so it would not make sense for LACSD

A-24 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion to provide fare enforcement in areas patrolled by LAPD and LBPD. It also allowed law enforce- ment to focus exclusively on police work. Metro’s inspector general recommended evaluating staff responsibilities, taking into con- sideration what level of personnel can complete a function (e.g., unarmed civilians able to do fare enforcement) so that the responsibility can be assigned to the lowest level position, leav- ing higher-level safety and security personnel available for more urgent needs requiring higher levels of responsibility (e.g., to detain or remove a passenger from the system). This approach for assigning responsibilities is also more cost-effective and helps to better align enforcement personnel to the level of severity of the violation and/or safety or security concerns. For example, the public may view the need for armed personnel to conduct fare enforcement as unnecessarily intimidating. In addition to the agencies that are part of the multiagency law enforcement contract and Metro’s in-house civilian fare compliance officers, Metro contracts for private security to pro- vide security and a high-visibility presence at stations. Fare Inspection Devices and Discretion Fare inspections on LA Metro primarily involve checking TAP cards because those are required to ride BRT and Rapid bus services with all-door boarding and both light and heavy rail services. Fare compliance officers use mobile phone validators to check TAP cards, issue cita- tions electronically, and print citations using a wireless printer. Mobile validators are also able to deduct a fare on the spot if the passenger’s TAP card has sufficient stored value. The mobile validators can be used to scan barcodes on IDs to populate fields on the citation, but passengers cannot be required to show IDs. California is unique as even noncitizens can obtain state-issued IDs or driver’s licenses. Fare enforcement is not law enforcement-driven. Fare compliance officers try first to educate passengers about fare requirements and to get them to pay before issuing a citation. Fare com- pliance officers may give a warning, issue a citation, and/or deduct a fare at their discretion. The mobile phone validator shows the passenger’s TAP card history, including when the card was last used. Fare compliance officers do not know whether an individual has previously received a warning or citation. Fare Evasion Penalties Each violation that results in a citation carries a $75 fine ($40 for minors). An individual who violates any provision of the code may be immediately ejected from the Metro facility or vehicle without refund of any fare by an authorized Metro representative who witnesses a violation. Fines may be paid online, by mail, in person at Transit Court, or by phone. Repeated violations that result in multiple citations within 12 months may result in exclusion from use of service for 30 days after the third offense, 60 days after the fourth offense, and 90 days after the fifth and subsequent offenses. Notice and due process are provided before imposing these last resort consequences. A violator may appeal an exclusion to request a reduction in time or a limit on the days/times that the exclusion applies to get to work or school. Metro does not use any means (e.g., collections, garnishments, placing a lien on tax refunds) to compel payment. For repeat offenders or persons who fail to resolve their citations in any way, Metro exercises provisions for exclusion from the system. If an exclusion order is violated, the violator could be charged with criminal trespass. Although Metro could commence a civil action against an individual with a large number of outstanding citations for fare evasion, Metro’s

Case Studies A-25   preference and practice are to work with passengers to change their behavior and encourage them to pay fares, not to initiate court proceedings. Fare Evasion Adjudication Process LA Metro implemented an administrative process for adjudicating fare violations in 2012. This was made possible by a series of bills approved by the State Legislature and signed into law. In 2006, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority in conjunction with the City and County of San Francisco successfully lobbied to change state law to allow LA Metro and SFMTA to issue an administrative citation as an alternative to a criminal cita- tion for adults receiving transit-related violations, most commonly for fare evasion. California Senate Bill (SB) 1749 permitted LA Metro and SFMTA to impose and enforce administrative penalties, shifting the processing of transit violation citations for adults from the Superior Court to the transit agency. SB 1749 specifically excluded minors under the age of 18 from the administrative process, requiring citations issued to minors to continue to be processed by the juvenile courts. Subsequent new laws extended the authority to impose and enforce civil administrative penalties for fare evasion or passenger misconduct to all transit agencies in California in 2012 (SB 492), decriminalized fare evasion for minors in 2016 (SB 882), and encouraged transit agencies to adopt administrative penalties for fare violations by requiring fines and fees to be deposited with the transit agency instead of the county general fund, also in 2016 (California Assembly Bill 426). For transit agencies that choose to adjudicate these transit violations admin- istratively, the violations are subject only to an administrative penalty imposed and enforced in a civil proceeding. Ordinances enacted under these provisions are governed by California Public Utilities Code Section 99580, et seq. These provisions eliminate the possibility of a criminal record for failure to pay a transit fare. In 2010, Metro’s Board of Directors authorized the development of a plan to create a Transit Adjudications Bureau (i.e., Metro Transit Court) and approved an ordinance, the Metro Cus- tomer Code of Conduct, to be implemented later along with the Transit Court. The stated pur- pose of the Transit Court is to provide a simpler process for resolving citations through a civil administrative process rather than processing them as criminal infractions. Compliance with the Code of Conduct is a condition of use of a Metro vehicle, facility, or property. The Code of Conduct defines the violations subject to citation and the administrative process, including the penalties and the appeals process. Potential violations include fare evasion as well as breaking other conditions of use governed by the Code of Conduct. In March 2012, Metro implemented the administrative process, reduced the cost of a citation for a Code of Conduct violation from $250 to $75, and began processing citations and conduct- ing hearings on appeals for fare evasion and other transit-related violations in-house, through the Transit Court. The Transit Court provides due process for resolving transit violation cita- tions through appeals, payment of fines, Inability to Pay waivers, and diversion programs. The Transit Court has also assumed the handling of minors’ cases from the County Probation Department as they are no longer subject to criminal penalties under the Penal Code, as a result of SB 882, discussed above. Metro has set the fine for minors at $40. The Transit Court comprises two units: the Citation Processing Administration Unit and the Hearing Unit. The Citation Processing Administration Unit was originally part of Transit Systems and Security (now System Security and Law Enforcement). Following a change in administration and an organizational structure review, the Citation Processing Administration Unit was moved to the Office of the Inspector General in 2019, separating the responsibility for processing citations

A-26 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion from the responsibility for issuing citations. The Hearing Unit of the Transit Court has always reported to the Office of the Inspector General. This Unit is staffed with attorneys acting as Administrative Law Judges. The law requires that this judicial function be free of conflicts of interest from the group that issues the citations. When the units were joined, the Citation Processing Administration Unit continued to main- tain the records but discontinued handling the funds. Although they are separate units, the Cita- tion Processing Administration Unit supports the Hearing Unit, answering customer questions on a hotline, coordinating community service, and providing the Transit Court tutorial. Diversion Program LA Metro’s diversion program provides opportunities for fare evaders to resolve citations, including Transit School, community service, and an installment payment plan, as well as an appeals process. Metro Transit School and community service may only be completed once in any 12-month period upon order of a Metro Hearing Officer. Transit School is a 20- to 30-minute, online interactive program to educate the public on passenger safety and conduct, fare requirements, and how to pay fares and use TAP. Successful completion of the program and a three-part quiz provides eligibility for a $15 penalty reduction to apply to the $75 fare evasion fine. The program may be completed on any personal computer, and a computer is available in the Transit Court lobby. Metro’s community service diversion program allows violators to satisfy the $75 transit viola- tion penalty by performing 5 hours of community service. The hours of community service are determined by equating an hour of service with the minimum wage rate, typically working out to about a half-day. Late fees and penalty assessments are waived upon enrollment but may be reinstated if the community service deadline has defaulted. Community service is administered through an outside agency that provides the same service for the Los Angeles County Superior Court. It maintains a list of entities throughout the county that use people to perform community service, oversee them, and verify the number of hours completed. Individuals can choose where they would like to perform their service based on the number of hours, location, and type of work available. Individuals are responsible for enrolling with the outside agency. Individuals are also charged a registration fee, by the outside agency, of $35 for up to 20 hours of community service assigned. The fee, which is not set by Metro, includes costs of office operations, staffing, and insurance to protect participating entities from claims such as worker’s compensation claims. Individuals may also complete a Declaration of Inability to Pay Waiver. For those who meet financial criteria, fines may also be resolved through an installment payment plan, which allows unpaid transit fines and fees to be paid in three monthly installments of 30% for the first install- ment, 35% for the second installment after 30 days, and 35% for the third installment after 60 days. Metro’s administrative adjudication procedures provide a three-level appeals process for con- testing citations, beginning with an initial Level 1 administrative review by Transit Court staff, which must be requested within 21 days from the date a citation is issued. An individual who is dissatisfied with the results of the initial review may request a Level 2 administrative hearing to be conducted in person or by mail within 21 days of the date of the decision reached on the initial review. State law requires that the fine is paid before an administrative hearing can be requested unless the individual demonstrates they are unable to pay by completing a Declaration of Inability to Pay waiver. Citations upheld at Level 2 may be appealed within 30 days from the

Case Studies A-27   date of the administrative hearing decision to the superior court (Level 3). The trial in superior court is a trial de novo—it is conducted without regard to the findings made in the previous reviews. To appeal the decision of an administrative hearing, an individual must do so in person at the superior court. A $25 filing fee must be submitted to the court for each violation that the individual is appealing. Hearing officers who conduct administrative hearings are independent attorneys who work for Metro on a part-time, as-needed basis and who are paid for their work. A quality assur- ance hearing officer periodically reviews a sample of hearings, assessing courtesy, timeliness, the information provided, fairness, and competency. California transit agencies that implement an administrative adjudication process are required to report to the legislature on the program’s outcomes 2 years and 5 years after making the change. Metro’s second report to the legislature, for 2014–2017, summarized the following benefits of the administrative process: • Reduced the burden on the county’s Superior Courts by decreasing their caseload by approx- imately 342,700 citation cases from 2013 through 2017. • Saved approximately $4.3 million in time and resources for the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department by reducing the hours officers spent testifying in transit violations cases, allow- ing them to be deployed to other transit duties. • Enabled Metro to reduce fines to $75 from the Supreme Court’s fines and fees of over $220, benefiting low-income passengers in particular. Although the superior court sets bail for transit violations at $25, additional fees typically bring the total to an amount over $220. Metro staff noted that the proportion of fines paid is probably about the same for Transit Court as it was for the superior court, but Transit Court costs are lower than superior court costs. In general, the Transit Court appeals process is easier, faster, and less inconvenient than the sup- erior court process. One significant advantage of Transit Court is that fare and law enforcement personnel no longer spend 3 hours per citation appearing in court. Transit Court can perform immediate reviews of citations and accommodates walk-in requests for same-day Level 1 Admin- istrative Hearings to appeal violation(s). The number of citations issued has been reduced by 82%, from 117,400 in 2011 to 21,300 in 2017. Metro attributes this trend to fare compliance education for passengers and increased use of warnings instead of citations. Metro’s goals include improving Transit Court services and performance while continuing to control costs. Metro does not anticipate that Transit Court will ever produce significant revenues, but instead Metro views Transit Court as a means for Metro to better serve the public. Law Enforcement Reform With 2 years left in LA Metro’s law enforcement contract, Metro’s Board of Directors is reviewing and considering alternatives to the agency’s policing and security policies, practices, and direction. In June 2020, the Board established a Transit Public Safety Advisory Committee to develop a community-based approach to public safety in the transit system. This would shift resources from armed law enforcement to alternative approaches to addressing security issues in the system, such as a transit ambassador program and outreach to unhoused populations. A second Board motion mandated staff to report on transit police training and use-of-force policies, with recommendations for reform and reallocating resources to homeless outreach and services. The advisory committee’s role and its membership are being determined. Train- ing policies and procedures, such as de-escalation, are also being reviewed.

A-28 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion Homeless Action Plan As a result of the crisis among individuals experiencing homelessness, the number of indi- viduals and families seeking shelter on Metro rail and buses and at stops and other properties has increased notably. Several organizations have reached out to Metro to provide outreach at transportation hubs, intending to get people off the street and into programs. In 2016, Metro launched a homeless strategic planning process that resulted in Metro’s Transit Homeless Action Plan. The Action Plan’s goals are to enhance the customer experience, maintain a safe and secure system, and provide coordinated outreach. Recognizing that Metro’s response to homelessness must include solutions that connect the homeless to appropriate housing and supportive services, Metro has partnered with the County of Los Angeles, the City of Los Angeles, and homeless service agencies. The Action Plan called for hiring two County, City, Community (C3) teams through the LA County Department of Health Services to provide coordinated and responsive outreach to individuals experiencing homelessness and to connect them to housing resources. Each team includes health and mental health practitioners and homeless outreach staff. With System Security and Law Enforcement personnel as the lead, Metro’s C3 homeless out- reach teams coordinate with LAPD’s Homeless Outreach and Protective Engagement Teams, LACSD’s Mental Evaluation Teams, Long Beach PD, and Metro fare compliance officers. From implementation in May 2017 through March 2019, the C3 teams contacted 4,798 undu- plicated individuals experiencing homelessness and linked 1,137 to housing solutions, 88 of them permanently. From April through July 2020, the program helped shelter 495 people. The number of C3 teams has been increased to nine, and they have been expanded to cover rail, bus, and LA Union Station during day and evening hours. Metro is also working to identify feasible locations for temporary bridge housing on excess Metro properties. Metro has also entered into Memoranda of Agreement to partner with various organizations with proven programs, including Shelter the Unsheltered, Dream Center, Project Roomkey, and LA Door, and works with People Assisting the Homeless (PATH) through PATH’s contract with the LA County Department of Health Services. The subcontract with PATH provides mental health technicians and caseworkers to staff Metro’s C3 teams. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) is transitioning from its current fare collection system, known as AFC 1.0, to a new, account-based fare collection system, known as Fare Transformation. Under Fare Transformation, MBTA will be implementing all-door boarding with proof of payment and removing fareboxes from its bus, light rail, and BRT vehicles. Passengers will be expected to pay their fares upon boarding using pre-purchased fare media, and proof-of-payment fare enforcement will be implemented on the bus, BRT, and light rail services. This represents a major change for passengers who currently can pay at the farebox onboard and can load cash onto smart cards to receive transfer privileges. Because the agency is nearing this major transition related to fare payment and thus how fare evasion and enforcement will be managed, much of this case study focuses on how MBTA is planning to approach its future state. Access to Fares and Fare Payment Methods Passengers’ options for paying their fares vary by mode. At heavy rail subway stations, pas- sengers can use a TVM to purchase a magnetic stripe ticket or load value or passes onto their smart card using cash or a debit/credit card. On the bus and light rail vehicles, passengers can

Case Studies A-29   Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA), Boston, MA Overview of Agency MBTA operates bus, BRT, light rail, heavy rail, commuter rail, and ferry services. Fare Collection Overview On surface light rail, surface BRT, and bus, passengers pay on board. Heavy rail and subway light rail and BRT stations are gated. For commuter rail, passengers can pay in advance at ticket booths, TVMs, or retail stores, online, via the mobile ticketing app, or on board. Ferry passengers can purchase fares at ticket booths or TVMs, via the mobile app, or online. Fare Enforcement Overview For surface light rail, bus, and BRT, fare payment is observed by the operator. For heavy rail and gated light rail, fare payment is enforced using gates. Police also observe fare payment at gated stations. For commuter rail, conductors collect fares. For ferry, crew members collect fares as passengers board or once on board. Definition of Fare Evasion Commonwealth of Massachusetts, General Laws, Part I, Title XXII, Chapter 159, Section 101 defines a fare evader as “Whoever fraudulently evades or attempts to evade the payment of a fare . . . either by giving a false answer to the collector of the fare, by traveling beyond the point to which the person has paid the same, by leaving the station, train, trolley, car, motor bus or trackless trolley vehicle without having paid the fare established for the distance traveled or otherwise . . . . Whoever passes beyond the point where a fare is collected and does not first pay.” Fare Enforcement Personnel MBTA transit police officers can monitor fare evasion at gates, although fare enforcement is not their primary responsibility. As MBTA implements Fare Transformation, the agency’s new fare collection system, MBTA will migrate to proof of payment systemwide and discontinue cash on board. Although MBTA is authorized to use civilian fare inspectors, MBTA recently received legislative approval to designate the employees who may issue fare citations. This will allow MBTA to hire a civilian fare verification team, which will be needed to conduct proof-of-payment fare inspections. Fare Enforcement Deployment Under Fare Transformation, MBTA plans to deploy enforcement equally across the whole system rather than at locations with high evasion. MBTA views random deployment as critical to ensure equity. Fare Citation Practice The issuance of citations is at the discretion of the police officer. MBTA is exploring what its fare citation practice will look like under Fare Transformation and how technology can be used to support the practice. Fare Evasion Penalties MBTA issues noncriminal citations. Fare evaders are charged escalating fines: $100 for 1st offense, $200 for 2nd offense, and $600 for each offense after that. The Transportation Bond Bill, adopted in January 2021, provides MBTA with the regulatory authority to set fine levels and the appeals process. Further, passengers who refuse to provide identification can no longer be subject to arrest for evading fare payment. While appeals are processed within the Transit Police Department, MBTA is exploring a way to move the appeals process to a different MBTA department. Fare Enforcement Technology and Capital Investments MBTA is exploring potential software solutions for routing and scheduling fare enforcement to help improve the efficiency and equity of inspections. They have also decided to gate commuter rail terminus stations to increase fare compliance on commuter rail services. With the future debut of Fare Transformation, MBTA will transition to a fare collection system that does not accept cash on board. To address unbanked and underbanked passengers, they are developing a set of retail network and fare vending machine (FVM) coverage requirements, among other strategies. This change will include a transition to proof-of-payment fare enforcement on board buses and light rail. MBTA will implement a new mobile inspection application to support proof-of-payment fare enforcement as part of Fare Transformation.

A-30 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion use the onboard farebox to pay by cash, magnetic stripe ticket, or smart card. For commuter rail, passengers can purchase a ticket from a station agent, a TVM, the mobile ticketing applica- tion, retail locations, or from a conductor on board the vehicle. Commuter rail passengers who choose to purchase their fare on board may be charged a $3 fee if they boarded at a station where tickets could have been purchased in advance. Ferry passengers can purchase tickets from ticket booths, TVMs, or using the mobile ticketing application. Because Fare Transformation will require the pre-purchase of fares before boarding on all modes, MBTA is installing TVMs at several surface stations and bus stop locations. In locations without a TVM, the expectation is that passengers will use retail locations to load value to their accounts. MBTA will not accept cash on board under its new system. Fare Enforcement and Personnel by Mode Fare enforcement for MBTA’s heavy rail service is conducted by MBTA transit police officers from MBTA’s Transit Police Department. Transit police officers may only cite individuals who are observed evading fares; for example, those caught tailgating or hopping over the gates. For this reason, transit police officers are typically stationed near subway station gates; there is no onboard fare enforcement by MBTA transit police. MBTA transit police officers issue between 2,000 and 4,000 citations annually at subway stations. Under the current fare enforcement approach, MBTA occasionally deploys plainclothes transit police officers to subway stations. Outside of the gated stations (e.g., on surface light rail, BRT, and bus), the focus is more on the collection with the operator acting as the fare enforcer. Except for light rail passengers who may board through the back door during peak hours, MBTA requires all passengers outside of gated stations to pay at the farebox so that the operator can observe whether or not they pay. When a passenger boards, bus and light rail operators will state the fare. Operators are instructed to prompt a passenger to pay their fare if they do not pay on their own. If an operator sees some- one board through a rear door, the operator will use the public address (PA) system to tell the passenger to come to the front to pay their fare. If the passenger refuses to pay the fare for any reason, operators are given the discretion to handle the situation on a case-by-case basis. In rare cases, the operator will call for backup. Even more rarely they will hold the vehicle out of opera- tion, but these options are usually reserved for situations where something more extreme than fare evasion is occurring. In cases where fare evasion is only one element of broader concern, transit police officers may meet the vehicle to offer assistance. Conductors on commuter rail, crew members on ferries, and station staff are in charge of ensuring passengers pay their fare on commuter rail and ferry services. Passengers can buy fares before boarding on each of these modes and on board in the case of commuter rail. Because pas- sengers can purchase fares on board, there is limited enforcement on these modes. At terminal commuter rail stations during peak hours, station staff may inspect tickets before passengers board trains. MBTA has plans to implement several changes to its current fare enforcement paradigm. To address fare evasion on commuter rail, which is perceived as especially high compared to other modes, the agency will be installing gates at commuter rail terminal stations in the near term and passengers will be required to tap to exit. If someone does not have a fare and therefore cannot tap to exit, MBTA will staff these gates with employees who can sell tickets until Fare Transformation is fully implemented. Once Fare Transformation is in effect, commuter rail passengers will be required to tap one of several validators located along the platforms before boarding their train. Once onboard, commuter rail conductors will walk through the cars and verify that everyone has paid.

Case Studies A-31   Under Fare Transformation, surface light rail, BRT, and bus services will move to all-door boarding where passengers may board and pay their fare at any door. By allowing customers to board at rear doors, MBTA will eliminate the ability of bus and light rail operators to ensure that everyone has paid. To address this, MBTA is launching a proof-of-payment system alongside the new fare collection system. MBTA plans to use civilian fare inspectors to conduct proof-of-payment inspections. The Transportation Bond Bill adopted in 2021 gives MBTA the authority to designate employees to issue fare citations, including civilian personnel. Previously, MBTA could use civilian per- sonnel but the law for the commonwealth defined the job titles. The new law gives MBTA the ability to change or add job classifications. Under the fare enforcement regime proposed as part of Fare Transformation implementation, the civilian fare inspectors would likely report to the Operations Department. Civilian fare inspectors’ responsibilities would be flexible, including fare enforcement and customer service as well as helping handle large events/passenger loads and emergency situations. However, their main focus would be fare verification and inspection. In planning for the implementation of these changes, MBTA plans to conduct extensive pub- lic engagement to inform the development of principles for equitable, fair, and efficient fare inspections. Moreover, based on this public input, MBTA will develop standard operating pro- cedures and training requirements for the new civilian fare inspectors. Fare Enforcement Training, Staffing Levels, Scheduling, and Assignments MBTA operators must take a personality test before being hired that investigates how a person would respond to difficult situations to ensure they have the proper disposition for the job. Once hired, operators also undergo customer service training because they are the front line and the only staff for bus and surface BRT and light rail. Transit police officers undergo standard police officer training at the police academy run by MBTA. MBTA is conducting a study to determine how many people they need to hire for inspections under Fare Transformation and what inspection rate different staffing levels would provide. The agency is also seeking to procure routing and scheduling software that would help MBTA assign the civilian fare inspectors such that all passengers would have an equal chance of being inspected no matter what parts of the system they use. The goals of implementing this sched- uling software are both equity and efficiency in the inspection. Other inspection policies will include expecting enforcement personnel to inspect every passenger on a vehicle in a systematic manner and deploying enforcement personnel in pairs, at a minimum. Fare Evasion Citations MBTA issues noncriminal citations. The fine for a passenger’s first citation is $100. The fine escalates with each subsequent citation to $200 for a second offense and $600 for third and sub- sequent offenses. Fare evasion citations are processed through the transit agency, and passengers have 30 days to appeal the citation. MBTA does have issues with people not paying their fines. Although the agency does not use a collections company to assist in citation payment compli- ance, unpaid violations may result in the Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles suspend- ing an individual’s driver’s license. MBTA does not seek license suspension due to technology constraints. In general, MBTA has been trying to think about fare policy holistically. For example, it is considering the opportunity to leverage social service agency relationships and move the cita- tion appeals process out of the MBTA Transit Police Department. With the implementation of

A-32 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion Fare Transformation, MBTA is planning several other changes to the way it handles fare eva- sion. However, these changes require legislative approval. MBTA successfully pursued legislative changes through the Massachusetts legislature that authorized the agency to establish regulations regarding the nature and issuance of noncriminal warnings and citations, collection of fines, fine amounts, penalties for failure to pay fines, options for alternatives to resolve fines other than by immediate payment in full, and the administration of appeal processes and hearings. The Transportation Bond Bill adopted in 2021 also changes the standard for not renewing a person’s driver’s license for failure to resolve outstanding cita- tions, requiring at least two unresolved citations and providing that an individual’s “license or right to operate a motor vehicle” will not be renewed until MBTA reports that all outstanding citations have been resolved. Further, the registrar will offer to accept payment or offer to waive fines based on financial hardship, and a person who requests or appeals a waiver will be issued a license, if otherwise eligible, while the request or appeal is pending. Further, passengers who refuse to provide identification can no longer be subject to arrest for evading fare payment. MBTA will also be required to provide an annual report on fare citations and fare evasion. Technology To assist with fare evasion and other citations, MBTA has procured citation management software that is in development. The software will allow for the storage and management of cita- tions, as well as allow individuals to pay or appeal their citations online. The software would also provide integration to the Registry of Motor Vehicles for blocking the renewal of one’s license if fines go unpaid. MBTA is developing a handheld device to verify proof of payment, track warnings and cita- tions, scan ID cards (e.g., driver’s licenses), and issue citations. For reduced-fare cards, the hand- held device will populate a picture of the individual that the card was issued to for verification. If the card is being used by someone else, MBTA would be able to freeze that account and issue a citation for fraud. Public Perception and Customer Relations The public perceives commuter rail fare evasion as especially high. Because of this, most of MBTA’s education efforts regarding the payment of fares and reductions in fare evasion have focused on its commuter rail services. Keolis, the contracted commuter rail operator, launched an information campaign to educate passengers about paying their fares and stationed person- nel on the platform at commuter rail terminal stations to ask passengers to validate their tickets before boarding. The agency did receive some complaints about these campaigns, but overall MBTA believes that the effort has been effective as fare revenue collection increased following the campaigns. However, some of the increased fare revenue may have been due to increased ridership in addition to decreased fare evasion. The public also perceives fare evasion as high on the light rail at ungated, surface stations during peak times, but this is because operators allow rear-door boarding during morning and evening peak commutes due to ADA and operational reasons (i.e., to maintain on-time perfor- mance during peak passenger loads). Most members of the public understand why MBTA has this policy in place and accept the practice as reasonable. Based on the last study conducted, approximately 60% to 70% of passengers who take advantage of the ability to board at the rear door have a valid pass. As part of broader customer relations efforts, MBTA has contracted transit ambassadors who are deployed at some subway stations to help passengers purchase fares and navigate the system.

Case Studies A-33   They are usually located near the TVMs so they are close by if passengers encounter any issues purchasing a fare or entering the system or if they have questions. Transit ambassadors are pri- marily responsible for passenger education efforts, not fare enforcement. Equity and Balance Regarding fare evasion generally, MBTA believes the reality is that some people will always evade fares. In light of this, the questions staff are asking themselves include: how do we make it easy to pay, how do we foster the collective social expectation that people pay fares, what is an effective level of deterrence, what should the fines and ramifications of not paying a fare be, what level of fare evasion is the agency willing to accept, and what does equity mean? They interpret equity as concerning not only enforcement but also that everyone pays the fare required for them. The agency is aware of community concerns regarding the transition to proof of payment as part of the launch of Fare Transformation. MBTA is giving substantial thought to how they will deploy enforcement personnel and collect enforcement data to minimize the chance for inequitable or biased fare enforcement. They plan to deploy enforcement personnel across all bus routes and surface stations in an equitable manner and do not plan to target specific areas according to fare evasion statistics. Any time a warning or citation is issued, the agency will collect perceived demographic information including race, ethnicity, and gender. As part of the Transportation Bond Bill, MBTA is required to issue an annual report on fare evasion that would include demographic statistics. From the perspective of agency staff, Fare Transformation will essentially take all human discretion out of fare collection and enforcement because the system, not human operators, will determine whether a passenger has sufficient funds to board. This is in contrast to the current system where passengers on the bus and light rail can pay less than the actual fare, and the opera- tor can indicate a short fare was paid and still allow them to board. There are both positive and negative aspects to this shift in the fare collection and enforcement paradigm. Although agency staff cannot anticipate all user scenarios as they design the new system, they are spending a lot of time thinking about these “edge” cases and their relationship to equity. As MBTA plans for the Fare Transformation implementation, agency staff has involved community partners in the process, from drafting the recently adopted Transportation Bond Bill addressing fare evasion and defining aspects of the fare enforcement process to determin- ing TVM and retail network coverage. MBTA has also developed several groups specifically designed to incorporate public feedback into the Fare Transformation system design and imple- mentation, including a Fare Transformation Policy Development Working Group and Fare Transformation Focus Groups. MBTA also holds Fare Transformation Public Advisory Meet- ings to involve the broader community. Metro Transit Metro Transit is an operating division of the Metropolitan Council, the regional policy- making body, planning agency, and essential services provider for the Twin Cities’ metropolitan area. Metro Transit operates bus, BRT, light rail, and commuter rail services in addition to pro- viding resources for those who carpool, vanpool, walk, or bike in the Twin Cities. In 2004, Metro Transit opened the state’s first light rail line, the METRO Blue Line (previously known as the Hiawatha Line). A second light rail line, the METRO Green Line, opened in 2014. The light rail system, as well as Metro Transit’s three BRT lines and commuter rail system, is proof of payment with off-board smart card validators and TVMs at each station.

A-34 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion Metro Transit, Minneapolis–Saint Paul, MN Overview of Agency Metro Transit operates bus, BRT, light rail, and commuter rail services. Fare Collection Overview Passengers pay on board the bus and in advance of boarding BRT, light rail, and commuter rail services. BRT, light rail, and commuter rail stations are equipped with platform smart card validators and TVMs for passengers to purchase fares before boarding. Passengers can also purchase fares online, by mail, at authorized fare retailers, and using the Metro Transit App. Definition of Fare Evasion According to 2019 Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 609 Criminal Code, Section 855 Crimes Involving Transit, Subdivision 1, a person is guilty of fare evasion if they “occup[y] or rid[e] in any public transit vehicle without paying the applicable fare or otherwise obtaining the consent of the transit provider including the use of a reduced fare when a person is not eligible for the fare or the use of a fare medium issued solely for the use of a particular individual by another individual” or if they “intentionally fail to exhibit proof of fare payment upon the request of an authorized transit representative when entering, riding upon, or leaving a transit vehicle or when present in a designated paid-fare zone located in a transit facility.” The 2016 Metropolitan Council’s Light Rail Fare Evasion Program Evaluation and Audit defined evasion as: “(1) riding without any fare media; (2) riding with fare media more than 1 hour outside of the transfer period; (3) riding with electronic fare media that had expired or had never been activated; (4) riding with electronic fare media that had been reported stolen; (5) riding with fare media that is not valid on light rail, such as Super Saver Stored Value passes; and (6) riding with a Campus Zone pass outside of the allowed zone or on the Blue Line.” Fare Enforcement Overview On the bus, fares are collected at the farebox at the time of boarding. BRT, light rail, and commuter rail are all operated as proof-of-payment systems. Fare Enforcement Personnel At this time, the Minnesota legislature has only granted Metro transit police officers the authority to issue citations. Nonsworn Community Service Officers who are employees of the Metro Transit Police Department and commuter rail conductors can request proof of payment, but they do not issue citations and warnings. The legislature recently introduced two bills to decriminalize fare evasion and authorize nonpolice officers to issue citations for fare evasion. A bill (HF 1306) is in the legislature to create civilian fare inspector positions with the authority to administer civil administrative citations for fare evasion. Fare Enforcement Deployment Metro transit police officers are deployed to conduct fare inspections on board light rail and BRT, particularly around the AM/PM rush hours, although there is coverage at other times of the day including late at night. A separate division of Metro transit police officers are deployed to the commuter rail system. Other than for special events, Metro Transit rarely conducts platform inspections because of the number of personnel required to cover the open platform area and ensure that everyone on the platform is inspected. Fare Citation Practice Metro transit police officers have no discretion in whether to issue a warning or citation to passengers without valid proof of payment. Passengers receive a warning for their first fare evasion offense and a citation for any subsequent offenses. Offense tracking goes back to 2006. In 2015, Metro Transit implemented the warning-first practice to ensure fairness and consistency in how passengers without valid fares are treated. Fare Evasion Penalties Under Minnesota State law, Metro Transit fare evasion citations are criminal citations. There is no escalation of fines. A passenger may be suspended from the service for 30 days if the passenger is found to be in violation for a second time. If the passenger is found to be in violation for a third time (or more), the passenger may be booked for the continued offense, and if applicable, issued a trespass violation. Citations are processed by the courts.

Case Studies A-35   In 2007, Metro Transit launched the Go-To card-based fare collection system that allows passengers to use a smart card to pay their fares. In 2016, Metro Transit introduced the Metro Transit App, a separate mobile ticketing application for fare payment. Metro Transit also has magnetic stripe tickets. Given the variety of ways to pay, it is difficult for passengers to determine who among them has paid, leading to the perception that not all passengers have paid their fare. Fare Enforcement and Personnel by Mode Metro Transit police officers conduct proof-of-payment fare enforcement on board light rail, BRT, and commuter rail. The current Minnesota State law precludes nonpolice officers from issuing citations. Metro Transit police officers are supported by community service officers (CSOs). CSOs are civilian employees that provide extra visibility, promoting safety and security while Metro Transit police officers conduct fare inspections. CSOs may go out on regular fare inspection duties with Metro Transit police officers on light rail or BRT and are also used during special events such as large sporting events. CSOs can request proof of payment and inspect fares, but cannot cite evaders. CSOs report to the Metro Transit Police Department. On commuter rail, conductors may also request proof of payment from passengers, but like CSOs, conductors lack the authority to write citations and warnings. Metro Transit police officers are deployed to conduct fare inspection on board light rail and BRT with an emphasis on commute hours, though there is coverage throughout the service day. Metro Transit police officers assigned to fare inspection duties bid their shifts. If multiple groups of officers are assigned to the same line, each group is assigned to cover a specific segment of the line. If only one group of officers is assigned to a given line, they are responsible for the length of the line. Officers are instructed to ride as many trains as possible. A separate division of Metro Transit police officers is deployed to the commuter rail system. Metro Transit police officers are assigned in groups of two or more. When conducting fare inspections on board the vehicle, they start at one end of the vehicle and work their way to the opposite end of the vehicle, walking together and inspecting every passenger. Metro Transit police officers are also authorized to inspect fares in the paid-fare area, typically the entire station platform area. However, other than for special events, Metro Transit rarely conducts platform inspections because of the number of personnel required to cover the open platform area and ensure that everyone on the platform is inspected, as required by Metro Transit’s standard oper- ating procedures for fare inspection. Metro Transit, Minneapolis–Saint Paul, MN (Continued ) Fare Enforcement Technology and Capital Investments Metro Transit police officers have a handheld fare validator to inspect smart cards. Magnetic stripe tickets, paper tickets, and Metro Transit App tickets are visually inspected. Visual inspections do not get logged into the handheld. Metro Transit police officers use a records management system to look up whether an individual has a prior warning or citation for fare evasion. Warnings and citations are tracked in the records management system with data going back to 2006. Metro Transit police officers check the database by calling dispatch. Metro Transit has been exploring a process to create a digital log of inspection data. Administrative staff inputs inspection, warning, citation, and arrest data manually. For special events, Metro Transit installs removable gates to support enforcement and minimize the need to enforce fares on the platform when vehicles are too crowded to inspect on board. Except for special events, Metro Transit platforms are open and ungated.

A-36 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion For special events, Metro Transit police officers check fares as passengers are arriving or departing the event. Passengers are funneled through a queue area created by removable gates to have their fares checked. Passengers without valid fare media are warned as they arrive at the event and are instructed on how to buy a ticket for their return trip. Passengers are not allowed onto the platform without valid fare media after the event. Additional agency employees serving as ambassadors are deployed during special events. These ambassadors are primarily deployed to park-and-ride locations and focus on educating passengers on how to purchase a round-trip ticket so they have a valid fare for their return trip. On board buses, the bus operator is responsible for observing fare payment. If a passenger refuses to pay upon boarding, the bus operator will record the boarding as a “no pay” by pressing a button on the farebox and the bus stays in operation. If a bus operator encounters a chronic fare evader, the operator can generate a Metro Transit police officer service request through their transportation manager. In these cases, Metro Transit police officers are assigned to ride along and intervene at a later date. Metro Transit police officers do not respond in real time to fare evasion incidents on board buses. Fare Evasion Citations and Tracking Metro Transit encourages all passengers using the region’s Go-To smart card to tap every time they board. Passengers who fail to tap but have a valid transfer or pass on their smart card are considered to be in noncompliance and are educated that they should be tapping every time. Passengers using stored value to pay their fare are deemed to be fare evading if they do not tap on the platform or bus validator before the first boarding of their journey. When a Metro Transit police officer encounters a passenger without valid proof of payment, the officer will call the passenger’s name into dispatch. Dispatch will use the law enforcement field-based reporting records to determine whether an individual has a prior warning for fare evasion and will complete an NCIC check for outstanding warrants or missing person reports. Warnings and citations are tracked in the records management system with data going back to 2006. According to an administrative announcement sent to officers in 2015, passengers with no prior fare evasion offense will be issued a warning. Metro Transit implemented the warning-first practice to ensure fairness and consistency in how passengers without valid fares are treated and eliminate potential bias and discrimination. This change was made in response to a data request submitted to the Metro Transit Police Department by the American Civil Liberties Union for 2014 and 2015 arrest and citation data, including demographic data. Metro Transit conducted its internal analysis of fare evasion citation data to understand if there were differences in enforcement procedures by race/ethnicity. Although the data indicated there were differences in the likelihood of being cited versus warned by race/ethnicity, when a warn-first procedure for first-time fare evasion incidents is in effect the data indicated that there were no significant differences. On subsequent offenses, after a warning has been issued, a passenger receives a citation. If the passenger is found to be in violation for a second time, in addition to issuing a citation, the passenger may be suspended from the service for 30 days. If the passenger is found to be in vio- lation for a third time (or more), the passenger may be booked for the continued offense and if applicable, issued a trespass violation. Fare evasion citations issued by Metro Transit police officers are criminal citations. Citations are processed by the courts, not Metro Transit.

Case Studies A-37   Fare Evasion Data Analysis Metro Transit regularly analyzes various fare inspection and evasion data. On board buses, bus operators have a farebox key that they press to tally the number of passengers who do not pay or who short pay their fare. These data are available at the trip level but, due to data quality concerns, are typically analyzed at a route level. Metro Transit has a live dashboard linked to the no-payment tally key on the farebox. Although the data generated by farebox tallies are not used to request police services directly, a bus operator can submit a Metro Transit police officer service request through their transportation manager. Metro Transit Police will set up an appointment to ride along and help address the issue reported by the bus operator at a later date. Metro Transit also uses a CompStat (COMPare STATistics) model to identify areas of routes on which to focus Metro Transit police deployments. These models are commonly used by police departments and look at calls for service data more broadly, not just calls related to fare enforcement concerns. Metro Transit uses the information to deploy Metro Transit police to address broader service requests. Metro Transit police will conduct fare enforcement as part of these deployments if they are on rail or BRT. Metro Transit police also record the number of inspections completed as well as warnings and citations issued by the route. In the 12 months following the implementation of the warning- first administrative directive, Metro Transit began analyzing fare evasion data monthly to ensure compliance with the new warn-first practice. Metro Transit reports on fare enforcement every month to senior staff. These reports typically include total inspections, total inspections by route (excluding special events), and the percentage of passengers who had their fare checked (exclud- ing special events) and are based on the officer-recorded data. Metro Transit is working to streamline the data reporting process, including shifting more data collection activities from paper to electronic. Daily logs and citations are recorded on paper and manually inputted into the records management system and an Excel spreadsheet by an administrative staff member. Metro Transit has been exploring opportunities to streamline this process and record data electronically. The goal would be to have an application on the Metro Transit police officers’ phones to enter data directly. This would help improve data quality and the level of detail available (e.g., route, location, time of day) for analysis. Given the limitations of the data set, Metro Transit is unable to conduct in-depth analyses of the data. Fare Check Surveys Metro Transit periodically conducts fare check surveys to measure fare evasion rates. The agency has completed statistically significant surveys on light rail and BRT, such as the 2015 and 2016 Metropolitan Council’s Light Rail Fare Evasion Program Evaluation and Audit. The plan for the fare check surveys is based on a stratified cluster sampling method that is stratified by time of day (e.g., weekday AM peak, weekday midday, weekday PM peak, weekday night, and weekend). A round trip is considered a cluster. For each randomly selected round trip, a specific train car and then a section of the car are randomly selected. Any passenger that stands or sits in the selected section is surveyed. Sample sizes are determined based on Metro Transit’s desired standard error and ridership levels based on automatic passenger counter (APC) data on how many people Metro Transit expects to board during a specific trip. On light rail, this has led to needing to sample 20–25 round- trips and a few more round-trips than that on BRT. The most recent fare check surveys were completed in 2018 by CSOs and used for internal evaluations. To increase efficiency, samples were selected over 3–4 weeks so that the surveys

A-38 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion could be completed during a CSO’s regular shift, rather than dedicating staff to conduct the survey. Before the use of CSOs to conduct fare check surveys, Metro Transit has used survey firms. Metro Transit is evaluating whether the surveys should be done in the future by the audit department, internal resources, such as CSOs, or a survey firm. During some surveys, responses were recorded on paper; during other surveys, responses were recorded using an electronic touchpad. The use of the electronic touchpad enabled staff to cross-reference the time stamp from the touchpad with handheld validator data as staff would use the handheld validators to read smart card fare media. The last formal fare check survey completed by the Metropolitan Council Program Evalua- tion and Audit Department as part of a Metropolitan Council Audit Committee request was in 2016. Since then, Metro Transit has completed fare check surveys to support internal reporting needs. The most recent internally led fare check survey was in 2018. Following changes in Metro Transit leadership, the emphasis on regular fare check surveys to support reporting was reduced and more emphasis was placed on preparing for the administration citation bill. Future Plans to Decriminalize Fare Evasion and Use of Civilians In 2019, the Governor supported the Metropolitan Council’s legislative proposal to develop and issue administrative citations for transit fare evasion. Under current Minnesota law, transit fare evasion is a misdemeanor. The Metropolitan Council’s legislative proposal would allow for an administrative or civil citation as an alternative to the current criminal citation. The Metropolitan Council’s legislative proposal would also allow nonsworn transit personnel to issue administrative or civil citations. In addition to the 2019 agency bill for administrative citations, during the 2020 Minnesota State Legislature Session, multiple bills were introduced that included some form of adminis- trative citation authority. To date, none of the proposed administrative citation legislation has become law. The Metropolitan Council will continue to prioritize the passage of an adminis- tration citations bill in the 2021 legislative session. In anticipation of the transit enforcement and administrative citations program and the use of civilian personnel for fare enforcement, Metro Transit staff has begun preliminary discus- sions about impacts on existing operational processes. Metro Transit is also looking to intro- duce ways future civilian inspectors could access the needed information from the fare evasion database without needing to contact dispatch. Metropolitan Transit System The Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) serves the urbanized areas of San Diego County as well as rural parts of East County. Transit in North County is provided by the North County Transit District (NCTD), with connecting services into the MTS service area. MTS operates bus, Rapid bus, and light rail (Trolley) services. The San Diego Trolley system has three lines with open platforms and operates as a proof-of-payment system with a desig- nated fare-paid zone. In addition to assisting with fare enforcement, the fare-paid zone helps in addressing other prohibited behavior, including loitering, trespassing, and vandalism. All bus services, including Rapid bus, are normally front-door boarding. Due to the COVID-19 pan- demic, MTS has migrated to rear-door boarding and changed its focus temporarily from fare enforcement to fare compliance. In 2009, the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) launched Compass Card, which is the region’s smart card for MTS and NCTD. Initially, Compass offered only passes.

Case Studies A-39   Metropolitan Transit System (MTS), San Diego, CA Overview of Agency MTS operates bus, Rapid bus, and light rail (Trolley) services. Fare Collection Overview On the bus, passengers board through the front door and pay on board at the farebox. On Trolley, passengers purchase a fare at TVMs or tap their Compass Card on a platform validator. Passengers can reload their Compass Card at TVMs, online, by phone, or at retail locations. Passengers can also purchase 1- day and 30-day adult passes through the mobile app, Compass Cloud. Fare Enforcement Overview On the bus, fares are collected at the farebox and overseen by the operator at the time of boarding. The Trolley is a proof-of-payment system with fare enforcement conducted in the designated paid zone and on board Trolley vehicles. Definition of Fare Evasion San Diego MTS Ordinance No. 2 states “No unauthorized person shall board, occupy, ride in, use or deboard any Trolley vehicle or stand within a designated paid zone waiting area at a Trolley station without possessing and exhibiting, upon demand of an Inspector, valid proof of fare payment.” MTS also issues citations for violations of California Penal Code 640(c), which defines fare evasion more broadly to include entering the closed area of a public transit facility or vehicle without a valid fare; misuse of a fare product with the intent to evade fare payment; and unauthorized use of a discount ticket or failure to present proof of eligibility (or to present proof of eligibility within 72 hours). Fare Enforcement Personnel Fare enforcement is conducted by Train Teams that consist of an MTS code compliance inspector and a contracted, armed security officer. Security officers can request proof of payment but cannot cite individuals. Code compliance inspectors write the citations. Fare Enforcement Deployment Train Teams are deployed to beats that consist of three to five stations in one of four sectors. Each sector has multiple Train Teams at one time. Special enforcement details are conducted once or twice a week. Train Teams are redeployed from their beats for these special enforcement details, which are intended to conduct 100% inspections of an entire train. Fare Citation Practice Generally, code compliance inspectors issue citations when they encounter a passenger without proof of payment. Under the new diversion program, code compliance inspectors will give passengers found without proof of payment an opportunity to purchase a fare before issuing a citation. Reduced-fare media without proof of eligibility are confiscated and within 72 hours of being cited, the individual must contact MTS Security with valid proof of eligibility to have the confiscated pass returned and the citation voided. Fare Evasion Penalties As of September 1, 2020, MTS initiated the Phase 1 Pilot for its Diversion Program. As part of the Diversion Program, individuals can resolve their citation directly with MTS within 120 days by paying a $25 fine or completing 3 hours of community service. After 120 days, an unresolved citation is transmitted to the San Diego County Superior Court system. Once filed in court, the presumptive fine is $177.50 (including court fees) or more. Fare Enforcement Technology and Code compliance inspectors and security officers are equipped with a handheld device to read Compass smart cards. However, citations are handwritten Capital Investments because the San Diego County Superior Court system does not accept electronically generated citations. Citations are entered into a database. This database cannot be accessed from the field. As part of the Diversion Program, MTS will also begin tracking warnings. All code compliance inspectors and security officers have body cameras. MTS also has an extensive camera system on board vehicles and at Trolley stations.

A-40 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion In 2014, SANDAG transitioned Compass management and operations to MTS. In 2017, Com- pass launched stored value, Compass Cash, and a new mobile ticketing app, Compass Cloud. The ECO Pass Program for employers and college monthly and semester passes are imple- mented on Compass Card, while the University of California San Diego U-Pass is implemented on Compass Cloud. MTS, along with NCTD, is in the process of developing and implementing its next-generation fare collection system. MTS offers a Compass Card photo ID for reduced-fare passengers. This is MTS’s preferred method for purchasing reduced-fare passes, but MTS also accepts other types of identification to purchase reduced-fare Compass Cards at the MTS Transit Store or select retail outlets. For Compass Cloud, reduced-fare passengers must go to the MTS Transit Store or call the NCTD Customer Call Center and provide proof of eligibility to purchase a 30-day pass. Reduced-fare passengers can purchase 1-day passes through Compass Cloud without prior authorization, but are required to provide proof of eligibility upon request. Transit Enforcement/Train Teams MTS uses code compliance inspectors and security officers to provide routine fare inspec- tions, enforce code violations, provide security, and protect MTS property. The total budget for transit enforcement, including both fare enforcement and transit security, is just under $13 million per year. Fare enforcement is conducted by Train Teams that consist of one code compliance inspector and one security officer. Code compliance inspectors are civilian personnel who work for MTS, while security officers are contracted. MTS has 64 code compliance inspectors and has a con- tractual agreement for 158 security officers (although the number fluctuates). Security officers who are not part of the Train Teams are assigned fixed posts to provide security (e.g., bus yard) or support revenue collections. Depending on security needs, security officers may be armed. Code compliance inspectors are responsible for enforcing MTS ordinances and select Penal, Public Utility, Health and Safety, Business Professions, Municipal, and Department of Motor Vehicle Codes on MTS property and vehicles. Code compliance inspectors are public officers with powers of arrest but are nonsworn and unarmed. For each shift, code compliance inspectors and security officers are overseen by two MTS code compliance inspector supervisors and two security officer supervisors from the contracted security company. The MTS supervisors are responsible for overseeing all transit enforce- ment, while the security officer supervisors are responsible for overseeing the security officers. MTS supervisors are assigned two of the Trolley sectors (described later under Train Team Deployment). Code compliance inspectors and security officers conduct proof-of-payment inspections together. Security officers are authorized to request proof of payment but cannot issue a cita- tion. Citations are written by the code compliance inspectors. In addition to assisting with fare inspections, the security officers are deployed with code compliance inspectors to provide addi- tional security. Although not all security officers are armed, the security officers deployed with code compliance inspectors are all armed. Code compliance inspectors and security officers are equipped with a radio, handheld device to read Compass Cards, handcuffs, and a chemical agent (e.g., pepper spray). They also wear protective vests. All citations are handwritten because the San Diego County Superior Court system does not accept electronically generated citations. The current handheld devices can tell whether the Compass Card is valid and if it is a reduced-fare card. It can also track how many inspections have been completed. However, it cannot look up transaction history.

Case Studies A-41   Code compliance inspectors and security officers report to MTS headquarters, which is the central point for the Trolley system. MTS does not have a contractual arrangement with local jurisdictions for law enforcement. Enforcement Personnel Hiring and Training The hiring of code compliance inspectors is done in-house by the MTS Human Resources Department. The Director and Deputy Director of Transit Enforcement participate in initial screenings, conduct final interviews, and make selections. Unlike contracted security officers, who must have a Security Guard Card prior to hiring, code compliance inspectors have no spe- cific requirements. However, as part of the hiring process, MTS reviews qualifications and work history for applicable backgrounds. Experience in customer service is viewed as an advantage. Several security officers apply to become MTS code compliance inspectors. Code compliance inspectors complete 3 weeks of classroom training with 4 weeks of field training. The classroom training covers all relevant policies and procedures. MTS has added anti-bias and de-escalation training courses to new hire training. These courses were previously conducted as part of continuing training, but MTS felt it was important to include them as part of initial training. Field training for code compliance inspectors is conducted by a field training officer who has gone through the California Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) training program. The field training officer takes the trainee out along with a security officer to learn how to do the code compliance inspector job. There is a field training guide that must be completed. The length of field training can be extended up to 2 weeks, at the discretion of the field training officer, for individuals with the potential to execute the job well. As noted, security officers must have a Security Guard Card before hiring. They complete 160 hours of training in the field with optional 8-hour courses (on such topics as the use of pepper spray and batons). Code compliance inspectors and security officers must also complete a 40-hour course entitled 832 PC Laws of Arrest, which is one of the first courses for the minimum training standard for California peace officers as specified in the Commission on POST Regulation. The training must be completed within 1 year of employment and then every 3 years. All code compliance inspectors and code compliance supervisors attend continuing training throughout the year. A minimum of 16 hours is required per year. Two of the courses (8-hour anti-bias and 8-hour defensive tactics) are required. Other topics are based on current needs or trends. For the past 3 years, MTS has been conducting de-escalation training. In 2019, continu- ing training included • De-escalation training (taught by a licensed psychologist who is a former police captain), • CPR training, • Defensive tactics (taught by POST-certified instructors), • Courtroom testimony, • People with disabilities, • Bias-based policing/cultural diversity, • Homeless outreach (line-up training), and • Veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (supervisors only). MTS also incorporates training into the 30-minute briefings at the beginning of each shift. The new field operations manager has a strong background in training. The plan is to have mini- training sessions (e.g., handcuffing techniques) or periodically bring in someone to talk about their services (e.g., homeless outreach organizations) as part of the daily briefings.

A-42 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion Train Team Deployment Train Teams are deployed randomly to increase visibility and provide a security presence. Train Teams are deployed to four sectors and assigned smaller beats (three to five stations) within a sector (see Figure A-3). There are multiple Train Teams in each sector at the same time, so a passenger may encounter multiple Train Teams throughout a trip. Train Teams work 10-hour shifts. There are two main shifts, 7 days per week, which pro- vide coverage for all revenue hours. Each regular shift has 10–15 inspection teams. Staffing is slightly lower on weekends, but staffing essentially provides a similar level of coverage. Source: MTS 2020a. Figure A-3. MTS San Diego Trolley sector and beat map.

Case Studies A-43   Fare Enforcement on Bus Fare enforcement is not typically conducted on the bus. Bus operators observe fare payment at the farebox and make sure passengers have proper fares or pay cash. Bus operators are instructed to tell boarding passengers that they need to pay and notify dispatch if a passenger does not pay and stays on board. The bus operator will continue operations, and the bus may be intercepted down the line. Fare Enforcement on Trolley On Trolley, Train Teams conduct fare inspections on board vehicles and platforms in the fare-paid zones. Most inspections occur on board, but during the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of inspections on platforms has increased. In late August 2020, MTS planned to again begin conducting inspections on board. During inspections, the Train Team announces they are checking fares, and passengers are asked for proof of payment. Train Teams must also complete checks of eligibility when a passenger presents a reduced fare. For onboard inspection, Train Teams board the same car and check every passenger in the car. When boarding, the code compliance inspector notes the time, station boarded, the direction of travel, and train number on a Daily Log. As inspections occur, the number of inspections conducted is recorded to provide an accurate number of passenger fares checked on each car. If a code compliance inspector/security officer encounters someone without proof of payment, they generally keep checking fares and reconnect with the individual later. However, inspec- tions may be interrupted if a passenger is confrontational. When the train arrives at the next station, the Train Team may switch to another car, ask boarding passengers for proof of payment, alight and check the platform, or wait for another train in either direction, at the discretion of the code compliance inspector. MTS has given Train Teams discretion to decide how to move around their assigned beat and whether to inspect on board a vehicle or on the platform. However, they are expected to board trains regularly as well as inspect at stations. Train Teams may decide to inspect on platforms if crush loads prevent them from conducting inspections on board safely. When inspecting fares on platforms, the Train Teams stop and observe for a while. They then walk down the platform, which is a fare-paid zone, and inspect passengers who are waiting for the next train. Passengers on the platform must be in the process of paying or have a paid fare. Once platform inspections commence, the Train Team must make every attempt to inspect all waiting passengers. Once all passengers have been checked, the Train Team can inspect passengers entering the fare-paid zone. The number of passengers inspected is recorded in the Daily Log. Train Teams may also visually inspect the station to confirm TVMs and platform validators are working and identify and report any safety or security issues. Train Teams may leave their assigned beat if they are called to lend assistance to an adjacent beat or for special enforcement details. Special Enforcement Details MTS conducts special enforcement details that are zero-tolerance fare inspections. When a passenger without proof of payment is encountered, they are deboarded and issued a citation. The special enforcement detail can hold a train for up to 2 minutes to complete inspections. Train Teams assigned to beats are redeployed for special enforcement details, which are normally conducted once or twice a week (although they have been suspended since mid- March due to the COVID-19 pandemic). MTS uses an average of 10 Train Teams, along with

A-44 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion one code compliance inspector supervisor, for most special enforcement details, leaving the other Train Teams on the lines to perform their regular duties. MTS conducts controlled and noncontrolled special enforcement details. Controlled special enforcement details conduct 100% inspections of an entire train, typically a three-car consist. In 2019, MTS completed 65 controlled and 24 noncontrolled special enforcement details. Con- trolled special enforcement details usually require 22 to 24 code compliance inspectors and security officers. Because controlled special enforcement details require 100% of passengers to be inspected, controlled special enforcement details provide MTS a better understanding of fare evasion rates. Generally, more special enforcement details are conducted downtown because it is considered a high fare evasion area. However, these special enforcement details are intended to be con- ducted randomly, and MTS does not want to target a specific community. Therefore, the MTS Transit Enforcement Department tracks locations of recent special enforcement details to try to spread them equally across the lines and the Trolley network. Issuing Citations Code compliance inspectors have the discretion to choose whether to issue citations, except during special enforcement details, which are zero-tolerance fare inspections. The MTS Transit Enforcement Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) identify some factors to consider when determining whether to issue a citation, including the validity of the passenger’s explanation, instances of fare machine malfunctions, and prolonged systemwide or local power failures during peak times. In general, if an individual has not paid the fare, they are issued a citation. With the implementation of the new diversion program, however, code compliance inspectors will give passengers without proof of payment an opportunity to purchase a fare before issuing a citation. A code compliance inspector may confiscate passes and fares. A citation must be issued when any fare is confiscated. Passengers who say they have valid proof of eligibility for the reduced fare but do not have it with them are instructed to make an appointment with the MTS Transit Enforcement Department to show proof of eligibility, reclaim their pass, and void the citation. Failure to make an appointment within 72 hours results in the citation being processed, and the pass is not returned. If a code compliance inspector decides to issue a citation, they request identification and may contact the San Diego Police Department or the San Diego County Sheriff’s Department to verify identity. These checks are only for identification and do not include an NCIC check or immigration status check. The MTS Transit Enforcement SOPs clearly state that “CCIs [code compliance inspectors] will treat all patrons and violators of the Metropolitan Transit System in the same manner regardless of citizenship status or perceived status when contacted. . . . Under no circumstances will a CCI detain an individual merely for an immigration violation or hold a person pending arrival of ICE or Customs and Border Protection (CBP) personnel.” Train Teams are usually successful in verifying identity; however, Train Teams sometimes need to request a fingerprint team or take the person to the San Diego Police Department for fingerprinting to verify identity. Diversion Program Fare evasion is a criminal infraction. Before September 1, 2020, MTS forwarded fare eva- sion citations to the San Diego Superior Court immediately after they were issued. Starting on

Case Studies A-45   September 1, 2020, certain fare violation citations may be resolved directly with MTS within 120 days through its new diversion program. After 120 days, unresolved citations are still trans- mitted to the court for adjudication. Misuse of a reduced fare is not eligible for diversion. One of the main reasons for the diversion program is to provide options to resolve citations outside of the court system. Many homeless advocates have expressed concern that fare enforce- ment is criminalizing homelessness and those who do not have the means to pay. The diversion program provides opportunities for individuals to avoid court and pay a lower fine or perform community service by resolving a citation directly with MTS. Under the new program, code compliance inspectors will also offer passengers without proof of payment an opportunity to purchase a fare before being cited. The new diversion program also provides an appeals process. Individuals have 15 days to contest a citation. An individual must submit a written appeal with proof of valid fare or that the TVM was broken. Appeals can be submitted online or at the Transit Store using the Limited Appeal Form. As part of the appeal, individuals provide their Compass Card number or provide the date, time, and location where they purchased a paper ticket. For appeals due to broken TVMs, individuals provide the date, time, and station where the TVM was not working properly. This information is necessary for the MTS Legal Department to investigate an appeal. If an appeal is granted, the citation is voided and MTS sends the individual confirmation that the citation is voided. If the appeal is denied, MTS sends notice that the appeal has been denied and that MTS will continue to hold the citation until 120 days from the date of issuance. When determining the resolution period, MTS made sure to provide sufficient time for an individual to pay the reduced fine or complete community service if the appeal is denied. The fine for citations resolved with MTS directly is significantly lower than through the courts. Individuals who resolve with MTS directly pay a $25 fine or must complete 3 hours of com- munity service. Once a citation is filed in court, the presumptive fine is $177.50, including court fees, or more. Individuals choosing community service may schedule a 3-hour shift with the San Diego Food Bank or a Homeless Court program provider. Upon completion, the San Diego Food Bank/Homeless Court directly emails MTS proof of participation. The Homeless Court was created to provide an alternative means for individuals experiencing homelessness to resolve court fines. MTS is using the Homeless Court providers list to expand its community service options. A coordinator for the Homeless Court puts individuals in touch with organizations throughout the county that are convenient for them to access rather than limiting community service to San Diego Food Bank locations. Even after a citation is forwarded to the San Diego Superior Court, certain individuals may still be eligible to receive assistance with court cases, fines, or fees through the Homeless Court Program. Citations unresolved after 120 days are forwarded to the San Diego Superior Court, where they are handled by the traffic court. Once a citation is forwarded, a court date is assigned. If an individual chooses not to challenge the citation, the individual can pay the fine to the court. Otherwise, the individual must appear and plead guilty/not guilty. If an individual pleads not guilty, the court assigns a mini-trial date, and a notice is sent to MTS so that the code compliance inspector can appear to testify. The diversion program is being implemented in two phases. The objective of the Phase 1 Pilot, initiated on September 1, 2020, is to evaluate the effectiveness of the new program and identify necessary software, hardware, and staffing resources to effectively manage the program perma- nently (Phase 2). As part of the Phase 1 Pilot, existing staff and resources are being used and individuals can pay their fines in person at the Transit Store or by mail. In the future, MTS may enable payment online as part of Phase 2.

A-46 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion In preparation for launching the Phase 1 Pilot, the MTS Legal Department has been working with the MTS Marketing Department to determine how to advertise the program. The focus of the marketing and education has been valid fare is required; here are the options if cited so you can resolve the citation without it going to court. Marketing efforts have included updating the MTS website and creating a web page, issuing news releases, contacting community groups, installing station signage, and advertising the program on trolley cards on board vehicles. MTS also created envelopes for the citations that explain the resolution options in English and Spanish. With the implementation of the diversion program, MTS plans to track participants and outcomes, including repeat offenders. This information will enable MTS to refine its program, especially the way it handles repeat offenders. Many repeat offenders, even with the alternative resolution process, may not resolve citations or show up for court hearings. MTS is beginning to look at ways to develop effective means of intervention for repeat, chronic fare evaders who may be experiencing homelessness, drug addiction, and/or a mental health disorder. This includes actively engaging with the Regional Task Force on the Homeless for the San Diego region to develop strategies to address the overarching problems. Citation Database MTS clerical staff enters citation data into a database. The citation database includes demo- graphic data for citations issued: name, address, date of birth, race/ethnicity, sex, and other basic data. Internally, MTS analyzes fare enforcement data quarterly to determine how many inspections were conducted and citations issued. In the past, warnings have not been recorded in the data- base, but they will be going forward with the new diversion program. As part of the diversion program, MTS will also be using the database to monitor repeat fare evaders. MTS is beginning to analyze race/ethnicity data for individuals issued citations. A few Board members have expressed some concerns about racial/ethnic inequities in issuing citations. Based on preliminary analysis, the share of Black individuals who received a citation may be higher than the percentage of MTS passengers who are Black. However, because MTS does not collect data on passengers who were not issued a citation, MTS is unable to determine whether Black or other minority passengers are disproportionately cited. Transit Enforcement Oversight and Reporting MTS reports to its board of directors twice a year on transit code enforcement, including fare evasion, and Part I crimes and arrests (e.g., homicide, rape, robbery, aggravated assault). The most common citation is for fare evasion. The number of passengers inspected, the number given warnings or citations, and the results of the special enforcement details are reported, as well as the estimated fare evasion rate based on the controlled special enforcement details. MTS does not report lost fare revenue due to fare evasion. In general, MTS estimates that every 1% increase in fare evasion equates to almost $1 million in revenue lost based on past ridership data. As part of the diversion program, MTS will be trying to track and quan- tify lost fare revenue during the Phase 1 Pilot. However, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, ridership levels are down significantly; this makes it temporarily difficult to obtain accurate measurements. All transit enforcement personnel (code compliance inspectors and security officers) have body cameras. The recording and preservation of contacts provide transparency and account- ability. There are also cameras at stations and on board vehicles.

Case Studies A-47   MTS investigates complaints and conducts a proactive review of all use-of-force incidents. For example, if handcuffs are used to restrain an individual that was combative and force was used to gain control of the subject, both a use-of-force report and an incident report are required. The incidents are documented, reviewed by management with potential for formal investiga- tion, and, when warranted, appropriate action (e.g., retraining and/or disciplinary action). New York City Transit The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) is North America’s largest public trans- portation network, serving a population of 15.3 million people across a 5,000-square-mile travel area surrounding New York City through Long Island, southeastern New York State, and Connecticut. New York City Transit (NYCT) is one of the operating agencies in the MTA net- work. NYCT operates the New York City Subway, New York City Bus [Regular Bus Service (RBS) and Select Bus Service (SBS) services], and the Staten Island Railway (through a sub sidiary arrangement). Within New York City Bus, operations are split into RBS (Local, Limited Stop, and Express bus services) and SBS (BRT type service offering with limited stops and offboard fare payment). Fare Payment on the System NYCT is implementing One Metro New York (OMNY), a contactless fare payment system that will replace the MetroCard by 2023. A related OMNY mobile app is being developed. New York City Transit (NYCT), New York, NY Overview of Agency NYCT operates the largest transit system in the United States, providing passengers with Regular Bus Service (RBS), Select Bus Service (SBS), and heavy rail service (subway). Fare Collection Overview On RBS, passengers pay upon boarding at the front door. With the upcoming full rollout of One Metro New York (OMNY), NYCT’s contactless electronic smart card system, preparations are being made to enable all-door boarding. On SBS, passengers must prepay at off-board TVMs to receive proof of payment before boarding the vehicle, or tap their OMNY fare media upon boarding. On the subway, passengers purchase fares from TVMs at the station and pay at the turnstile when entering. Fare Enforcement Overview On RBS, fares are collected at the farebox and overseen by the operator at the time of vehicle boarding. When a passenger does not pay the fare, the bus operator uses the F5 farebox key to record the unpaid boarding. On RBS and subway, fare inspectors and police officers must see a passenger evade the fare (at the farebox for RBS and the turnstile for subway) to issue a warning or summons. SBS is a proof-of-payment system with fares inspected by fare inspectors on board the vehicle at any point in a passenger’s journey. Definition of Fare Evasion NYCT’s rules of conduct for the payment of fares and access to their facilities are defined in Title 21, New York Code, Rules and Regulations, Chapter XXI, Subchapter D, Part 1050.4. Under the Code, “no person shall use or enter the facilities or conveyances of the authority, for any purpose, without the payment of the fare or tender of other valid fare media.” Fare Enforcement Personnel Fare inspectors, as part of Eagle Teams, conduct inspections and enforcement on the SBS system and some RBS services. New York Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) Bridge and Tunnel Officers also conduct fare inspections and enforcement on RBS. Police officers from the New York City Police Department (NYPD) and MTA Police Department conduct subway fare inspections and enforcement. (continued on next page)

A-48 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion New York City Transit (NYCT), New York, NY (Continued ) Fare Evasion Penalties A fare evasion summons can be criminal (only NYPD can issue a criminal summons for fare violations) or civil [Transit Adjudication Bureau (TAB) or New York City Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings (OATH) summons]. A criminal summons has been deemphasized in favor of a civil summons. A civil summons carries a fine of $50–100, depending on the type of service ($50 on MTA bus and $100 on NYCT trains and buses). If not paid within 30 days, a $25 penalty is added. If not paid within 60 days, an additional $25 penalty is added. Thereafter, the fine accrues interest at 9% per year until paid or until the violation is dismissed. After the 60 days, any unpaid summons can be referred to a collection agency, wages may be garnished, and/or a lien can be applied against future New York State income tax refunds. Passengers receiving a summons may apply to pay the fine in installments. Passengers of limited financial means can submit a financial hardship appeal to have the fine waived. Certain types of violations heard by OATH are eligible for community service instead of fines. Police officers and fare inspectors have no way of tracking repeat offenders. NYCT has no mechanism to ban passengers from the system for fare evasion or any other infraction. Fare Enforcement Technology and Capital Investments NYCT has invested in cameras to help monitor the system and measure/track fare evasion. They now have over 9,000 cameras on the system. They have introduced video analytics software at five stations to automatically detect passengers going over/under turnstiles and going the wrong way through exit gates. In 2019, video screens showing passengers passing through turnstiles in real time were installed to encourage good behavior. This investment was part of a larger education campaign to discourage fare evasion, in combination with signage and floor decals. Fare Enforcement Deployment On SBS, fare inspectors are often assigned to one of the 17 lines, so that they come to recognize passengers on the vehicles. Fare inspectors also undertake “surges” where a supervisor and six fare inspectors will pick an SBS route and location and inspect all passengers on every vehicle in a specific timeframe, typically 60 minutes. NYPD and MTA police officers develop their deployment plans on subway, and MTA Bridge and Tunnel officers develop their deployment plans on RBS. Fare Citation Practice Police officers and fare inspectors have discretion about whether to issue a verbal warning or summons. Additionally, NYPD Officers have discretion as to whether to issue a criminal or civil summons. NYCT prefers to approach enforcement through customer education, communication, and behavior modification rather than the issuance of summons. OMNY will start with a full-fare, pay-per-ride option, but will gradually expand with weekly and monthly passes, reduced and student fares, and other options riders use. Adoption of the OMNY system will likely change some fare enforcement protocols. Because the transition from MetroCard to OMNY was still ongoing at the time of this writing, fare collection and fare enforcement information provided below apply to the current system. On RBS services, passengers board through the front door and pay with cash, by swiping their MetroCard, or on OMNY-equipped vehicles by tapping their credit/debit or reloadable pre paid contactless card or smart device with a digital wallet. To minimize conflicts with passengers, the bus operator is not responsible for enforcing fares but can state the fare. When a passenger does not pay the fare, the bus operator uses the F5 farebox key to record the unpaid boarding. NYCT is making plans for future all-door boarding on RBS with rear-door OMNY validators. On SBS services, passengers paying with cash or MetroCard must prepay before boarding the vehicle. TVMs at each stop issue a paper ticket that must be retained as proof of payment for

Case Studies A-49   the entire duration of the trip. Once prepaid, passengers may board through any door. SBS pas- sengers paying with a credit/debit or reloadable prepaid contactless card or smart device with a digital wallet using the OMNY system may tap their card/device on a validator at any door at the time of boarding. The entire SBS system is a proof-of-payment environment. On subway services, passengers paying with cash must use a TVM and are issued a MetroCard, which can be swiped at turnstiles to enter the station. Those paying with MetroCard, a credit/ debit or reloadable prepaid contactless card, or a smart device with a digital wallet may proceed directly to the turnstiles and swipe/tap to enter the station. Fare Enforcement Personnel, Roles, and Training Within NYCT, four groups of personnel are involved in fare enforcement activities. NYPD officers can enforce fares on the subway system. The NYPD Transit Bureau comprises 12 geographic transit districts, with each district responsible for specific subway stations in Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, and the Bronx. They are deployed on the subway system exclusively. Each of the 12 districts has a commanding officer, a neighborhood coordination officer, and six police officers (approximately 100 officers total in the Transit Bureau). NYPD officers can issue a criminal or civil summons for fare evasion activities. To issue a summons, an attempt to evade at a turnstile must be directly observed by an NYPD police officer. In addition to fare evasion enforcement, NYPD ensures the safety and security of passengers and NYCT employees on the system. NYPD operates independently of the three other groups of personnel, making their own deployment decisions; however, they do share information with MTA and NYCT teams. The MTA also employs its own police department. MTA police officers have full police authority in New York City, seven New York counties, and the State of Connecticut. The MTA employs approximately 800 police officers and civilian employees. Until 2019, MTA police officers only had the authority to enforce fares on the Long Island Railroad, Metro North Rail- road, and the Staten Island Railway. With a change in state law in 2019, the MTA Police Depart- ment was granted authority to undertake enforcement actions on NYCT buses and subway. In late 2019, the State of New York announced the hiring of an additional 500 MTA police officers to support subway safety operations, namely fare enforcement and issues of homelessness. Within the NYCT system, MTA police officers are deployed only on the subway, not on buses. On the subway, MTA police officers must directly observe an attempt to evade fare to be able to issue a summons, and can only issue a civil summons for fare evasion violations. The MTA Police Department coordinates its own deployment decisions. The New York MTA Bridge and Tunnel Authority employs peace officers, who originally enforced traffic violations and ensured security only on MTA-controlled bridges and tunnels. MTA Bridge and Tunnel officers are New York State sworn peace officers. With a change in state law in 2019, MTA Bridge and Tunnel officers were granted authority to undertake enforcement actions on NYCT buses and subway. The MTA Bridge and Tunnel Authority employs approxi- mately 465 peace officers, only some of whom undertake transit enforcement activities. Within the NYCT system, MTA Bridge and Tunnel officers are generally deployed on RBS and mainly to respond to bus operator security complaints; however, they may undertake fare enforcement activities. On RBS, MTA Bridge and Tunnel officers must directly observe a passenger board without paying a fare to issue a summons and can only issue a civil summons for fare eva- sion violations. MTA Bridge and Tunnel officers work closely with NYCT fare inspectors when determining where to deploy resources. NYCT fare inspectors are focused on fare enforcement activities. Fare inspectors are deployed as part of “Eagle Teams,” which were created to address issues of vandalism and graffiti. Their

A-50 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion role has changed over the years, as key issues on NYCT have shifted, and now many Eagle Teams focus on fare enforcement. Fare inspectors are civilians and are not sworn peace officers; how- ever, they do receive New York State security guard training. They are provided with safety vests, but they do not carry any weapons or defensive devices (e.g., no guns, pepper spray, or batons). NYCT employs approximately 150–160 fare inspectors, 30 supervisors, and six managers along with some administrative support staff across 10 locations throughout the five boroughs (Staten Island, Brooklyn, Queens, Manhattan, and the Bronx). Each supervisor oversees six fare inspectors. Historically, fare inspectors were deployed on SBS routes, but beginning in 2018, some Eagle Teams are deployed on RBS services. On SBS services, passengers are expected to carry proof of payment for the entire length of their journey, so fare inspectors may undertake fare checks on the vehicle at any point along the bus route and as passengers disembark the vehicle. On RBS services, fare inspectors must directly observe a passenger board without paying a fare to issue a summons and can only issue a civil summons for fare evasion violations. Fare inspectors work closely with MTA Bridge and Tunnel officers when determining where to deploy resources. The police officer and fare inspector training differ by role. MTA police officers receive at least 28 weeks of officer training before being certified by New York State. Both NYPD and MTA police officers receive use-of-force, de-escalation approaches, and defensive tactics train- ing and are required to meet annual retraining requirements, particularly around the use of force and firearm use and safety. Bridge and Tunnel Peace Officers typically receive at least 6–8 weeks of training to meet New York State Peace Officer requirements. Fare inspectors receive New York State security guard training over 6 weeks. The training includes de-escalation approaches, diversity training, how to write a summons, and scenarios around how to interact with passengers. Field training for recruits is also undertaken, with recruits paired with exist- ing fare inspectors and overseen by supervisors. Annual retraining is conducted, and optional supplemental training courses are offered throughout the year. NYCT also conducts fare inspector training as needs arise (e.g., an increase in complaints). These trainings are conducted in 4-hour blocks at the beginning or end of an assignment. NYCT determined that there was an insufficient time during daily briefings at the beginning of a shift to appropriately undertake supplemental training. As part of this training, fare inspectors conduct role-playing scenarios on how to handle specific situations and demonstrate effective approaches (e.g., de-escalation strategies). These training sessions have been successful at reduc- ing passenger complaints. Fare Enforcement On subway, NYPD and MTA police officers must directly observe instances of fare evasion occurring to issue a summons, so enforcement takes place near turnstiles. The most common types of fare evasion identified on the subway are entering the station without a valid fare (e.g., jumping the turnstile) and multiple passengers entering with only a single passenger paying their fare (i.e., tailgating, where individuals follow closely behind a paying passenger). Police officers undertaking fare enforcement on the subway are in uniform, providing a visual deter- rent for potential fare evaders. If a passenger is observed evading a fare, a police officer may choose to issue a verbal warning or issue a summons. On RBS, MTA Bridge and Tunnel officers and NYCT fare inspectors must also observe instances of fare evasion, so they will board a vehicle at a selected point along the route and ride to the end of the route, watching all boarding passengers to ensure fare payment. If a passenger is observed evading the fare, MTA Bridge and Tunnel officers or fare inspectors will issue a verbal

Case Studies A-51   warning or summons. MTA Bridge and Tunnel officers and fare inspectors undertaking fare enforcement on RBS are in plain clothes. With the rollout of the OMNY electronic fare collection system underway, NYCT is prepar- ing to introduce all-door boarding on RBS by the end of 2020. The goal of all-door boardings is to reduce dwell and travel times through expedited boarding. Lessons learned from SBS all- door boarding are being used to inform RBS all-door planning. NYCT has not yet determined whether changes to the definition of fare evasion or changes to enforcement approaches will be made with the introduction of all-door boarding on RBS. On SBS, NYCT fare inspectors conduct fare enforcement wearing uniforms and typically working in groups of three, known as “Eagle Teams.” Fare inspectors normally undertake “stop” enforcement checks where one fare inspector will board through each of the three doors of the articulated vehicle, and each fare inspector will inspect one portion of the vehicle. SBS vehicles are held for “stop” enforcement checks; the added dwell time is usually less than a minute. Every passenger is asked for proof of payment, including passengers disembarking. Passengers that cannot show proof of payment are generally asked to disembark the vehicle, and all fare inspec- tors will disembark after passengers have been inspected. Warnings and summons are issued off board at the stop. NYCT has found it difficult and unsafe for the fare inspectors to write citations while the vehicle is in motion. Fare inspectors do not separate; they remain as a group of three throughout the inspection and enforcement process for safety reasons. Fare inspectors may also undertake “riding” enforcement checks. This approach is very sim- ilar to “stop” enforcement with the exception that the vehicle is not held and is allowed to proceed. Fare inspectors will check all passengers while the vehicle is in motion. If passengers cannot show proof of payment, they are generally asked to disembark the vehicle at the next stop where a warning or summons will be issued. “Riding” enforcement checks are typically under- taken while fare inspectors are relocating to a new location for their next inspections. NYCT fare inspectors will also undertake inspection “surges,” where a supervisor and six fare inspectors will select a stop, or several nearby stops, and inspect all passengers on every passing vehicle for a specified period, typically 60 minutes. During surges, the number of passengers inspected, and the number with and without valid fares are recorded. Surges use the “stop” enforcement approach described earlier, where the vehicle is held briefly while fare inspections take place. Fare Enforcement Deployment Deployment decisions for fare enforcement activities are made independently by the four groups of personnel. They will share information and collaborate on deployment planning, but deployment decisions rest with each group. Police officers within the NYPD Transit Bureau are assigned to one of 12 geographic transit districts, with each district responsible for specific subway stations in Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, and the Bronx. Each of the 12 districts has a commanding officer, a neighborhood coor- dination officer, and six police officers. NYPD police officer deployment is typically in pairs, so each district might have three teams available for subway station safety and security, including fare enforcement, but they may not all be on duty simultaneously. Although station responsibili- ties are well defined, deployment decisions about which stations to focus on and how much time to spend at each station rests with the District commanding officer. MTA police officers and MTA Bridge and Tunnel officers make their own deployment decisions on fare enforcement. On the subway, police officers are typically deployed to higher capacity sta- tions to supplement NYPD deployments. On RBS, deployment is typically informed by operator

A-52 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion safety needs and F5 farebox key data used to log fare evasion. As with NYPD police officers, MTA police officer and MTA Bridge and Tunnel Authority officer responsibilities are not limited exclu- sively to fare enforcement and include safety and security responsibilities. As such, deployment decisions may not rest exclusively on fare enforcement needs. NYCT fare inspectors conduct most of their fare enforcement on SBS services, so deploy- ment focuses on those services. They are often assigned semi-permanently to one of the 17 SBS routes so that they come to recognize frequent passengers. As noted above, they typically work in groups of three for safety reasons. For surge inspections, a team consisting of one supervisor and six fare inspectors is deployed. Supervisors also join fare inspectors in the field to observe behavior, enforce fares, and support new fare inspector training. On SBS services, fare inspectors have a target inspection rate of 10%. During each inspection, 100% of passengers are inspected. Fare inspectors are deployed in 8-hour shifts, from either 6 a.m. to 2 p.m. or 1 p.m. to 9 p.m. Some late-night shifts are scheduled on an as-needed basis. NYCT staff makes scheduling deci- sions; fare inspectors do not bid on their preferred days/times. To ensure that inspections are distributed by location and time of day, a chart is created every month with each stop listed and daily time windows. Fare inspectors record the number of inspections by stop and time of day throughout the month. The goal is to undertake inspections at all stops and in each time of day window at least once. If data suggest that evasion is typically higher at certain locations and times, those locations may receive a higher share of inspections until the evasion rate drops. This methodological approach has been reviewed by MTA Audit staff and the MTA Office of the Inspector General (MTA OIG). It is acknowledged that this approach may simply displace fare evading passengers to other services or locations. On SBS services, the choice of where to undertake a “surge” enforcement activity is targeted based on areas of known high fare evasion. Fare evasion data used to determine surge locations are both quantitative and qualitative. Quantitatively, inspection and surge data are analyzed every week to determine which routes, stops, and times of day exhibit the highest rates of fare evasion. Qualitatively, fare inspectors will speak with bus operators and dispatchers to under- stand where they have concerns with fare evasion. Supervisors and fare inspectors are aware of the varied demographics of their service areas and potential concerns with the targeting of specific passengers. They rely significantly on mea- sured evasion data from inspections and surges to justify their choice of inspection locations. There is no dedicated team for surges. All Fare Inspector Eagle Teams will participate in surges in combination with their traditional inspection activities. Eagle Teams assigned to a surge may inspect their route or other routes, but they typically remain in their borough. Approximately three surges a week may be undertaken throughout the SBS system, but additional surges may be scheduled if the fare evasion data indicate additional problem areas. In the future, NYCT will be able to use APC data to help inform SBS and RBS deployments. MTA bus is rolling out APCs on about 2,000 buses. Testing of the APCs is still underway. Fare Enforcement Technology As part of a broader education campaign, NYCT has invested in cameras at subway stations to detect potential locations of fare evasion. Cameras have been installed at turnstiles. In 2019, 10 video monitors were installed at turnstiles, showing passengers’ behavior in real time as they approach the turnstile to encourage good behavior and deter evasion. Initially, the video monitors displayed “tracking boxes” around passengers moving through the turnstiles, which raised concerns that facial recognition software was being used. The agency has been challenged

Case Studies A-53   in court regarding the presumed use of facial recognition software. NYCT removed the “tracking boxes” and has publicly clarified that no facial recognition software has been used at any point in time. NYCT is also looking at video analytics software to analyze the video feeds from its 9,000 cameras, and has selected software for initial testing. The software is meant to count pas- sengers jumping over or crawling under turnstiles and counting passengers entering the station through the exit gate. It is operational in five subway stations on the system. With the impacts associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, NYCT has determined the software can also be used to estimate mask-wearing compliance rates. With the launch of New York’s OMNY electronic fare collection system, a new handheld fare inspection device is being introduced. The device will allow police officers and fare inspectors to scan contactless cards or smart devices to determine whether a passenger has paid a fare. It is expected that the device will also be used to track the number of passengers inspected and the number of summons issued. The handheld device will also record the geolocation where the summons is issued, providing important data for future deployment activities. The device will allow police officers and fare inspectors to scan or swipe a passenger’s government-issued ID and in some cases, automatically populate specific fields required to issue a summons. The plan is to pair the handheld device with a mobile printer to allow summons to be input digitally, printed, and issued at the time of the offense. This is expected to yield time savings, both in writing summons and transcribing paper summons into the electronic database. It is hoped that this will also limit the amount of time spent with each passenger, thereby reducing the chances of a fare evasion encounter escalating. Through the second half of 2019 and before the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, it was believed that the education campaign and use of video technology had helped to stabilize the fare evasion rate. Fare Evasion and Revenue Loss Estimation Fare evasion measurement is undertaken in several different ways within NYCT. On RBS and subway, fare evasion has historically been estimated through the use of quarterly, stratified random sample surveys conducted by traffic checkers, known as the Subway Fare Evasion (SFE) survey and Bus Fare Evasion (BFE) survey. The SFE survey has undergone some methodological changes over time, changing from a stratified random sample to a sampling approach that uses both stratified and cluster sampling methods. In July 2019, the MTA OIG reviewed the SFE survey method and data gathering practices and noted several concerns, including the sampling method, the small percentage of samples that were executed (for the period of review only 60% of samples were completed), and traffic checker training and documentation. In response to the MTA OIG report, some imme diate changes were implemented. Traffic checker resources were increased to survey loca- tions for longer periods and boost sample execution rates. Previously, only some entrances to stations were included in the survey mechanism; now all turnstile lines in a station can be selected in the random sample survey. NYCT and MTA OIG also undertook a longer-term review of the SFE survey method and released details on a revised methodological approach in July 2020. The SFE survey will remain a stratified cluster sample, but with a lower number of strata to be developed. The change in method along with the higher execution rate of the samples is expected to increase the statistical relevance of the results. The method only allows for subway-wide evasion estimates every quarter; line-specific results cannot be estimated with statistical reliability.

A-54 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion The BFE survey also uses a stratified cluster sample design but has historically included strati- fication to report evasion by borough. The sample design involved traffic checkers riding on selected routes in both directions and recording types of paid, partial payment, and unpaid boardings. The BFE survey is only conducted on certain types of RBS service and excludes Express buses entirely. In the same July 2019 MTA OIG report, several concerns with the BFE survey method were identified, including the statistical method and whether it reflects an accept- able margin of error, traffic checker availability and sample completion issues, and the ability of traffic checkers to monitor both doors and appropriately record multiple different types of fare payment by passengers. In response to the MTA OIG report, some immediate changes were implemented. Traffic checker resources were increased and the survey categories were simplified to make it easier for checkers to focus on monitoring evasion. NYCT and MTA OIG also undertook a longer-term review of the BFE survey method and released details on a revised methodological approach in July 2020. Similar to the SFE survey, the BFE survey will remain a stratified cluster sample, but it will improve the weighting of borough-specific estimates to increase the reliability of a bus systemwide evasion estimate. Results will only be reported for the bus system as a whole. While results will be released every quarter, the data collection is based on bus system “picks” or “sheets” (e.g., seasonal bus service schedules) that do not necessarily align with calendar quarters. Although methodological changes for the SFE and BFE surveys were initially anticipated in mid-2020, the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in significant changes in ridership and pas- senger travel behavior and, as such, the implementation of further changes has been put on hold until ridership stabilizes. On SBS, the entire system is a proof-of-payment environment and all passengers are checked when a vehicle is inspected. Fare inspectors endeavor to check every route at least quarterly, ensuring a broad sample of passenger inspection data. The fare evasion rate is calculated by count- ing the number of instances of fare evasion against the total number of passengers inspected. Ineligible use of discount fare products (e.g., Senior fares, Student MetroCards) is counted as fare evasion. The number of summons issued and the number of times a bus operator indicates that fare evasion has taken place by using the F5 key on the driver console do not factor into the formal calculation of fare evasion. These data sources may be used to determine locations/routes for enforcement activities and deployment decisions. Fare evasion rates differ by mode. Data shared by NYCT suggests evasion rates are approxi- mately 18% to 20% on RBS, 3% on SBS, and 4% to 5% on the subway. The lower fare evasion rates on SBS compared to other modes is likely due to several factors and characteristics of the service, including the consistent presence of fare inspectors and the ability to conduct enforce- ment throughout the journey, not just at the time of payment. Once fare evasion rates are estimated, fare revenue loss estimates are developed by MTA’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB), whose method is complex and relies on a combina- tion of product sales, fare evasion estimates, and additional survey/sample data. The revenue loss approach differentiates by some passenger segments (e.g., Student, Adult) and by types of fare evasion (e.g., partial fare payment/short drop, no fare payment). Senior/Medicare passengers with discount MetroCards are not reported as a separate passenger segment, due to data avail- ability and variability. Children less than 44 inches tall are free according to NYCT’s fare policy; these passengers are counted as a rider with $0 contributing revenue. In 2018, MTA estimated revenue losses from fare evasion amounted to $225 million. The MTA OIG, in the review of the SFE and BFE survey methods, noted that due to the statisti- cal validity of the underlying fare evasion estimates, a revenue loss estimate based on more

Case Studies A-55   statistically valid survey methods may be materially different from MTA’s current $225 million loss estimate. Because the Office of Management and Budget’s updated fare revenue loss method relies on the updated SFE and BFE survey methods, updates to the revenue loss method are being finalized but likely will not be implemented until sometime after the COVID-19 pandemic has subsided and some form of normalcy has returned to NYCT operations. Fare Evasion Summons and Fines NYCT’s focus is on modifying passengers’ behavior to pay their fares rather than issuing summons and collecting fines. The authority believes consistency in patrols and maintaining a constant presence of enforcement personnel is critical to modifying passenger behavior. NYCT’s rules of conduct for the payment of fares and access to their facilities are defined in Title 21, New York Code, Rules and Regulations, Chapter XXI, Subchapter D, Part 1050.4. The most common types of fare evasion identified are crossing the turnstiles or entering a bus without a valid fare. Partial fare payment (known locally as a “short drop”) is a form of fare eva- sion. NYCT has no mechanism to ban passengers from the system for fare evasion or any other infraction. NYPD police officers, primarily conducting security and fare enforcement on the subway, have the option of issuing criminal summons, a Transit Adjudication Bureau (TAB) civil summons, or civil summons heard by the New York City Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings (OATH). TAB civil summons are processed administratively by NYCT. An OATH summons is processed administratively by the City of New York. For fare evasion-related offenses, MTA police officers, MTA Bridge and Tunnel officers, and NYCT fare inspectors may only issue TAB civil summons, but MTA police officers and MTA Bridge and Tunnel officers do have the authority to issue a criminal summons for nonfare evasion offenses. All police officers and fare inspectors have discretion in issuing warnings instead of summons for fare violations. Verbal warnings are not recorded in any centralized system. Individuals issued a criminal summons are given a hearing date. If they miss their hearing in the District Court system, an arrest warrant can be issued immediately. When issuing criminal summons on the subway, NYPD collects demographic data on race/ethnicity and age and shares that information publicly. A TAB summons is a civil violation and is administered internally by NYCT. TAB fare eva- sion summons carries a fine of $50–$100, depending on the type of service ($50 on MTA bus and $100 on NYCT trains and buses). If it is not paid within 30 days, a $25 penalty is added. If not paid within 60 days, an additional $25 penalty is added. The fine accrues interest at 9% per year until paid or until the violation is dismissed, and the fine can be referred to a collection agency, wages may be garnished, and/or a lien can be applied against future New York State income tax refunds. Individuals receiving a TAB summons may apply to pay the fine in installments, and individuals of limited financial means can submit a financial hardship appeal to have the fine waived altogether. An OATH summons is also a civil violation. Passengers receiving an OATH summons will be assigned a hearing date at least 15 days in the future. OATH summons have no defined penalty for fare evasion; the hearing officer decides what the penalty is after hearing testimony on the circumstances of the case. Hearings can be in person, online, or by phone. Failure to attend the hearing will result in a default judgment (i.e., guilty of the violation noted). Failure to pay an OATH summons default judgment penalty within 30 days of the hearing date can result in the fine being referred to a collection agency, and/or a lien can be applied to real property. Certain types of violations heard by OATH are eligible for community service, rather than payment of a financial penalty.

A-56 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion When issuing TAB and OATH summons, no demographic information on the passenger is collected or recorded on the summons. Approximately 50% of TAB summons are paid. Beginning in 2019, the Manhattan District Attorney’s office began encouraging NYPD police officers to reduce the use of criminal penalties for fare evasion and to consider civil summons alternatives, due to concerns with the burden of prosecuting criminal theft of service charges, and concerns over passenger-targeting and racial/ethnic bias. Criminal penalties are time-consuming to prosecute through the courts and result in a criminal record for the passenger for what are viewed as low-dollar-value offenses. Concerns regarding potential bias in NYPD station deploy- ment decisions and fare enforcement approaches have been identified by local politicians and advocacy groups since 2017. In January 2020, the New York State Attorney General opened a formal investigation to examine potential racial/ethnic biases and/or discriminatory practices in NYPD transit deployment decisions and fare enforcement approaches. Because the COVID-19 pandemic impacted services in early 2020, both ridership and fare evasion summons issued have decreased dramatically. Due to this substantial change, it is difficult to determine whether the shift from criminal to civil violations has had any marked change on fare evasion. Any summons issued is paper-based. Information is then transcribed into an online system later in the day. Police officers and fare inspectors have no way of tracking individuals with multiple offenses, other than by memory. With the introduction of OMNY, handheld devices for fare inspection are under development to input citation data electronically and may be able to track repeat offenders. Regional Transportation District The Regional Transportation District (RTD) provides public transit services to eight counties in the Denver metropolitan area. Services include bus, BRT, light rail, commuter rail services, and FlexRide (call-and-ride for the general public). Over the last 15 years, RTD has embarked on a substantial service expansion, focused on light rail and commuter rail service investment. Fare inspection and fare enforcement approaches have been adjusted over time to reflect the growing network. Fare Payment on the System RTD has zone-based fares on its rail and bus services. There are three zones: Local, Regional, and Airport (exclusively for travel to/from Denver International Airport). Passengers traveling between zones can purchase the higher price zone fare at the time of initial boarding, or may pay the initial fare and pay an upgrade amount (equal to the fare differential between the ser- vices) when transferring to a second service. Across RTD’s system, passenger fares can be paid with cash, prepaid paper media, mobile ticketing on a mobile device, and smart card. All valid fares provide a passenger with at least 3 hours of travel, including transfers between modes. Fare prices are differentiated for adults, youth, seniors/people living with disabilities, and low- income passengers. RTD also offers several pass programs for businesses, colleges, and neighborhoods. These pass programs are “universal” in nature, requiring all employees/students/residents to participate regardless of their frequency of transit usage. By pooling these groups of passengers together, passes can be offered at prices that are lower than typical monthly passes. RTD contracts directly with the business/college/neighborhood for billing and payment purposes, rather than seeking payment from each passenger. Participants are issued a smart card for fare payment. On bus and BRT modes, passengers paying with cash or 10-ride paper tickets deposit the applicable fare into the farebox. If the passenger requires a transfer, a paper transfer is printed and issued by the operator. Transfers are only issued if requested. Passengers paying with a

Case Studies A-57   Regional Transportation District (RTD), Denver, CO Overview of Agency The Regional Transportation District (RTD) provides public transportation in eight counties in the Denver metropolitan area. Services include bus, BRT, light rail, commuter rail, and FlexRide (call-and-ride for the general public). Fare Collection Overview Fares for buses, including BRT, are collected on board. Rail stations are open platforms. Rail passengers are required to purchase fares before boarding at TVMs, through a mobile app, or by tapping their smart card on the platform validator. On rail, fares are inspected on board. Across the RTD system, passenger fares can be paid with cash, prepaid paper media, mobile ticketing, and smart card. A significant portion of ridership comprises RTD’s universal employer, neighborhood, and college pass programs on the smart card. Definition of Fare Evasion RTD fare evasion is defined in the Colorado Revised Statutes, Title 42, Article 4, Part 14-16, which specify that fare payment is required before boarding, and that proof of payment is required while on the vehicle. RTD is not able to cite individuals for failure to tap an employer, neighborhood, and college pass program smart card because they are considered a prepaid pass. Fare Enforcement Overview Fares are collected at the farebox on the bus and overseen by the operator at the time of vehicle boarding; rail is a proof-of-payment system with fares inspected on board the vehicle. Before 2012, fares could be inspected in designated fare-paid areas. Some limited enforcement is undertaken on buses and BRT; most inspection and enforcement focus is on light rail and commuter rail. Fare Enforcement Personnel On the bus, operators are instructed to state the fare if a passenger does not pay. RTD wants to minimize fare conflicts and does not want to put bus operators in the position of enforcing fares. On rail, fares are inspected by transit security officers (TSOs). TSOs are contracted employees. RTD also has internal RTD police officers and uses off-duty police officers contracted through local police departments. While police officers can check fares and write citations, TSOs are primarily responsible for fare enforcement. Fare Enforcement Deployment On the bus, TSOs or police officers may be deployed if higher levels of evasion are noted. RTD also occasionally deploys plainclothes police officers on the bus. On light rail, RTD uses teams of two TSOs who are assigned to each of RTD’s five zones. One TSO patrols the platform, station area, and park-and-ride facilities, while the other inspects fares on board. On commuter rail, RTD has designated a TSO, who is responsible for checking fares, as the second crew member. The commuter rail TSOs typically check fares twice on each train, and passengers know they will be inspected at least once. RTD also has mobile units (consisting of an individual TSO with a vehicle), and a Fare Task Force (FTF) team with flexible deployment abilities, to provide support as needed. Fare Citation Practice A warning is issued for the first instance (RTD refers to passenger interactions as “contacts”) without a fare. A second contact results in a citation, and a third contact results in a citation plus a 30-day suspension from RTD services. For subsequent contacts, the suspensions from service increase to 90 days, then 180 days, and then 1 year. These suspension levels apply to all passengers, including youth. Fare Evasion Penalties The Colorado Revised Statutes on fare evasion were changed in 2012, decriminalizing fare evasion. Tickets are now treated similar to a motor vehicle offense. Fines are a $75 penalty, and counties can add court fees to this amount. The maximum ticket is $106.50 with all fees. Tickets are handled by county traffic courts, and the counties retain the fine revenues. Appeals to suspension from RTD services are handled internally by RTD. Fare evaders who do not pay their fines can lose the ability to renew their driver’s licenses. (continued on next page)

A-58 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion mobile ticket/pass or a paper pass product present the fare to the bus operator for visual valida- tion. Payment with a smart card involves tapping the smart card on the validator. RTD’s light rail and commuter rail systems are open platforms with TVMs and platform validators for smart cards. Passengers wanting to pay with cash can purchase fares at TVMs and will be issued a paper receipt that should be retained for proof of payment and transfer privileges for the remainder of the journey. Passengers with 10-ride paper tickets must validate a ticket using the stamp validator on the station platform before boarding and retain the validated ticket as proof of payment. Passengers with a mobile ticket/pass or a paper pass product may board the rail vehicle and show the ticket or pass as proof of payment if inspected. Passengers using a smart card for fare payment should tap their card on the platform validator before boarding the rail vehicle; the validated fare/product on their card is their proof of payment. Changes in Fare Evasion Definition, Impacts on Inspection/Enforcement The Colorado Revised Statutes that define fare evasion on RTD services have been in place since 2012 when fare evasion was decriminalized and became a civil penalty, similar to a traffic violation. Before 2012, the fare evasion definition referenced “fare-paid zones,” allowing RTD to undertake fare inspections on rail platforms and on board transit vehicles. The 2012 revised statutes updated the fare evasion definition, replacing “fare-paid zones” with “public transit vehicles.” This change in the language required RTD police and TSOs to modify their inspection and enforcement processes. The largest change undertaken was the near elimination of inspec- tions on light rail platforms. Now, the vast majority of inspections take place on board the rail vehicles. In very limited circumstances, officers and TSOs will undertake inspections on plat- forms at stations before or after large events, such as football games or concerts. This is primarily done for safety reasons to avoid conducting inspections on very crowded trains. RTD’s fare evasion definition includes reference to “valid transit passes” as a form of proof of payment. This definition does not require that a valid transit pass on smart card media be tapped for each transit trip; it simply requires that the pass be present on the card and valid for the period of travel. This poses some challenges for fare enforcement of RTD’s employer, college, and neighborhood pass programs. The pricing for these programs is based on the number of trips taken by employees, students, and residents, as measured by smart card taps. The drawback of this pricing approach is that it creates a disincentive for passengers to tap; the fewer times a passenger taps, the lower their future transit pass price. RTD noted that the inability to cite a passenger for failure to tap their card reinforces this disincentive. RTD has approached this challenge through targeted education outreach campaigns, working with institutions to explain the importance of tapping their smart card. RTD fare enforcement team members often attend college orientation sessions and will have a greater physical presence at busy stations in the fall, during the start of the academic school year. Fare Enforcement Technology and Capital Investments RTD uses iPhones and mobile apps to check fares and to check for previous citations. One app is used to check smart cards. A second app is used to check mobile tickets. A third app is used to check for previous warnings and citations against a records management system (eForce). Onboard video from vehicles is used exclusively to investigate complaints (e.g., fare enforcement, ADA compliance, etc.). Video review is only conducted if warranted by a complaint. Regional Transportation District (RTD), Denver, CO (Continued )

Case Studies A-59   With the introduction of mobile ticketing on RTD’s proof-of-payment rail system, the agency has also had to address the added challenge of fare purchases that occur in the middle of a jour- ney, after a passenger has boarded a vehicle and sees a TSO. According to the Colorado Revised Statute, passengers are required to provide “proof of prior fare payment,” requiring that fares be paid before boarding a vehicle. RTD’s mobile ticketing app provides a banner across the screen for the first 2 minutes after a ticket has been activated, allowing officers to determine whether a ticket was very recently activated. If TSOs believe a passenger purchased a mobile ticket after boarding the vehicle, they may issue a warning or citation. Fare Enforcement Personnel and Roles Fare Enforcement is a division within the RTD Transit Police Division. It is staffed with a combination of contracted TSOs who work under Bus Operations, internal RTD police officers, and off-duty police officers contracted through four local police departments. All police officers can check fares and write citations, but TSOs are primarily responsible for fare enforcement activities and police officers typically respond to safety and security concerns in the system. The RTD Transit Police Division consists of the chief of police, one deputy chief, one lieutenant, two sergeants, eight police officers, and two trained canines (K9s). The RTD Transit Police Division will be increasing from 11 police officers to 14. RTD has approximately 280 contracted TSOs available with 300 budgeted and more than 200 off-duty police officers who equate to approx- imately 64 full-time positions. TSOs are contracted armed security personnel, designated by RTD to perform fare enforce- ment activities. The Colorado Revised Statutes allow RTD to designate who may undertake fare enforcement activities. Contracted security was chosen for their ability to effectively enforce fares while yielding cost savings compared to a staff made up entirely of police officers. TSOs are required to have some law enforcement or military experience. The contractor has a dedicated recruiting officer. On light rail, RTD uses teams of two TSOs who are assigned to each of RTD’s five inspection zones. One TSO patrols the platform, station area, and park-and-ride facilities, while the other inspects fares on board. On commuter rail, RTD has designated a TSO, who is responsible for checking fares, as the second crew member. RTD has also established a FTF team that supple- ments other fare enforcement activities on light rail and has mobile units with an individual TSO with a vehicle that assists TSOs in their assigned zone, as needed. In total, there are approx- imately 270 TSOs available during the week assigned to light rail and commuter rail, eight TSOs assigned to the mobile units, 10 TSOs assigned to bus enforcement, and 11 TSOs assigned to the FTF team. TSOs are supervised by sergeants and corporals provided by the contractor. Overall, there is roughly one supervisor (sergeant or corporal) per four TSOs. There are also duty lieutenants who primarily assist the mobile units. RTD bus supervisors are also in the field and check on fare- and suspension-related issues on buses throughout the system. TSOs receive multiple weeks of training. The first week of class training is conducted by the contractor and is focused on basic security training; the second week of class is on topics related to RTD and is focused on ambassadorship, fare enforcement, suspension of service, RTD Code of Conduct training, use-of-force training, etc. The field training component is not a fixed length; TSOs graduate once the checklist of competencies is achieved, usually after 4 or more weeks of field training. Field training is led by corporals. The corporals take TSO trainees out on the dif- ferent lines and demonstrate how to conduct inspections and make contacts. Periodic retraining is provided, and RTD tracks how many TSOs have undertaken the courses.

A-60 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion RTD previously deployed some plainclothes police officers; however, the decision was made to revert to mostly uniformed inspections and patrols. With uniformed officers, the perception is that officers are more visible and that fare enforcement is being undertaken. Only police offi- cers can be in plain clothes; the contract with the security provider does not allow TSOs to be in plain clothes. Fare Enforcement Deployment On light rail, RTD uses teams of two TSOs who are assigned to each of RTD’s five inspection zones during two shifts. Approximately 20–30 TSOs are deployed at any given time on week- days for patrolling the five zones. One TSO patrols the platform, station area, and park-and-ride facilities, while the other inspects fares on board. If either TSO requires assistance, the other can provide support. RTD has found that by splitting the responsibilities within each pair, overall contacts and productivity have improved. In some instances, the TSOs will double up for safety reasons (e.g., during public protests). In addition to the pairs of TSOs assigned to each zone, RTD has mobile units that are assigned a zone and provide assistance as needed. A mobile unit is assigned to each zone for each shift (i.e., five mobile units per shift). A mobile unit consists of an individual TSO with a vehicle. In addition to assisting other TSOs in their zone, the mobile unit TSOs are responsible for checking parts of park-and-ride lots that are not easily accessible from the platforms and undertake safety and security checks at other RTD properties. RTD also has a flexible FTF team made up of approximately 11 TSOs that provide additional support, predominantly on the light rail system. TSOs on the FTF typically work alone but may be deployed in pairs for security reasons. Unlike light rail TSOs, these TSOs are not assigned a specific zone. They are provided greater discretion as to where they undertake their activities. In addition to fare inspections, TSOs on the FTF may patrol park-and-ride lots or support plat- form safety initiatives. They may also be deployed to support large events or large gatherings and to undertake educational efforts such as college orientation. The contract with the security provider establishes a set number of total hours for the FTF, providing flexibility in how and when TSOs are deployed. On commuter rail, Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) regulations require a second crew member. RTD designates a TSO as the second crew member to meet regulatory requirements and conduct fare enforcement. The first crew member, the train operator, remains in the cab compartment for the entire journey. The commuter rail TSOs typically check fares twice on each train, and passengers know they will be inspected at least once. As a result, fare checking and compliance are higher on the commuter rail lines than on the light rail lines. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, fare inspection was challenging on the A-Line service to the airport because RTD had recently shifted from two-car to four-car trains, so depending on passenger loads, TSOs were not always able to inspect twice on this service. Similar to light rail, TSOs will inspect all passengers on the train, including any passengers that board during the journey and passengers whose fares were previously checked. Fare Enforcement Assignments The TSO pairs and the mobile units are each assigned to a zone. RTD has five fare inspection zones (not to be confused with their three fare payment zones), roughly one for each of the four “branches” of the light rail network and one for the central “spine.” Within each zone, TSOs have broad discretion on where to focus inspection efforts. Where multiple lines operate in the

Case Studies A-61   same zone, TSOs are provided discretion on which lines to inspect but are encouraged to board whichever trains arrive first to maximize contact with passengers. RTD designs the deployment plan based on levels of service and expected ridership levels for each zone. Once the deployment plan is developed by RTD, the security contractor is respon- sible for staffing the deployment plan. Assignments depend on where TSOs pick up equipment. TSOs report to four different locations. TSOs bid on their desired shift and then where they want to work through a process managed by the contractor. Once shifts are filled, the contractor will work to assign teams to a zone based on coverage needs and TSO preferences. In 2019, RTD undertook a pilot whereby TSOs were scheduled for 10-hour shifts, 4 days per week. The intent was to evaluate whether the condensed work week would lead to higher retention and lower turnover. The 10-hour shifts were also more consistent with other local law enforcement agencies. The results suggested little change in retention and little improvement in productivity among TSOs due to overlapping schedules. RTD has reverted to 8-hour shifts, 5 days per week, as it provides similar team retention outcomes, results in better weekly coverage across the network, and limits overlapping hours. Although 12-hour shifts may be better for assignments, TSOs’ responsibilities are physically demanding. There are concerns about longer shifts resulting in more complaints. With less demanding 8-hour shifts, TSOs are better able to function as an ambassador, improving cus- tomer service and customer interactions. Fare Enforcement on Bus On RTD buses, operators are encouraged to minimize fare conflicts when passengers choose not to pay. Bus operators are encouraged to educate and accommodate passengers. They may state the fare for a passenger, but bus operators are not required to enforce payment or remove passengers from a vehicle. In the event of passenger nonpayment, bus operators may report the unpaid fare on the driver console or by contacting bus operations dispatch. Dispatch can com- municate with bus operators in real time and send police or TSOs if the situation requires it. “Fare Unpaid” reports are also compiled daily for the prior day and reviewed by Street Opera- tions. They look for any bus operator that presses Fare Unpaid more than three times in a single day and meet up with the bus operator to determine what help is needed. For discount fares that require proof of eligibility, bus operators are directed to state the requirement for discount eligibility and ask for proof of eligibility. Once again, bus operators are encouraged to educate and accommodate passengers. Those unable or unwilling to provide proof of discount eligibility are asked to take a seat or step off the vehicle. RTD has not had any significant issues when asking for proof of eligibility or with passengers not being able to provide identification. Operationally, some forms of fare payment on the bus do not always yield a proof of pay- ment for the passenger. For example, passengers paying cash on the bus only receive a transfer if they request it. This transfer receipt is their proof of payment. Because of the possibility that a passenger without proof of payment paid their fare, RTD does not undertake inspections of the entire vehicle. RTD is exploring the option of citing passengers only if fare evasion is observed by a police officer or TSO on the vehicle. Several citations have been issued on the bus, and RTD is awaiting the local court’s interpretation before making any decision on the next steps. Given the size of RTD’s bus network and limited fare enforcement resources, inspection and enforcement on the bus are typically focused on routes or locations with fare evasion complaints.

A-62 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion Fare Enforcement Technology TSOs are provided with an iPhone with apps to validate different fare media. One app can inspect smart cards. A second app is used to inspect mobile tickets (although visual validation is also possible). Neither of these two apps is used for data collection purposes at this time. A third app is used to check for previous warnings and citations against a records management system (eForce). A passenger’s name is entered into the app to check for previous fare inspection contacts. The passenger’s identification is not scanned or uploaded. Although RTD currently issues paper citations from a ticket book, citations were previously issued from a mobile printer. TSOs requested to go back to paper so that they would not need to carry an additional, heavy device. Investigation of Customer Complaints RTD has a dedicated, internal department that investigates all manner of complaints, includ- ing fare enforcement complaints. If a fare enforcement complaint is received, RTD and the security contractor are required to respond. Each complaint is investigated and documented. Because TSOs are contracted, RTD can ask to have a TSO reassigned or removed from its account but cannot dictate employment. Onboard video from vehicles can be reviewed in the course of a complaint investigation. Video review is only conducted if required to investigate a complaint. RTD does receive occa- sional complaints about TSOs who appear to have singled out or targeted passengers for inspec- tion. Video can be helpful in these cases to review the event to determine the validity of the complaint and whether the TSO had already inspected the other passengers on board before the passenger filing the complaint boarded. Fare Evasion Estimation and Fare Evasion Monitoring RTD estimates fare evasion rates by mode (light rail and commuter rail), line, and fare zone. The estimated rate of evasion is based on the count of warnings and citations issued compared to the total number of fare inspection contacts that TSOs have with passengers. In 2019, evasion rates for light rail were around 2%, and below 1% for commuter rail. RTD has acknowledged that when plainclothes officers and TSOs conduct inspections, evasion rates tend to be higher. RTD does not undertake any additional passenger surveys by nonpolice/nonsecurity personnel to measure evasion. RTD does not capture demographic characteristics on fare evasion citations. New state leg- islation will require police officers to begin tracking demographics for contacts with the public. However, security officers were excluded from the requirements so TSOs will not be required to track demographics. RTD monitors inspection performance, including location and number of inspections. Every week, the number of contacts is reported by shift, day of the week, time of day, and location. Every month, the number of contacts, warnings, and citations is reported by zone for light rail and by line for commuter rail. These fare evasion statistics are reviewed internally for trend analysis every month. RTD also provides a quarterly “Security Statistics & Fare Inspection Summary” report to its board of directors. RTD’s records management system (eForce) tracks warnings and citations issued. It was designed to look up specific passengers to determine whether they have had previous contacts. RTD does not proactively use the system to track individual repeat offenders. Because the system

Case Studies A-63   tracks warnings and citations separately and a warning must be issued before a citation, monthly statistics do provide an aggregate assessment of repeat violations. Fare Evasion Citations The Colorado Revised Statute on fare evasion was changed in 2012, changing fare evasion from a criminal violation to a civil traffic violation. The first instance of fare evasion results in a warning. A second contact results in a citation. Citations issued by RTD are handled by the county court system in which the violation took place. Citations are a $75 penalty, and counties can add court fees to this amount. The maximum ticket is $106.50, inclusive of all fees. Tickets are handled by county traffic courts, and the counties retain the fine revenues. Any challenge to the citation requires a court appearance. If citations remain unpaid after 45/60 days (time frames differ by county), the Department of Motor Vehicles is notified and the passenger is required to pay their fine before being able to renew their driver’s license. In addition to civil citations, RTD can suspend passengers from using their services. Sus- pensions are issued with the citation. Although this is more frequently utilized for criminal behaviors, it does apply to fare evaders as well. A third contact results in a citation and a 30-day suspension from RTD services. For subsequent contacts, the suspensions from service increase to 90 days, then 180 days, and then 1 year. These suspension levels apply to all passengers, including youth. Appeals to suspension from RTD services are handled internally by RTD and follow proce- dures defined in RTD’s Fare Enforcement Manual. Appeals must be submitted within 10 days of receiving the notice of suspension. Appeals are reviewed by the deputy chief of the Security Operations Bureau and a hearing is conducted. If upon review it is determined that the suspen- sion was issued incorrectly, it is nullified in its entirety. A suspension may also be nullified or modified due to defined circumstances (i.e., a transit-dependent person shall not be issued a complete exclusion except in specific circumstances). After the deputy chief renders a decision, the person may schedule a final appeal with the Suspension Appeals Panel that convenes once a month. Sacramento Regional Transit The Sacramento Regional Transit (SacRT) District operates bus, light rail, and microtran- sit services in Sacramento County, home to California’s state capitol. SacRT opened the first light rail segment in 1987, with seven extensions opening between 1998 and 2015. The light rail system is a proof-of-payment service with off-board smart card validators and FVMs at each station. In 2017, SacRT, along with other transit providers in the region, launched the Connect Card card-based fare collection system that allows passengers to use a smart card to pay their fares. The same year, SacRT also introduced ZipPass, a separate mobile ticketing application for fare payment. SacRT also recently launched SmaRT Ride microtransit service, a rideshare service that operates in nine designated zones. Fare Enforcement and Personnel by Mode SacRT initially used transit officers for fare enforcement. Transit officers can issue citations for all infractions of SacRT ordinances and California Public Utilities Commission regulations. In 2016, SacRT started a pilot program called the Transit Agent Demonstration program, the goal of which was to improve the fare evasion citation process and curb evasion on light rail. The transit agents were instructed to enforce a zero-tolerance fare enforcement protocol with

A-64 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion Sacramento Regional Transit District (SacRT), Sacramento, CA Overview of Agency The Sacramento Regional Transit District (SacRT) operates bus, light rail, and microtransit services. Fare Collection Overview Passengers pay on board the vehicle on bus and microtransit services and in advance of boarding on light rail. All light rail stations are equipped with platform smart card validators and FVMs for passengers to purchase tickets before boarding. Passengers can also purchase fares at SacRT’s customer service center and several regional retail outlets, or can pay using the ZipPass mobile app or a reloadable Connect Card smart card. Definition of Fare Evasion Sacramento Regional Transit District, Ordinance 15-06-02 defines a fare evader as someone “entering an enclosed area of a public transit facility beyond posted signs prohibiting entrance without obtaining valid fare, in addition to entering a transit vehicle without valid fare,” “misuse of a transfer, pass, ticket, or token with the intent to evade the payment of a fare,” and “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.” Fare Enforcement Overview For bus and microtransit services, fares are collected at the farebox and overseen by the operator at the time of boarding. Light rail is a proof-of- payment system with a designated fare-paid area. Fare Enforcement Personnel Transit ambassadors are responsible for fare enforcement on light rail vehicles; however, their primary responsibility is customer service. SacRT also has legacy transit officers who are primarily used for customer service and fare enforcement. Contracted security guards are present at light rail stations and may ask for fares, but they cannot write citations for fare evasion. Transit ambassadors and legacy transit officers can call on the Regional Transit Police Services unit, which is staffed by City of Sacramento Police Department and County of Sacramento Sheriff's Department sworn officers if needed. Fare Enforcement Deployment SacRT deploys transit ambassadors so there is one transit ambassador on board every train during peak periods. The transit ambassador is a union position and ambassadors can bid for their work schedule. Once peak trains are covered, additional coverage is random, based on what is bid. Fare Citation Practice SacRT fare enforcement is focused on customer service and education first. If a passenger cannot produce proof of payment on light rail, transit ambassadors and legacy transit officers will inform the passenger that they are supposed to have purchased the fare before boarding and will educate the passenger on how to do so. They will then ask the passenger to purchase the fare at that time either using the ZipPass mobile app or by alighting at the next stop and using an FVM. Fare enforcement personnel only issue citations to passengers without proof of payment who refuse to purchase a fare or get off the train. Fare enforcement personnel can formally issue warnings but rarely do so. Fare Evasion Penalties Fare evasion citations are criminal. All citations are processed through the court system and once a citation has been issued, it is out of SacRT’s control. The court chooses what fine to assess and can decide to enhance the fine if the person has multiple citations. Fare Enforcement Technology and Capital Investments Fare enforcement personnel use a handheld device to inspect electronic fare media. SacRT uses an application by Brazos to track fare evasion offenses by individuals and review previously issued warnings or citations. SacRT also operates a 24/7 security operations center. From the security operations center, staff can monitor the 1,500 cameras deployed across the system as well as access the PA system in place at all light rail stations.

Case Studies A-65   limited exceptions. The transit agents were temporary new employees hired specifically to fight fare evasion and to provide safety and security by their presence on trains. This pilot program lasted for 3 years. Based on lessons learned during the pilot, SacRT formalized a new fare enforcement program and began hiring transit ambassadors, whose focus is customer service first and foremost, as opposed to transit agents who were focused on fare enforcement. SacRT has been replacing transit officer positions with transit ambassador positions as transit officers leave SacRT. SacRT currently has four remaining (legacy) transit officers. Transit officers and transit ambassadors have slightly different citation capabilities. Transit officers can issue citations for all infractions of SacRT ordinances and California Public Utili- ties Commission regulations, while transit ambassadors can only issue citations for fare eva- sion and/or nuisance behavior (e.g., smoking, drinking alcohol) in stations or on board trains. The transition to transit ambassadors was driven in part by transit ambassadors’ lower salaries compared to transit officers, due to transit ambassadors’ reduced responsibilities. The lower salaries enabled SacRT to hire more transit ambassadors and increase transit ambassador cover- age across the light rail system. Transit ambassadors and transit officers are supported by contracted security guards, who are present at light rail stations and may ask passengers for proof of payment but cannot write citations for fare evasion. The union that oversees the transit ambassadors and transit officers opposed giving security guards citation capabilities as it was seen as taking work away from union members. SacRT also has a Regional Transit Police Services unit staffed by sworn police officers from the City of Sacramento Police Department and the County of Sacramento Sheriff’s Department. SacRT chose to contract with two law enforcement agencies due to faster response times to transit issues compared to waiting for general local police response. Additionally, staff noted that the contracted officers bring an elite skill set, a strong reputation, and a significant reservoir of resources. These police officers provide an additional security presence on the system and are available should transit ambassadors or transit officers require assistance. While fare enforcement is not these police officers’ primary responsibility, they can cite for fare evasion if a passenger cannot produce valid proof of payment. Police officers were previously used for fare enforcement blitzes, but as SacRT has shifted to a customer service model of fare enforcement, the use of blitzes has ceased. On board buses, the bus operator is responsible for fare enforcement. Bus operators are instructed to state the fare to a passenger upon boarding if they appear hesitant to pay their fare and then make a reasonable effort to get the passenger to pay. If the passenger refuses to pay the fare but is not aggressive, the operator continues service. If the passenger refuses to pay and is aggressive, the operator will hold the vehicle and radio in for a bus transportation supervisor. A supervisor will meet the vehicle and try to mediate the situation including riding along with the bus. If the supervisor is unsuccessful in mediating, a member of the Regional Transit Police Services unit is dispatched to meet the bus. If the bus is at a light rail station when an issue arises and a security guard is present, the security guard will try to help mediate the situation. Fare Enforcement Training, Staffing Levels, Scheduling, and Assignments The transit ambassador training program is 5 weeks long, with 2 weeks spent in the classroom, 2 weeks spent in the field, and a fifth week with a supervisor divided between the classroom and the field. Classroom training includes a review of SacRT’s standard operating procedures for conducting fare enforcement, how to write citations, how to testify in court, training on oper- ating a two-way radio, de-escalation techniques, anti-bias training, and learning about other

A-66 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion applicable SacRT policies. Field training serves to familiarize transit ambassadors with the light rail trains, the nomenclature used in transit and the field, and SacRT’s stations. Transit ambas- sadors receive an annual training refresher. SacRT has four remaining transit officers in addition to 30 general and six lead transit ambas- sadors. The lead transit ambassadors exist to support general transit ambassadors. Lead transit ambassadors are available to assist with problems, monitor general transit ambassadors’ job per- formance and adherence to guidelines, and serve as motivators to general transit ambassadors. SacRT aims to schedule transit ambassadors to cover as many trains as possible with a goal of 100% coverage on all peak period trains, 80% coverage on nonpeak trains, and at least 50% cov- erage on weekends. Transit ambassadors sign up in seniority order for their shifts four times a year per their collective bargaining agreement. General transit ambassadors are divided between AM and PM shifts, assigned to specific train numbers and scheduled trips per their bid, and are bound to their schedule and a single train at a time. Lead transit ambassadors are not bound by a specific train schedule and can choose to jump off a vehicle to catch another train. Lead transit ambassadors are assigned to a line rather than a specific vehicle and work to make con- tact with general transit ambassadors throughout the day by traveling from one ambassador to another. Transit ambassadors are deployed individually; they are not sent out in pairs or teams. Available assignments are built off the train timetable. Double coverage is minimized through cross-referencing of all schedules with an eye for gaps or double coverage. If double coverage is discovered, staff will adjust assignments to achieve maximum coverage with available personnel. SacRT has three light rail lines: the Blue Line, the Gold Line, and the Green Line. SacRT tries to assign an equal number of employees between the Blue and Gold lines for maximum cover- age. The Green Line has significantly fewer stations than either the Blue or Gold Line. A lead transit ambassador is typically assigned to the Green Line to ride the trains performing fare inspections a few times a day. General transit ambassadors typically perform a full round trip before switching to another train. When on a train, transit ambassadors are instructed to move systematically through the train, switching between cars at least every three station stops. This is to help ensure that passengers regularly see transit ambassadors on board, improving the perception of safety. Upon entering a vehicle, transit ambassadors announce they are checking for proof of pay- ment and start at one end of the vehicle, making their way to the other side of the vehicle, asking for proof of payment from each passenger along the way. Transit ambassadors will even ask for proof of payment from an individual that they have already encountered. This process of asking for proof of payment from all passengers helps ensure that the fare enforcement process is not discriminatory in any way. Transit ambassadors maintain fare inspection logs during their shift, which include information on where inspections occurred, the number of passengers checked, and the number of citations written. They also record other data such as the number of times that they come across certain types of fare media (free student stickers, college IDs), calls from the security operations center, requests from vehicle operators, incidents, and requests for cus- tomer assistance. Public Perception and Customer Relations Based on lessons learned during the 2016–2019 Transit Agent Demonstration pilot program, SacRT transitioned away from a zero-tolerance fare enforcement protocol to a customer-service- first approach. SacRT heard from passengers that they liked the additional presence of SacRT staff on board light rail but not the zero-tolerance policy in place during the pilot. As a result, today’s transit ambassadors are focused on having passengers purchase a fare, with issuing a citation as a last resort. Transit ambassadors are instructed to do everything that they can to

Case Studies A-67   educate a passenger on SacRT’s fares and then have the passenger buy fare either through the mobile app or from an FVM at the next station, rather than cite them. SacRT sees the transit ambassadors’ focus on educating the public on fare media and fare policies as particularly important considering that SacRT has many different fare media. Before the 2016–2019 pilot, the public perceived fare evasion on light rail as high, and many passengers did not purchase fares because there was never anyone on the train to check that they had paid. Following the pilot program and the introduction of the permanent transit ambassa- dor program, public perception has changed completely. According to staff, SacRT passengers appreciate having their fares checked. Before the Transit Agent Demonstration pilot program, SacRT conducted a Paid-Fare Zone pilot program in April 2015. The pilot implemented a paid-fare zone at six light rail stations to reduce fare evasion, decrease loitering at stations, and improve the riding experience for paying customers. In fiscal year 2014, the last full fiscal year before the Paid-Fare Zone and Transit Agent Dem- onstration pilot programs launched, fare evasion on light rail was reported at approximately 12%. The most recent annual survey (before the launch of the permanent transit ambassadors program) reported fare evasion on light rail at less than 4%. SacRT staff noted that light rail rider ship decreased by approximately 1.2 million boardings or 10% of light rail ridership fol- lowing the launch of the 2016 pilot program due to fare evaders who stopped riding. SacRT has also created special initiatives to help address passengers who do not have the means to pay a fare. The agency, with help from outside funding sources, recently made it free to ride for youth who are 18 years or younger and register for the RydeFreeRT program. SacRT is also looking to hire a candidate for a master’s in social work who would be tasked with sup- porting the agency’s most chronic fare evaders based on data from SacRT’s citation database. Some chronic fare evaders receive more than 100 citations in a month. The social work candi- date would apply a case management approach to working with these individuals to help them obtain fares and access resources to help them get where they need to go. SacRT is exploring funding options to support this effort, which could include reallocating some funding from staffing police officers. Annual Fare Survey SacRT conducts fare surveys annually that capture approximately 15% to 20% of ridership on each route to determine how riders pay fares and to estimate fare evasion rates. Additionally, SacRT ensures that samples are collected from each period during the day (AM peak, midday, PM peak, late night, etc.). Before 2019, surveyors conducted the surveys. In 2019, transit ambassadors conducted the surveys for the first time. The use of transit ambassadors helped reduce the amount of time that it took to complete the survey from about 2 months to only a week since the fare surveys could be conducted as part of their normal shift. For this week, transit ambassadors were instructed to try and survey every customer rather than focusing on fare enforcement. The survey was a paper form that each passenger was asked to complete. Passengers indicated what kind of fare media and ticket they used to make the trip, or none if they did not pay. The transit ambassador conducting the survey did not check that the passenger paid with the fare they indicated on the survey. Passengers surveyed without fare were not cited during the survey period. The annual survey is performed on both bus and light rail services. SacRT attempts to randomize the survey schedule and has tried two processes to do so. In prior years, all trips were listed in an Excel spreadsheet and Excel randomly selected trips to be surveyed. Surveyor schedules were

A-68 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion built before and after the selected trip to maximize the sample size and efficient use of surveyor staffing. The scheduling supervisor would review recent surveys to determine whether it would be more beneficial to build the surveyor schedule to be more heavily weighted with trips before or after the randomly selected trip. Using this approach, a few hundred trips were sampled over the 2 months. Although this provided a fairly randomized sample, the sample size was small and was very challenging to schedule. In 2019, SacRT employed a new approach for its fare survey. Using the transit ambassadors, SacRT tried to survey every customer within a week. This approach led to the collection of data from approximately 25 times more trips, but the sampling was less random. This approach yielded a slightly higher fare evasion rate than in previous years, but management believes this is due to the change in survey method. Under both approaches, SacRT has ensured that samples are collected from each period during the service day. Infrastructure and Investments to Deter Fare Evasion SacRT has made several significant infrastructure and technology investments to help deter fare evasion. The agency has designated a portion of the light rail stations as paid-fare zones. These are delineated by a combination of pavement markings, detectable warning tile along the platform edges, and signage indicating that a person must either have a valid fare or be in the process of obtaining a valid fare. Within the paid-fare zone, the passenger must have a valid fare or promptly purchase a fare from an FVM and board the next vehicle traveling in the passenger’s direction of travel. Loitering is not permitted as defined in Ordinance 15-06-02 and adopted by the SacRT Board of Directors in 2015. To monitor the light rail system, SacRT has a security operations center that operates 24/7 and is the conduit for addressing security concerns throughout the system. The security operations center has been critical in SacRT’s ability to monitor fare evasion and the overall security of its stations. SacRT has 1,500 cameras that are monitored at the security operations center. A PA system at the stations also enables staff in the security operations center to address situations in real time, possibly eliminating the need to dispatch staff. SacRT staff estimates that they have about a 75% to 90% compliance rate with PA system instructions, such as when they instruct a loiterer to leave the paid-fare zone at a light rail station. Currently, SacRT’s security operations center is at the police department, but SacRT is moving forward with a project to make a single, centralized control center that would include both security operations and bus and light rail operator dispatch. This planned move to relocate the security operations center to SacRT facilities will increase communication and efficiency between security operations and operator dispatch. Under this centralized control center model, operator dispatch will be in the same room as dispatch for security operations. Under the cur- rent arrangement, an operator who needs assistance from law enforcement must radio operator dispatch, who then must radio security operations, who then radios police to assist. Co-location will save time and simplify this process. The relocation project is scheduled to be completed in early 2021. The security operations center and its use of cameras and a PA system enable monitoring and enforcement of loitering and/or fare evasion in the paid-fare zone. Staff emphasized the impor- tance of this setup and believes these investments help SacRT to mitigate some of the quality of life problems seen in other transit systems because they can leverage these tools to address undesirable behavior in real time. According to staff, the ability to use these tools increases the perception of safety for other passengers who know someone is monitoring the stations, espe- cially when these tools can be used to address nuisance behavior either in person or over the PA system.

Case Studies A-69   San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency The San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) is a department of the City and County of San Francisco responsible for the management of all ground transportation in the city. The SFMTA has oversight over public transit, as well as paratransit, parking, traffic, walk- ing and bicycling facilities, and taxis. The San Francisco Municipal Railway (Muni) is the transit division of SFMTA that delivers transit services, including bus, light rail, streetcar, and cable car services. Fare enforcement is conducted by the Security, Investigations, and Enforcement group in SFMTA’s Sustainable Streets Division, which provides all security, fare enforcement, and investigative services for SFMTA, including the Proof-of-Payment Unit. San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA), San Francisco, CA Overview of Agency The San Francisco Municipal Railway (Muni) is the transit division of SFMTA and operates bus, light rail, streetcar, and cable car services. Fare Collection Overview All Muni services, except cable cars, operate with all-door boarding and use a proof-of-payment system. Clipper card validators are installed at all doors on buses, streetcars, and light rail vehicles. At surface stops, cash-paying passengers board through the front door, pay at the farebox, and receive a proof-of-payment receipt/transfer. All Muni Metro underground (subway) light rail stations are gated. Passengers must tap their Clipper smart cards or Muni Clipper-enabled limited-use tickets to enter the station. Passengers with paper proof of payment or mobile tickets (MuniMobile) must show them to a station agent and go through the fare gate closest to the station agent’s booth. All Muni Metro stations have Muni TVMs that enable passengers to purchase Muni limited-use tickets or a Clipper card or load stored value/passes to a Clipper card. Clipper cards can also be loaded online or at retail locations. On cable cars, conductors continue to handle fare collection. Fare Enforcement Overview Except for the cable cars, the SFMTA system is entirely all-door boarding and enforces proof of payment. Proof-of-payment fare enforcement is conducted on board buses, streetcars, and light rail and in Metro underground stations by SFMTA employees who are civilian transit fare inspectors (fare inspectors). Muni’s bus, streetcar, and light rail operators do not enforce fares and do not engage with passengers except to answer passengers’ questions. Definition of Fare Evasion Per SFMTA’s Fares Policy and Pricing, evidence of fare payment is required “through the duration of the trip or while within the paid area of Muni [Metro] stations. Failure to produce proof of payment when asked by a Fare Inspector will result in a fine . . . . The farebox receipt or a transfer serves as proof of payment [for cash fares]. Clipper customers must tap their card and MuniMobile customers must activate their product immediately upon entering the vehicle.” Fare Enforcement Personnel The SFMTA’s civilian fare inspectors conduct proof-of-payment inspections and issue citations to bus, streetcar, and light rail riders who do not produce valid proof of payment. Fare Enforcement Deployment For onboard inspections, fare inspectors are deployed on bus and rail lines and ride each line to the end to provide equitable fare enforcement. Fare inspectors check everyone on board the vehicle and passengers as they board. In Metro stations, fare inspectors are positioned on the mezzanine between the stairs/escalators and fare gates, enabling them to monitor the gates as passengers enter and check fares as passengers exit the station. The SFMTA’s target is to inspect each line at least once every 2 weeks, with more inspections on higher ridership lines. Data from fare enforcement surveys are used to deploy fare inspectors, with fare enforcement focused on lines with high ridership. While fare evasion patterns are considered, they do not drive deployment decisions. (continued on next page)

A-70 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion Definition of Fare Evasion The San Francisco Transportation Code defines proof-of-payment as “a fare collection system that requires transit passengers to possess a valid fare receipt or transit pass upon boarding a transit vehicle or while in a Proof-of-Payment Zone, and which subjects such passengers to inspections for proof of payment of fare by any authorized representative of the transit system or duly authorized peace officer.” The code defines Proof-of-Payment Zone as “the paid area of a subway or boarding platform of a transit system within which any person is required to show proof of payment of fare for use of the transit system.” The following sections of the San Francisco Transportation Code establish the actions that constitute transit fare-related violations: 7.2.101—Fare Evasion Regulations: a. To fail to display a valid fare receipt, transit pass, Clipper card, Limited Use ticket, or elec- tronic fare media at the request of any authorized representative of the transit system or duly authorized peace officer while in or about any public transit station (including an outdoor high-level boarding platform or station operated by the Bay Area Rapid Transit District), Proof of Payment area, light rail vehicle, streetcar, cable car, motor coach, trolley coach or other public transit vehicle to evade any fare collection system or proof of payment program instituted by the Municipal Transportation Agency. San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA), San Francisco, CA (Continued ) Fare Evasion Penalties The SFMTA decriminalized fare evasion and enacted ordinances to adjudicate fare evasion through an in-house administrative process. The fine for fare evasion is $64 for youth and $125 for an adult. The administrative process provides payment plans and community service options that eliminate encounters with the courts. Enrollment fees and/or late penalties may be waived for low-income passengers and people struggling with homelessness. The SFMTA uses the City Treasurer’s Bureau of Delinquent Revenue for the collection of unpaid fines. If an unpaid citation can be linked to an individual correctly, unpaid fines may be subject to collections and/or submission to the Franchise Tax Board. Fare Enforcement Technology and Capital Investments The SFMTA is working with its vendor for the parking citation app to enable the issuance of fare evasion citations. The app would enable fare inspectors to access data on previous fare enforcement contacts and write citations. Newer fareboxes issue a paper proof-of-payment receipt that includes a code identifying the date and time issued and, for short fares, the amount paid. Fare Citation Practice The SFMTA’s approach to fare enforcement is to keep fare evasion rates low by educating passengers about fare requirements and building a culture of fare compliance. Fare inspectors focus on education, not enforcement and issuing citations. The fare enforcement strategy creates the expectation that fare inspections may occur anytime, anywhere on the system. Fare inspectors have discretion about whether to issue a citation. Fare enforcement was suspended temporarily in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. As fare enforcement returns in fall 2020, fare inspectors will return to full-fare inspection, including issuing citations but focusing on compliance with fare policies over enforcement. Citations will be issued as a last resort, to passengers who refuse to pay their fare or agree to enroll in a discounted fare program.

Case Studies A-71   b. To knowingly use or attempt to use any illegally printed, duplicated, or otherwise repro- duced token, card, transfer or other item for entry onto any transit vehicle, Proof of Payment area, or into any transit station with the intent of evading payment of a fare. c. For any unauthorized person to use a discount ticket, Clipper card, or Limited Use ticket, or fail to present, upon request from a system fare inspector, acceptable proof of eligibility to use a discount ticket. If an eligible discount user is not in possession of acceptable proof at the time of request, an issued notice of fare evasion or passenger conduct violation shall be held for a period of 72 hours to allow the user to produce acceptable proof. If the proof is provided, the notice shall be voided. If the proof is not produced within 72 hours, the notice shall be processed. 7.2.103—Fare Evasion Violations Committed by Youth Any violation of Section 7.2.101 that is committed by a minor under the age of 18 shall be subject to a separate fine established by the Municipal Transportation Agency. SFMTA’s Fares Policy and Pricing, adopted by the board of directors on June 30, 2020, requires evidence of fare payment “for all Muni service through the duration of the trip or while within the paid area of Muni [Metro] stations. Failure to produce proof of payment when asked by a Fare Inspector will result in a fine (see San Francisco Transportation Code Division II, Section 302 for the list of current fines). Passengers with proof of payment may board a Muni vehicle by any door. All other passengers must enter at the front of the vehicle and pay the fare at the farebox. The farebox receipt (from newer fareboxes) or a transfer serves as proof of payment. Clipper users must tap their card and MuniMobile users must activate their product immediately upon entering the vehicle.” Fare Collection and All-Door Boarding All Muni services, excluding cable cars, operate with all-door boarding and proof of payment. The SFMTA began allowing passengers with valid proof of payment to enter through any door of buses and streetcars beginning in 2012, expanding a policy that had already been applied to light rail vehicles since the 1990s. The policy change effectively legalized informal practices that had developed as passengers boarded at back doors in response to queues at front doors and crowding. Although the unsanctioned practices increased perceptions of fare evasion, they demonstrated the potential viability of all-door boarding. Before introducing all-door boarding, Muni installed Clipper validators at all doors. The additional validators have reduced barriers to fare payment on crowded vehicles for passengers boarding through rear doors and increased fare data from what would previously have been missed taps. Nonetheless, there continue to be passengers who board through the rear doors without proof of payment and do not tap. Passengers with proof of payment, including valid transfers/fare receipts, Clipper Cards, MuniMobile, paper passes, or other fare media may board through any door of any vehicle at any time. Normally, about 50% of fares are paid using Clipper cards, although that has dropped to about 15% during the COVID-19 pandemic. Clipper validators are located at every door and Clipper users must tap for each boarding. For cash-paying passengers, fare collection depends on whether the passenger is boarding a vehicle on the surface or in a subway station. For bus, streetcar, and light rail services operating on the surface, cash passengers must board through the front door, pay at a farebox, and obtain a transfer to serve as proof of payment. In the light rail subway Muni Metro stations, TVMs allow passengers to purchase and add value/passes to Clipper cards or purchase Muni Clipper-enabled limited-use tickets. Fare gates in subway sta- tions are activated by tapping the validator with a Clipper card or limited-use ticket. Passengers with a proof-of-payment transfer, paper pass, or MuniMobile ticket must show it to the station agent, who inspects the fare media and then releases the fare gate.

A-72 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion Muni has also introduced MuniMobile, a mobile application (app) that allows passengers to purchase mobile tickets using a credit/debit card, PayPal account, or Apple Pay and Google Pay. When a purchased ticket is activated, the ticket screen, which serves as proof of payment, is an animated screen that shows the time of activation and duration of use. When tapped, the anima- tion changes color, indicating it is a valid ticket. For surface operations, passengers are expected to activate a purchased mobile ticket upon entering the vehicle. MuniMobile passengers enter- ing Muni through a fare gate must activate a purchased mobile ticket and show the active screen to the station agent who will release the fare gate. It is the passenger’s responsibility to ensure that the phone battery is charged and tickets have been downloaded and activated. The SFMTA is considering fare collection options for the planned Van Ness and Geary Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) projects. BRT fare collection will be the same as the rest of the Muni system, building on the popularity of Clipper among passengers as well as the faster boarding times asso- ciated with tapping a Clipper card over paying a cash fare. The SFMTA is considering installing Clipper validators on select BRT platforms to speed boarding but would continue to rely on retail locations, not TVMs, to load value to Clipper cards. By allowing passengers to pay cash on board, SFMTA avoids needing to add TVMs at surface stops throughout the system. Fare Compliance Culture and Enforcement Responsibilities A primary objective of SFMTA’s approach to fare enforcement is to keep fare evasion rates low by improving fare compliance, not to recover the costs of the fare enforcement function by collecting citation fines. This objective has been reinforced by adopting a fare enforcement strategy that creates the expectation that fare inspections may occur anytime and anywhere on the system. Building a culture of compliance can be reinforced by fare structures that are easy to understand, affordable fares, easy-to-access media to pay fares, and consistent operating practices and design (i.e., minimizing the different fare collection environments, as in the case of systems with both gated and open platform stations). Fare enforcement is handled entirely by fare inspectors. Bus and rail operators are not involved in fare enforcement. To avoid conflict with passengers, Muni’s operators do not enforce fares and are instructed to avoid engaging with passengers about fares, other than to answer questions. Bus and light rail operators are in a separate compartment that limits passenger interaction. Bus operators are in a compartment behind a Plexiglass shield that they can close. On light rail vehicles, fareboxes are placed within the operator’s cab. Lifting a window provides an opening for passengers to access the farebox. In the subway, this window is typically closed as under- ground stations have fare gates and TVMs for fare collection. Installed in 2017 and 2018, SFMTA’s newer fareboxes print transaction details on tickets, which helps SFMTA keep better track of fare payments. Previously, operators issued torn paper transfers where expiration times were imprecise. Now, operators push a button, and the farebox issues a ticket with an automatically calculated 2-hour expiration time. If passengers pay less than the full-fare amount applicable to their fare category, they receive a receipt that shows the amount paid. This is not a valid ticket, and passengers offering one as proof of payment may receive a citation. This more secure transaction method has also eliminated the theft of Muni’s old paper transfers, helping keep operators safe and reducing uncaptured fare revenue. Fare Enforcement Personnel Fare enforcement was originally conducted on Muni’s proof-of-payment light rail lines by the San Francisco Police Department (SFPD). In 1999, the responsibility for fare enforcement was transferred to SFMTA. Today, fare enforcement is conducted by civilian fare inspectors in

Case Studies A-73   SFMTA’s Proof-of-Payment Unit. They are employed by SFMTA and responsible for enforcing proof-of-payment fare policies on bus, streetcar, and light rail services. Fare inspectors also provide a uniformed presence that increases security in the system. In addition to fare enforcement, fare inspectors are responsible for enforcing other SFMTA regulations and policies identified in the San Francisco Transportation Code. They are autho- rized to issue citations for violations of the Transportation Code that pertain to users of the transit system. They also provide customer assistance and education and have the discretion to escort passengers to TVMs to purchase fares instead of issuing citations. Fare inspectors are uniformed but not armed. Their training consists of 2 weeks of classroom training and 4 weeks of field observation by field training officers (with some allowances for variability, depending on how individuals complete the field work). Field training officers are lead fare inspectors. Some courses are taught in-house and some by other organizations. The SFMTA’s chief security officer is reviewing and updating fare inspector training needs. The SFMTA has 42 fare inspectors and eight supervisors who oversee them, with two super- visors per team of eight inspectors. These personnel are assigned to both bus and rail fare enforce- ment. Fare inspectors work in teams of two [this will increase to three, at least temporarily, as discussed below (see Reimagined Fare Enforcement) when fare enforcement is reintroduced in fall 2020 after being suspended due to the COVID-19 pandemic], monitored and supervised by a supervisor who must rotate between the two teams under their supervision. Supervisors maintain contact by radio and move around the system by vehicle but may also ride with and perform the same duties as the fare inspectors that they oversee. The SFMTA also has a contract with SFPD to provide a uniformed presence on the Muni system to assist with transit enforcement and special events. Through this program, the SFPD’s Muni Response Team puts uniformed peace officers in the field for a few hours each day to help improve fare compliance. This arrangement has been disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Historical Deployment and Inspection Over time, SFMTA has used several models to deploy fare enforcement personnel. The evolu- tion of deployment strategies has been influenced largely by changes in service delivery, espe- cially as proof of payment and all-door boarding were extended to bus and streetcar lines, the need to deploy limited fare enforcement resources effectively, and concerns about deploying fare enforcement equitably across the system. Most recently, before fare collection and fare enforcement were discontinued due to the COVID-19 pandemic, SFMTA deployed fare inspectors to lines, assigning them in teams of two to all bus and rail lines. To provide equitable fare enforcement, fare inspectors rode each line to the end. Fare inspections were focused on the lines with high ridership and to a lesser extent, on lines with high fare evasion rates. Fare evasion data from SFMTA’s fare enforcement surveys have been considered in making these deployment decisions, but they did not drive deployment decisions. The SFMTA does not have a target inspection rate. In conducting inspections, one fare inspector boarded through the front door while the other boarded through the back door. They announced that they were going to check everyone’s fare and then worked toward each other in the middle of the vehicle, checking everyone on board. Passengers boarding at later stops were checked as they boarded. In Metro stations, fare inspec- tors were positioned on the mezzanine between the stairs/escalators and fare gates, enabling them to monitor the gates as passengers entered and check fares before passengers exited the station. Muni fare gates are tap-in only and do not require passengers to tap to exit.

A-74 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion As fare enforcement returns to Muni services in the fall of 2020, SFMTA is “reimagining” fare enforcement and inspections, as discussed below in Reimagined Fare Enforcement. Before SFMTA implemented all-door boarding and proof of payment on all bus and streetcar lines, a zone structure model was used to deploy fare inspectors to a line segment, a platform, or a stop (i.e., a light rail line and segment, a downtown Metro station platform, or a bus stop as part of a pilot of all-door boarding and proof of payment on buses). For example, the J Church line was divided into two districts (or zones): (1) Embarcadero to 20th & Church and (2) 20th & Church to Balboa Park. “Platform” assignments were left to the discretion of fare inspectors to choose the station they wanted to work. Fare inspectors were also assigned to work at various bus stops as part of the bus pilot program that led up to extending all-door boarding and proof of payment to buses and streetcars. Assignments changed weekly, so teams of fare inspectors worked the same line assignments 5 days in a row. The zone model was intended to provide randomness so that anyone riding light rail could be subject to fare inspection at any time. Line and station coverage and time of coverage, therefore, varied from week to week. The deployment plan was also intended to vary work assignments from week to week because fare inspectors considered some assignments to be better than others. A management audit of SFMTA’s Proof-of-Payment Program, conducted by the San Francisco Budget Analyst in 2009, questioned aspects of SFMTA’s zone deployment strategy. The audit recommended that the inspection strategy should give greater consideration to SFMTA’s fare evasion deterrence goals and resource constraints, better correlate fare inspector deployments with ridership levels and fare evasion activity, and structure fare inspector assignments to reduce unproductive time. Data on the levels of fare evasion, by location, are available from fare surveys. In 2009, SFMTA conducted a comprehensive proof-of-payment study in response to concerns about revenue losses from then-illegal rear-door boarding and to identify strategies to improve fare enforce- ment. A survey conducted as part of the study provided information on fare evasion levels, showing that they varied by route, location, and period. Fare evasion studies were also con- ducted in 2010, 2012, 2014, and 2019. The SFMTA has used data on fare payment patterns and fare evasion locations from these studies to assist in deploying fare enforcement more efficiently and effectively to improve fare compliance. As SFMTA extended proof of payment and introduced all-door boarding on all buses and streetcars, fare enforcement needs expanded significantly, but staffing resources were con- strained by the budget. The SFMTA converted to a “police district” deployment model that rotated fare inspectors to different police districts daily, improving geographic coverage and enabling fare inspectors to check any Muni vehicle in a district instead of focusing on specific lines or locations. In addition, fare inspector shifts were restructured to improve weekend coverage by sched- uling all fare inspectors to work either Saturday or Sunday instead of working only Monday through Friday. The SFMTA introduced “enhanced fare enforcement” surge deployments, where a large team of fare inspectors quickly checked all passengers on a vehicle, sometimes accompanied by police. To improve productivity, the reporting location for all fare inspectors was changed to SFMTA’s headquarters, which is centrally located and adjacent to a Muni Metro station, to reduce travel time and increase time spent conducting inspections. SFMTA subsequently discontinued the “police district” model and surge deployments, revert- ing to line deployments that allowed SFMTA to schedule assignments based on ridership, resulting in better systemwide coverage. At the beginning of each month, SFMTA distributed a deployment calendar to fare inspectors listing the lines to be inspected each day. Fare inspectors were assigned lines to inspect during a shift, and their supervisors determined where they started

Case Studies A-75   on the line (e.g., inbound or outbound). Regardless of where a team of fare inspectors started on a line, they rode the entire line end-to-end. A team of fare inspectors could work both bus and rail in a single shift, and platform and onboard assignments could also be mixed into the deployment schedule. On light rail, fare inspectors generally conducted inspections on board but could also do in-station inspections on the mezzanine level inside of the Metro fare gates. Fare inspectors did not do any off-board fare inspections at surface bus or rail stops. However, with limited fare enforcement resources, SFMTA also considered fare evasion levels to maximize contacts and effectiveness. As a result, the number of fare inspectors doubled on some lines (e.g., lines operating on Mission Street) and fare enforcement coverage became less dispersed. The SFMTA began to see the effects of over-enforcing in some areas, resulting in underenforcement and lower fare compliance in other areas. As fare inspectors were deployed less frequently to routes with lower ridership and less fare evasion, fare evasion patterns shifted, moving to locations where passengers were less likely to encounter fare enforcement. SFMTA recognizes that there are trade-offs between maximizing the effectiveness of con- strained fare enforcement resources and ensuring fare enforcement is conducted equitably. The SFMTA mitigates equity concerns by using data on ridership, evasion rates, and excessive activity to categorize lines into “high” and “low” lines and deploying fare enforcement to an equivalent number of high and low lines each day, thereby building equity into the deployment strategy. The SFMTA covers 40 lines per week, making it possible to inspect every line within a 2-week period, including both high and low lines. When last deployed, fare enforcement was focused on lines with high ridership, and, while fare evasion patterns were considered, they did not drive deployment decisions. The SFMTA also recognizes that the very presence of fare inspectors may deter evasion, even if no citations are issued, suggesting that the presence alone of fare inspectors may be helping to achieve SFMTA’s enforcement objective: to improve fare compliance, possibly without issuing citations and collecting fines for fare violations. Reimagined Fare Enforcement Initially, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, SFMTA suspended fare inspection. Fare inspectors were redeployed to perform disaster response work, such as cleaning vehicles and preparing personal protective equipment kits. As fare inspectors return to fare enforcement in the fall of 2020, SFMTA has “reimagined” fare enforcement and reorganized the Proof- of-Payment Unit to allow fare inspectors to coordinate better with each other and with Muni operators, spend more time on vehicles, and cover more of the city. Fare inspectors have new “civilian-like” uniforms and prioritize visibility of fare inspectors and passenger fare compliance over enforcement. Citations will be issued as a last resort to passengers who refuse to pay their fare. The SFMTA is also considering offering enrollment in a discount fare program as an option to resolve fare evasion citations for qualified low-income individuals. The return to fare inspection is being phased and focuses on buses while Muni’s light rail services remain suspended. Fare inspectors are working with ambassadors to provide customer assistance and service information throughout the system. Ambassadors provide outreach, information, and customer education and information, serving as SFMTA’s “ambassadors” to the public. In the next phase, fare inspectors will return to buses and conduct fare inspections without issuing citations, explaining fare programs to passengers who have not paid, and engag- ing with operators and passengers about safety and well-being. In the last phase, fare inspectors will return to full fare inspection, including issuing citations but focusing on compliance and helping to ensure passengers have financial access to Muni. The SFMTA plans to enable indi viduals who are cited to get their first violation waived if they show they are enrolled in

A-76 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion a low-income fare program, such as Clipper START, Lifeline Pass, or Free Muni for youth/ seniors/people with disabilities within 30 days of receiving a citation. Rather than working in groups of two, fare inspectors are working in teams of three. The fare inspector teams start at the beginning of the line or a rest stop and ride all or a segment of the line, inspecting all passengers, rather than boarding at any stop along the line. One fare inspector checks on the operator while the other two ride alongside passengers for customer support and to provide fare compliance reminders. Fare inspectors have handouts to provide to passengers about SFMTA’s discounted fare programs. Fare inspectors ask passengers to tap or provide proof of payment on boarding instead of during the course of the trip, avoiding mid-trip delays caused by removing a passenger with- out proof of payment. Periodically and on a random schedule, SFMTA conducts inspections of all passengers on board a vehicle. The SFMTA will continue to use data and a combination of metrics to deploy fare inspectors. Fare inspectors are returning to covering 40 lines per week, which allows every line in the Muni system to be inspected within a 2-week period. Fare Enforcement Data Collection Handheld devices have been issued to SFMTA’s fare inspectors to electronically validate Clipper cards during fare checks. The devices are not currently used to collect data to monitor fare evasion patterns, but those are requirements for the next generation of the Clipper system. Data from the Clipper handhelds are reported internally to SFMTA management, including estimates of the number of inspections conducted and the fare evasion rate. For the mobile app, MuniMobile, fare checks are conducted visually. The SFMTA tracks the total number of inspections completed and citations issued. Although the total number of inspections is reported, it is not tied to specific lines or locations. To under- stand fare evasion trends, SFMTA uses a database of citations issued (the database does not include verbal warnings). The database retains information such as the line and location where a citation was issued and the name, address, and driver’s license number of the individual cited. The database is used to analyze citations although not necessarily to identify repeat offenders. The SFMTA does not collect demographic data when citing so demographic data are not available. The SFMTA has had internal discussions about different ways to use fare inspectors, and whether some populations are being cited disproportionately, but SFMTA has not reached a formal direction about how to address those concerns sensitively. Citations and Penalties In 2006, the City and County of San Francisco, in conjunction with the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LA Metro), lobbied successfully to change state law to allow LA Metro and SFMTA to issue an administrative citation as an alternative to a criminal citation for adults receiving transit-related violations, most commonly for fare evasion. California SB 1749 permitted Muni and LA Metro to impose and enforce administrative penalties. With this change, the processing of transit violation citations for adults shifted from the superior court to SFMTA, similar to the parking tickets also handled by SFMTA. Subsequently, in September 2007, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors amended sections of the San Francisco Traffic Code (which is now part of the San Francisco Transportation Code). The amended sections include Section 127, “Fare Evasion Regulations,” Section 128, “Passenger Conduct Regulations,” and related “Penalty and Other Fare Evasion and Passenger Conduct” regulations. In addition to revisions made under authority provided by the Public Utilities Code, the amendments clarified the definition of proof of payment.

Case Studies A-77   Effective February 2008, fare evasion was decriminalized for adults with the objectives of reducing the severity of the punishment, reducing the number of fare evasion citations on traffic court dockets, and increasing the collection of fine revenue. Handling the fare citations admin- istratively in-house enables SFMTA to minimize encounters of cited individuals with the court system, offer a reduced penalty for early payment, and implement a lower effective fine because it does not include court fees. Before decriminalizing fare evasion, the adult fine, including court fees, totaled $123.97 and the bulk of the fine was kept by the court. With the implementation of an administrative process for adjudicating fare evasion, the civil penalty for fare evasion on Muni was reduced to a $50 administrative fine for adults and, as a consequence of Assembly Bill 426, all citation revenue goes to SFMTA. Assembly Bill 426, which requires fines and fees to be deposited with the transit agency instead of the county general fund, was passed in 2016 to encourage transit agencies to adopt administrative penalties for fare violations. Fare violations remained criminal penalties for youth and were processed by juvenile courts until 2016 when the legislature decriminalized fare evasion for youth and SFMTA reduced the fine for fare violations by youth to $56. Since July 1, 2019, the fine for fare evasion has been $125 for adults and $64 for youth. The SFMTA does not have a policy for escalating fare evasion penalties for repeat offenders and has put off developing one in the absence of a capability to make data about warnings and citations available to fare inspectors writing citations in the field. Without access to this informa- tion, fare inspectors are unable to determine whether an individual has previously been warned or cited. The SFMTA is considering how to develop an app that would provide data on warnings and citations to fare inspectors. The SFMTA’s parking control officers are using an application to issue parking citations using a ruggedized smartphone. Through an option in the contract, the parking system’s vendor is developing a transit application to process and track warnings and citations for fare violations and to provide access for fare inspectors to an individual’s citation history. As envisioned, the app would run on the same system as the parking enforcement app, using the same ruggedized smartphone. This solution would require fare inspectors to carry the smartphone used for parking enforcement as well as the Clipper fare checking device and a Bluetooth printer. If it is implemented, this approach would enable the policy discussions that have been deferred. Citations that are not paid promptly are forwarded to the Bureau of Delinquent Revenue in the City and County of San Francisco’s Treasurer’s Office for collections. Collections were previ- ously handled by a third-party citation processing vendor, but the Treasurer’s Office prefers not to contract work that can be done by City employees and offered to take it on for SFMTA. The Treasurer’s Office does not garnish or file claims against people but can encourage them to set up a payment plan or perform community service (see Diversion Programs, below). In California, government agencies can collect outstanding debts from members of the public by intercepting tax refunds through the Franchise Tax Board. Individuals must be notified and given 30 days to respond and request a hearing. Taking funds in this way requires correctly identifying the individual by name, address, social security number, and driver’s license number. Because individuals cited for fare evasion often do not provide an ID and the fare inspector cannot compel them to provide the information, the Bureau of Delinquent Revenue often does not have the necessary information to forward a claim to the Franchise Tax Board. Diversion Programs The SFMTA recognizes the need to strike a balance between aggressive fare enforcement and understanding that sometimes individuals are trying to get to work and cannot afford to pay the fare, much less the fine, and that in those cases it is more important to offer alternative resolution options for handling fare evasion citations. The SFMTA has developed a diversion program that

A-78 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion accepts community service as an alternative to paying a fine and offers payment plans and an appeals process. (These alternative options are discussed in detail below.) In 2016, changes were made to adjust service hours credit to be consistent with minimum wage requirements and to eliminate pre-payment requirements for certain fees. In January 2018, Assembly Bill 503 was passed, setting requirements for payment plans for low-income passengers. Community Service Program The SFMTA community service program is an option to perform community service instead of paying transit or parking citations. Community service program hours must be completed within defined timelines, based on the citation amount. Enrollees have the option to make partial payments on the remaining amount due if they are unable to complete their hours. Failure to complete the community service plan in the time allotted will result in plan cancellation. Indi- viduals can enroll in a maximum of two payment plans and have a maximum of $1,000 in fines and penalties per calendar year. Participants’ community service hourly service credits are set at San Francisco’s minimum wage rate, $15 for every hour of community service completed. Individuals enrolling in a community service plan must pay an enrollment fee based on the total penalty amount due for citations enrolled in the plan, as shown in Table A-2. Recent changes to the community service program reduced the processing fees for all partici- pants and increased the allowable time for completion of the largest citation amounts enrolled. Low-income individuals with a gross annual income at or below 200% of the Federal Poverty Level are granted one enrollment fee waiver per calendar year. Proof of income is required, such as a current Lifeline, Medi-Cal, or EBT card, WIC benefits app on a mobile phone, or a benefits letter from the Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing. Individuals not partici- pating in any of the programs may certify their eligibility, with the understanding that SFMTA may request documentation to verify income. The SFMTA contracts with a third-party administrator to manage the program, which includes setting requirements for participating organizations. Interested organizations contact SFMTA and are referred to the administrator for review and enrollment. Normally 50–60 organizations are available to individuals who choose to perform community service, but about half of them (as of summer 2020) are closed as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Fifty percent of commu- nity service hours associated with the citations included on an application must be completed with SFMTA or the San Francisco Department of Public Works, which may include manual labor in inclement weather; a waiver for this requirement may be issued to any participant with a disability or physical limitation. The rest of the required hours can be completed with an approved San Francisco nonprofit agency. Payment Plan Individuals with outstanding transit and parking citations can enroll in a monthly payment plan. Enrolled individuals must pay an enrollment fee of $25 and make minimum monthly Citation Amount Enrolled ($) Timeline for Completion (weeks) Enrollment Fee ($) 50–300 10 6 301–600 14 52 601–1,000 18 77 Source: San Francisco Transportation Code Section 311. Community Service and Payment Plan Processing Fees. Table A-2. SFMTA community service timelines and fees.

Case Studies A-79   payments based on the total amount of the citations enrolled. The timeline for completion is also based on the total amount enrolled (see Table A-3). A current plan must be completed before entering a new one. A low-income payment plan added in 2018 reduces the enrollment fee to $5 for individuals whose gross household incomes are at or below 200% of the Federal Poverty Level. Any late penalties are removed at the time of enrollment but are reinstated if the plan is not completed by the due date. There is no limit to the number of payment plans or total fine amounts for low-income payment plans. The reforms are a result of recommendations by the San Francisco Fines and Fees Task Force to alleviate the burden of fines, fees, and tickets on low-income San Franciscans. In 2020, the standard payment plan timelines were simplified in San Francisco Transporta- tion Code Section 311, consolidating five tiers into just two tiers, as shown in Table A-3. Appeals Process State law provides for a three-step appeals process available to individuals who wish to contest a citation. It includes an administrative review conducted by SFMTA staff, an administrative hearing conducted by independent hearing officers, and the opportunity to appeal to the supe- rior court. Fare Evasion Studies In 2009, before the implementation of all-door boarding and proof-of-payment fare enforce- ment on Muni buses, SFMTA conducted a proof-of-payment study in response to anecdotal concerns that a quarter to a third of passengers boarding through back doors could be evading fares. The survey objective was to determine the magnitude of fare evasion, assess the finan- cial and operational impacts of fare payment patterns, and assist in efficiently and effectively deploying fare inspectors. Since then, SFMTA has conducted four more surveys to evaluate the effectiveness of the fare enforcement program. Following two smaller pre-implementation surveys in 2010 and 2012, SFMTA conducted a survey in 2014 to determine how all-door boarding had affected fare compliance and concluded that the fare evasion rate had not materially changed with the implementation of all-door board- ing. The four audits conducted before 2019 reported generally stable fare evasion rates before Amount Owed ($) Timeline for Completion Minimum Monthly Payment Due ($) Standard Plan—$25 Enrollment Fee 50–500 12 weeks 25 ≥501 16 weeks 50 Low-Income Plan—$5 Enrollment Fee ≤500 Up to 24 months 25 ≥501 Up to 24 months 50 Note: Proof of eligibility for the Low-income Plan includes current Lifeline, Medi-Cal, or EBT card, WIC benefits app on mobile phone, unemployment benefits, a benefits letter from the Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing, or certification of annual income requirements (may require submission of recent tax returns or other documentation). Source: San Francisco Transportation Code § 311—Community Service and Payment Plan Processing Fees. Table A-3. SFMTA payment plan timelines and monthly payment amounts.

A-80 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion and after implementing all-door boarding systemwide, as shown in Table A-4. The most recent survey, conducted in 2019, was designed to provide data needed to diagnose the reasons for and the impact of fare evasion, to determine how to recover fare revenue losses. For the 2019 survey, SFMTA developed a sampling plan that included all of Muni’s services, lines, and times of the day. As for the 2014 survey, SFMTA hired a consultant to assist with developing the sampling plan, improve the objectivity of the analysis, and ensure that the survey was defensible. The plan called for 384 samples for each line, to provide a 95% confidence level systemwide, with each line weighted based on ridership. Coverage was lower on lines with lighter ridership, such that they might achieve only a 90% confidence level, due to the higher level of effort required to get 384 samples on lines with less ridership. Surveyors were given a daily sample plan that identified the day of the week, time of day, line, location on line, and vehicle to be surveyed. Once the survey was underway, periodic check-ins were conducted. The results were reviewed after 25% of the samples were complete, and again at other points in the course of the survey. As results became available, they quickly converged on the final result, increasing confidence in the survey and its results. The SFMTA’s 2019 survey method relied on a blank-slate survey approach, making no assumptions about how, where, and when fare evasion occurs. Survey teams, which included two fare inspectors and two survey takers, were charged with checking and recording fares and identifying and recording passenger behaviors, such as passengers leaving a vehicle upon seeing a fare inspector. Fare inspectors wore their uniforms when participating in surveys, in part because uniforms give them the authority to request proof of payment; survey takers were in plain clothes. Because fare inspectors were in uniform, ride-along enforcement evasion rates were impacted as some passengers paid only when they noticed a fare inspector. Survey teams traveled throughout the transit system during all times of day, checking all passengers on a vehicle or passing through a checkpoint in a station’s fare-paid area. Survey takers did not collect demographic data because those data would not affect fare enforcement. Teams employed two observation methods, point checks, and ride-alongs. For point checks, a survey team boarded a vehicle after all passengers had boarded. Team members boarded through both doors and one fare inspector and one survey taker worked from the front while the other fare inspector and survey taker worked from the back, meeting in the middle. Fare inspectors also observed passenger behavior and tried to capture and record nuances, such as fare under- payment and the number of people who left a vehicle upon seeing a fare inspector. Usually, at least one team member spoke Spanish or Chinese to assist passengers in those languages. Table A-4. Results of SFMTA fare evasion study. Year Sample Sizea Evasion Rate (%) Margin of Error 2009 41,239 9.5 95% ± 0.3% 2010 11,939 8.6 95% ± 0.5% 2012b 9,162 8.4 95% ± 0.6% 2014 b 42,539 7.9 95% ± 0.2% 2019 27,006 12.8 95% ± 0.4% aTo maintain methodological consistency between the 2009 and 2014 surveys and to avoid double- counting with light rail vehicle observations, subway station observations are excluded when calculating the systemwide fare evasion rate. bSFMTA launched all-door boarding on July 1, 2012. The 2012 survey took place in the spring just before implementation. The 2014 survey also took place in the spring 2 years later and enabled SFMTA to gauge the fare evasion impacts of all-door boarding.

Case Studies A-81   Point checks have had some limitations, especially for a survey intended to support efforts to estimate revenue losses. Survey teams could not determine whether passengers who displayed a valid transfer or fare receipt had paid the appropriate fare, and they could not distinguish which passengers had entered through the back door. Some fare types were missed and there were prob- lems recognizing underpayment because all paper transfers at the time of the surveys looked the same for all fare categories and passengers who underpaid were still issued transfers. In addition, paper transfers were torn in ways that made it difficult to determine the expiration time. To better understand issues encountered in point checks and passenger behaviors such as underpayment, observation survey teams completed a point check and occasionally (about a third of the time) continued to ride along for several stops. Survey teams on ride-alongs watched passengers pay fares and relied on farebox responses (beeps) to determine whether the fare was paid. If the farebox did not beep, the fare inspector could check to see how much was underpaid. The SFMTA has addressed many of these issues with the newer fareboxes that print on the receipt a code identifying the date and time that the receipt was issued and the amount paid in the event of a short fare. These changes have simplified visual inspections by fare inspectors and addressed situations where previously the operator may have issued a transfer for a short fare to minimize conflict. Sound Transit The Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority (Sound Transit) builds and operates regional transit services throughout the urban areas of Pierce, King, and Snohomish Counties in Washington. Transit services include Link light rail, Sounder commuter rail, ST Express Bus, and Tacoma Link light rail. Sound Transit services other than the Tacoma Link system are operated and maintained by transit agency partners based on the areas served. Tacoma Link is operated directly by Sound Transit. In early 2019, Sound Transit convened an internal interdisciplinary workgroup to review the agency’s approach to and implementation of fare enforcement. The workgroup’s final recom- mendations were published in March 2020. Sound Transit (Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority), Seattle, WA Overview of Agency Sound Transit contracts and oversees regional express bus, light rail, and commuter rail services operating in the Seattle region. Fare Collection Overview Passengers on Link light rail and Sounder commuter rail are expected to either use their ORCA card, the regional smart card, to tap on and off at wayside validators to calculate and charge them the appropriate distance-based fare for the trip, or purchase an appropriate fare from a FVM or the Transit GO Ticket mobile app before boarding. Bus passengers can pay by tapping their ORCA card when boarding, using cash at the farebox or presenting a virtual ticket on the Transit GO Ticket mobile app. Tacoma Link light rail is free. Definition of Fare Evasion Fare evasion is defined as “failure to pay fare,” and “failure to produce proof of payment,” including “a validated fare payment card.” This means that even if passengers have a valid pass if they do not tap their card, they are considered to be evading fare. “Failure to depart the bus or other mode of public transportation when requested” is also a citable offense. Both are defined under the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 81.112.220. (continued on next page)

A-82 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion Sound Transit (Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority), Seattle, WA (Continued ) Fare Enforcement Technology and Capital Investments FEOs carry a ruggedized handheld device, which is used to check ORCA cards and also provides real-time access to the Sound Transit fare enforcement database that tracks prior fare evasion warnings and citations. The handheld is capable of reading an individual’s driver’s license to populate name, date of birth, and address information in the system for tracking warnings and citations and issuing the citations. Sound Transit is considering more distinctive signage and visual cues to demarcate fare-paid areas so that passengers better understand when they are entering a fare-paid area, making it more feasible to inspect fares on the platforms. Fare Enforcement Overview For rail, the Link light rail and Sounder commuter rail systems are barrier-free with fare enforcement based on proof of payment; contracted FEOs enforce fares on board the vehicles. Although conductors on commuter rail can request proof of payment, they generally do not do proof-of-payment inspections. On the bus, the operator is responsible for fare enforcement. Sound Transit contracts with three transit agencies to operate its regional bus services; each dictates its own processes and procedures for fare enforcement on buses. Fare Enforcement Personnel Sound Transit uses contracted FEOs who are monitored directly by Sound Transit staff. The FEOs are authorized to request proof of payment and issue both warnings and citations for fare evasion. Conductors on commuter rail may ask for proof of payment but cannot issue a warning or citation to a passenger who does not have the fare. Fare Enforcement Deployment FEOs conduct fare enforcement on Sound Transit rail services. Fare inspections mainly occur on board vehicles. Under the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 81.112.220, Sound Transit has the authority to enforce fares in ‘’fare paid areas.” However, Sound Transit does not conduct platform inspections even though platforms are designated fare-paid areas and denoted by signs. FEOs are deployed on light rail during all hours of operations and on commuter rail during peak weekday periods. FEOs begin at a central point in their zone, then work their way to the end of the zone and back. Fare Citation Practice Sound Transit’s fare evasion goals are education and behavior modification over punishment. Individuals without any fare evasion infractions within the previous 12 months are given a warning. Subsequent offenses within that period yield a citation and fine. Sound Transit is considering changing the number of allowable warnings to two in 12 months. Fare Evasion Penalties Sound Transit issues civil citations for fare evasion that are handled by the District Court. The fine is $124, which is paid entirely to the court. RCW 81.112.210 authorizes Sound Transit to establish a schedule of fines and penalties for civil infractions for fare evasion. Based on recent community engagement efforts and an internal review of fare enforcement, Sound Transit plans to reduce the fine from $124 to $50 and is exploring the possibility of collaborating with the King County District Court to set up a community court at Sound Transit to facilitate access to the legal system, alternative citation resolution options, and broader support services. The District Court adjudicates citations and decides on the result, which may be payment, community service, reduction in the fine, etc. Unpaid fines are sent to collections by the court.

Case Studies A-83   Fare Enforcement Personnel Sound Transit’s Public Safety Office is responsible for fare enforcement on all of Sound Transit’s commuter and light rail. RCW 81.112.210 authorizes Sound Transit to designate personnel, including contracted personnel, to exercise all the powers of an “enforcement officer,” as defined in RCW 7.80.040. RCW 81.112.210 also authorizes those designated personnel to request proof of payment from passengers, request personal ID from a passenger who does not produce proof of payment when requested and issue a civil notice of infraction established in RCW 81.112.220. Fare enforcement for buses is managed by the three service providers who operate the bus lines on behalf of Sound Transit. Enforcement is done by the operator as passengers board through the front door and pay at the farebox. Each of the service-providing agencies dictates its processes and procedures for fare enforcement; the Sound Transit Public Safety Office has no visible role. Sound Transit uses FEOs, who are contracted personnel, for fare enforcement on Link light rail and Sounder commuter rail services. These FEOs are a specialized unit within the broader, contracted security unit under the purview of the Sound Transit Public Safety Office, which has direct oversight over the FEOs. These FEOs are specifically and solely eligible to conduct fare enforcement on behalf of Sound Transit. State law regulates the appointment of enforce- ment officers, who become authorized by the County District Court to file citations. If there are changes to an FEO’s responsibilities or new FEOs are to be appointed, a formal memo request must be made to the District Court to effect the change. Sound Transit’s Public Safety Operations Team meets weekly with its contracted Security Management Team, which includes the FEOs. This meeting is to review any issues that come up and any projected issues or needs for the future. The meetings ensure that everyone is on the same page about expectations. The interdisciplinary workgroup has discussed the possibility of changing FEOs’ uniforms to create a more approachable appearance compared to today’s more tactical look. However, because the higher priority goals of the FEO role are to provide customer support and ensure safety, the current uniforms have been deemed an asset rather than a detriment and will con- tinue to be used. Although Sounder commuter rail has conductors who may ask for proof of payment, they cannot issue a warning or a citation to a passenger without proof of payment. Consequently, the conductors on Sounder commuter rail generally do not conduct proof-of-payment inspec- tions or ask passengers for proof of payment. Instead, they focus on making announcements, answering passenger questions, dealing with broader safety issues, and fulfilling the other duties of being a conductor. Sound Transit also contracts with the King County Sheriff’s Office, whose deputies respond to assist FEOs in any situations that involve ID issues or criminal acts. King County Sheriff Officers are authorized by Sound Transit to formally suspend a person from being on Sound Transit property or using the transit system. Customer Service Approach FEOs have three responsibilities: customer service, security of the passengers and train, and inspection and enforcement of fares. Officers are instructed that customer service is their number one priority, followed by security and then inspection and enforcement. This philosophy extends to interactions between FEOs and passengers who are found without valid proof of pay- ment. FEOs are instructed to help individuals who have not been warned or cited within the past

A-84 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion 12 months to properly understand the fare system. This practice is a manifestation of the policy of giving passengers the benefit of the doubt on their first fare evasion offense. Deployments, Scheduling, and Assignments Link light rail operates 20 hours per day, 7 days per week, and FEOs are scheduled for all hours of revenue service. The specifics of scheduling are handled by the contractor, but there is an expectation that there will be a heavier presence of FEOs on the system in the AM/PM commute times and during peak evasion times like early evening. Coverage is lighter during nonpeak hours, but there is always an FEO presence. It is expected that when a planned second light rail line begins operation in 2024, the existing fare enforcement processes will be extended to that line. Sounder commuter rail has daily coverage during peak commute times, for approxi- mately seven to eight runs in both the morning and evening and does not have full coverage during other hours. However, a conductor is present on all commuter rail runs. The Link light rail line is split into five zones. Sound Transit does not deploy FEOs for tar- geted fare checks even in instances of suspected fare evasion. Instead, they are pre-assigned to a specific zone(s) throughout their shift for set periods to prevent them from unintentionally concentrating in a single area. Additionally, FEOs communicate via radio which trains they are inspecting or have inspected to avoid FEOs boarding and inspecting a train that was just inspected in the preceding zone. The zone descriptions are also useful for purposes of commu- nication with public safety personnel including police and fire departments, which enable safety departments to easily identify a location requiring their response. During times when fewer FEOs are working, they may be assigned to more than one zone to cover more of the system. The FEOs work in pairs, except in rare cases where they may work in a group of three because of the presence of a trainee or if someone calls in sick. Sound Transit has established clear SOPs for fare enforcement, which cover all areas of staff- ing and implementation. On Link light rail, FEOs begin at a central point within their zone and work their way to the end of their assigned zone and back. This has been deemed the most efficient way to complete an enforcement circuit and avoid bias. Fare checks are performed on board in methodical sweeps through each car to reduce the opportunity for personal bias in the inspection process. The FEOs randomly select a train and car for inspection, but typically it is the first train that arrives. Once passengers have alighted or boarded the train, and just before the doors close, the FEOs board the train. After the FEOs board the train and the doors close, they announce that they will be checking fares, and the two of them separate and walk to oppo- site ends of the car. As the FEOs walk to the end of the car, they have an opportunity to answer questions or help passengers with anything before beginning a proof-of-payment inspection. Once at the end of the car, they begin their inspections with the first passenger in the last row. They then work their way to the middle of the car until they meet in the middle. Once they have completed their inspections in the car, they disembark at the next stop. Sounder commuter rail operates peak period/peak direction service between Seattle/Tacoma and Seattle/Everett. Fare inspection is conducted on board only. Sound Transit requires that each commuter trip be inspected at least once a week. Because the Sounder has a limited number of total trips in a day, all trains need to see an FEO on a regular but random basis. Typically, one officer works during the morning commute and two officers during the evening, although the squad is flexible, allowing individual FEOs to adjust their schedules to meet the weekly work plan. Each FEO submits a work plan to the Sounder squad supervisor, who ensures that the FEO is not forming a pattern with their inspection routines and the work plan satisfies overall inspection requirements. Once approved, the FEO works the plan as detailed and reports any deviations to the supervisor.

Case Studies A-85   During the inspection, the FEO boards the train, informs the conductor that fare enforcement will be occurring on that trip, and then starts inspecting at one end of the train. The FEO moves from one end of the train to the other, beginning by inspecting the fare of the first passenger in that path and continuing to inspect every passenger in order until encountering a fare evader. Interruption of inspection occurs only when an FEO contacts an evader or addresses a security issue. Otherwise, the FEO continues through both levels of each car until the entire car has been inspected and repeats the process on the remaining cars. The fare enforcement process does not formally change for special events. Although staffing does increase for some special events, the focus is on customer support and safety, including security and crowd control, rather than fare enforcement. Fare-Paid Areas Under RCW 81.112.220, Sound Transit has the authority to enforce fares in fare-paid areas in a transit facility. The Code requires that “signage must be conspicuously posted at the place of boarding or within 10 feet of the nearest entrance to a transit facility that clearly indicates: (a) The locations where tickets or fare media may be purchased; and (b) that a person using an electronic fare payment card must present the card to an electronic card reader before entering a transit vehicle or before entering a restricted fare paid area.” Currently, Sound Transit does not conduct platform inspections for two reasons. First, limit- ing inspections to on board vehicles facilitates efficiency in boarding and maintains headways between trains. Second, although Sound Transit has fare-paid areas denoted by signs and fares could be enforced in these paid areas, the current signage and markings are easily missed. Thus, it would be difficult for FEOs to determine whether an individual on the platform is accidentally in the area without proof of payment or actively intending to evade fare. In addition, in the past, fare enforcement on the platform in the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel was complicated by the mixed transit services using the Tunnel before the removal of buses in March 2019. To enable proof-of-payment inspections in fare-paid areas and on platforms, Sound Transit is considering more distinctive indicators and better signage, such as visual barriers, that make it more clear that a passenger is entering the fare-paid area, along with more strategically placed ORCA readers and FVMs, as shown in Figure A-4. In the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel, Sound Transit would also need to remove validators on platforms that had been installed to accommodate passengers who may have decided last minute to take Link light rail instead of a bus before March 2019. Source: Sound Transit. Figure A-4. Sound Transit proposal for enhanced fare-paid area design.

A-86 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion Fare Enforcement Personnel Training FEOs must complete training before being sent out into the field. Initial hire training and most follow-up training are conducted by the contractor, not Sound Transit, although the Sound Transit Public Safety Office does have input and insight into the training process. Most individuals who become FEOs are selected and promoted from within the existing staff on the security contract. Whether hired directly as an FEO or promoted from within, the new hires must complete 40 hours of administrative training and 120 hours of field training. This training includes anti-bias and de-escalation techniques, educating passengers on using the system, and Sound Transit’s fare enforcement SOPs. Most continuing training is scheduled, developed, and administered by the contractor. The Sound Transit Public Safety Office provides input on what specific topics or areas of responsibility need attention based on current trends or issues. For example, earlier in 2020, Sound Transit partnered with King County to conduct training for FEOs on how to deal with unsheltered individuals. Sound Transit has also started hosting “Unconscious Bias Awareness” training for FEOs twice annually. Sound Transit is pursuing specific training opportunities for FEOs that focus on interactions with youth. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, Sound Transit had made arrangements to host a training with Strategies for Youth, a policy and training organization dedicated to improving police/youth interactions through community engagement, police training, outreach programs for youth, and proactive use of multidisciplinary approaches to problem-solve and build rela- tionships between police and youth. Although this training has been postponed due to the pan- demic, Sound Transit intends to reschedule the event. Fare Enforcement’s Impact on Fare Evasion and Passenger Safety Sound Transit’s targeted inspection rate is 8% of ridership, which is what the agency has determined will keep the fare evasion rate below the stated goal of 3%. Sound Transit has been able to observe a direct relationship between the number of fare inspections performed and the level of fare evasion by tracking these statistics through onboard surveys over the past decade. Generally, when fare inspections are decreased for some reason (e.g., staffing, illness, other events) evasion increases but with a lag time of approximately 6 weeks. A similar, opposite effect has been seen when inspections are increased; evasion decreases within a similar time frame of about 6 weeks. From onboard surveys related to fare evasion, the Sound Transit Public Safety Office has also drawn a direct correlation between the amount of visible fare enforcement presence and pas- senger perceptions of safety. Thus, increased FEO presence is also deemed essential to making passengers feel safe while riding the system. Calculating the Costs of Fare Evasion Sound Transit tracks monthly and annual estimates of financial losses due to fare evasion using a standard loss prevention formula to determine loss per transaction, defined as: loss per transaction = average fare per boarding ∗ evasion rate For example, if the average fare per boarding is $1.50 and the evasion rate is 3%, then the formula would specify that the loss per transaction is $1.50 × 3% = $0.045. Thus, it estimates that 4.5 cents per fare paid are lost to evasion. The average fare per boarding accounts for all fare categories (e.g., full-fare adult and reduced fares).

Case Studies A-87   When the loss per transaction is multiplied by total ridership, it provides Sound Transit with an estimate of the total revenue loss due to fare evasion. For example, if light rail’s annual rider- ship was 25 million passengers per year, then Sound Transit would multiply $0.045 (from above) by 25,000,000 to get an estimated loss of $1,125,000 due to fare evasion for that year. Further analysis compares the estimate to actuals and compares Sound Transit’s figures to industry-standard averages (5% to 7% is typical for light rail) and extremes (9% is very high for light rail). Comparing the revenue lost due to fare evasion based on the current evasion rate and industry-standard averages and extremes enables Sound Transit to understand the fare revenue contribution of its proactive fare enforcement program. Sound Transit accounts for its distinct modes by using the particular average fare per board- ing and evasion rate that applies to each mode. The agency can then multiply these losses per transaction by the mode-specific ridership numbers to get estimates of revenue losses due to fare evasion by mode. Fare Evasion Citation Issuance and Resolution “Failure to pay fare,” “failure to produce proof of payment . . . including . . . a validated fare payment card,” and “failure to depart the bus or other mode of public transportation when requested” are citable offenses according to the RCW 81.112.220. This means that even if passengers have a valid pass if they do not tap their card, they are considered to be evading fare. RCW 81.112.220 identifies the following as civil infractions: failure to pay the required fare, failure to produce proof of payment “including . . . the failure to produce a validated fare pay- ment card,” and failure to depart the facility “when requested . . . by a person designated to monitor fare payment.” RCW 81.112.210 authorizes Sound Transit to establish a schedule of fines and penalties for these civil infractions, while RCW 7.80 establishes a system for civil infractions for minor offenses. In 2009, the Sound Transit Board of Directors adopted Resolu- tion 2009-02: Rail Fare Enforcement Policy to direct the chief executive officer to implement procedures to enforce fare payment on Sound Transit’s barrier-free rail systems. Sound Transit is considering revisions to this policy, based on the recommendations of its Workgroup Fare Enforcement Action Plan. FEOs are instructed to help fare evaders who have not been warned or cited within the past 12 months to properly understand the fare system. When a passenger is found without proof of payment, the FEO requests proof of ID and scans the driver’s license using their handheld device to pull their name, date of birth, and address. The FEO then checks whether the indi- vidual has a prior warning or citation in the past 12 months using Sound Transit’s proprietary fare enforcement database. If the individual has received a warning or citation in the past 12 months, the FEO issues a citation using the handheld device and connected Bluetooth printer. The fare evasion citation indicates where the individual was found evading fare and the type of fare evasion. Fare evasion citations issued by Sound Transit are civil infractions that are handled by the District Court. The District Court adjudicates the citation and decides on the result, whether it is payment, community service, a reduced fine, etc. Sound Transit establishes the fines and penalties for fare evasion; however, the fines estab- lished cannot exceed those imposed for Class 1 infractions. Although Sound Transit sets the fine, Sound Transit does not receive any of the revenue collected from paid fines. This choice was intentional because Sound Transit did not want any perception that fare evasion citations serve as a source of revenue for the agency. Instead, the fine is meant as a tool to modify behavior and encourage fare payment. Unpaid fines are sent to collections by the court.

A-88 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion Sound Transit does not track whether fines have been paid because fines are paid to the District Court. However, Sound Transit can request these data as needed from the court and has done so recently as part of a workgroup effort to evaluate fares and fare evasion. Equity in Fare Enforcement Sound Transit has endeavored to make its fare enforcement process as free from bias and discrimination as possible. The inspection process that FEOs employ provides little opportunity for bias in the enforcement process. All Link light rail vehicles have camera systems, enabling the agency to observe deviations from the scripted enforcement process if they occur, as well as to assist with investigating any complaints. Sound Transit tracks and audits fare evasion warnings and citations at a system level and down to individual FEOs to monitor for any indications of bias. Sound Transit also uses citation data to track the race/ethnicity demographics of passengers who are issued fare evasion cita- tions. The Washington State–issued citation format is used by all types of enforcement agencies throughout the state and includes five race/ethnicity categories to select from: Black, White, Asian, Hispanic, and Indian (Native American). FEOs use a script when necessary to ask for this demographic information if it is not apparent, and the script explains why they are asking for this information and allows the passenger to self-identify. Sound Transit has seen a higher proportion of African American fare evaders than is reflected in the demographics of the city, and the theory is that this derives from access to fares. The workgroup effort to review fare inspection and enforcement practices, discussed in the text box below, has also identified, through analyzing the Sounder commuter rail onboard survey, that evasion rates appear to vary by both race/ethnicity and income. The workgroup assessed these issues to determine potential remedies, including better communication, reducing fines, or setting up a community court at Sound Transit. The results of these assessments and the recommendations for near-term action are detailed in the text box below. Sound Transit Fare Enforcement Action Plan In 2019 and early 2020, a workgroup performed a thorough review of Sound Transit’s current inspection and enforcement practices. The interdisciplinary workgroup included representatives from Passenger Experience, Public Safety (Operations), Equity and Inclusion (including Title VI), Research and Innovation, Finance, Government and Community Relations, Business/Labor Compliance, Communications, Legal, Office of the CEO, and Operations. According to the 2020 Sound Transit Fare Enforcement Action Plan, the mission of the workgroup was to “understand the impacts of our current program and develop recommendations that provide an equitable and customer-focused experience, including safety for all riders and integrity of decision-making, while ensuring strong financial stewardship of taxpayer dollars.” The workgroup translated the vision, mission, and objectives into criteria that could be used to evaluate and prioritize proposals and recommendations. To assist the workgroup, Sound Transit conducted outreach efforts to collect feedback and information from relevant stakeholders, including passengers, the broader Puget Sound community, and FEOs. Outreach tactics included an onboard survey, an online survey, and community conversations. The workgroup used the outreach data collected regarding fares, fare evasion, and fare enforcement to inform possible strategies to address the issues identified and presented a Fare Enforcement Action Plan to the Sound Transit Board in March 2020. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Board postponed taking action on adopting the Action Plan until the Governor’s executive order restricting actions at public meetings (due to the pandemic) expires. As of late 2020, Sound Transit is continuing to refine its work plan for implementing the Action Plan.

Case Studies A-89   Sound Transit Fare Enforcement Action Plan (Continued) The Fare Enforcement Action Plan presented in March 2020 included the following proposals for near-term implementation (i.e., within the next year): 1. Expand communications and targeted education about (Sound Transit) ST fare enforcement process and how to use your ORCA card. The workgroup recommended expanded communications and targeted education to help passengers better understand how to access and use available fare media using marketing communications and public education efforts. Topics for targeted education include why it is important to tap even if you have an employer or school-paid ORCA card, why there is a fare enforcement program, what a barrier-free system is, public service announcements, and changes to the current fare enforcement program. 2. Participate in an income-based fare program for a 2-year pilot. In February 2020, the King County Council approved an income-based fare program for King County Metro that would provide free bus passes to all qualifying residents in King County with incomes at or below 80% of the federal poverty level. King County, in partnership with community leaders and members who are experiencing poverty, developed the proposed program. As part of the implementation of the Sound Transit Fare Enforcement Action Plan, the workgroup recommended that Sound Transit participate in the 2-year pilot program. As part of the program, participants would receive fully subsidized, no-cost annual transit passes for use on transit services operated by Sound Transit and King County Metro and could use the ORCA card that they are issued to receive discounted fares on other regional transit services. 3. Expand access to ORCA LIFT and other programs for passengers with limited income. The workgroup recommended increasing access and participation in existing programs serving low- income passengers (e.g., ORCA LIFT and discounted fares through the Human Services ticket program). Sound Transit already offers a Human Services ticket program that provides highly discounted fares to human service agencies for their very low-income clients, while its ORCA LIFT program provides discounted fares directly to qualified low-income passengers through the issuance of a reduced-fare ORCA smart card. However, Sound Transit would like to explore further efforts to help all passengers to be able to afford their transit fares. Since 2018, Sound Transit has incentivized passengers to sign up for the ORCA LIFT program by preloading the cards available at the Department of Social and Health Services offices with $10 in stored value. The workgroup recommended (1) extending the $10 pre-load program and possibly increasing the amount of money pre-loaded on the ORCA LIFT smart cards, and (2) working with the organizations participating in the Human Services ticket program to ensure they know that they can purchase day passes for Link light rail at a 90% discount to distribute to their clients. There are also additional potential considerations under this recommendation that can be found in the full Sound Transit Fare Enforcement Action Plan (https://www.soundtransit.org/st_sharepoint/download/sites/PRDA/ ActiveDocuments/Presentation%20-%20Fare%20Enforcement%2003-26-20.pdf). 4. Develop a youth-focused program. Interactions between fare enforcement and youth were an especially important topic in the feedback obtained by the workgroup. Online survey data showed support for unique resolution pathways and targeted education for youth passengers. In response, the workgroup recommended that FEOs focus on fare payment education, as opposed to fare evasion warnings or citations, at the beginning of the school year; that the agency reaches out to youth to get their input on what should be included in a youth program and for general communication purposes, especially in communities of color and those close to poverty; and that FEO training includes specialized training for youth interactions. There are also additional proposals and potential considerations under this recommendation that can be found in the full Sound Transit Fare Enforcement Action Plan, such as a separate fare evasion warning and citation resolution process for youth and youth ambassadors in schools. (continued on next page)

A-90 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion Sound Transit Fare Enforcement Action Plan (Continued) 5. Increase verbal warnings from one to two, in a 12-month period. Current Sound Transit SOPs state that warnings are valid for 12 months. The workgroup recommended (1) increasing the number of warnings issued to an individual from one to two within a 12-month period before a fare evasion citation is issued, and (2) changing the SOP so that individuals found without proof of payment and only given a warning are not asked to deboard. The workgroup believes this could lead to greater compliance and fewer fare evasion citations. 6. Reduce the cost of fines from $124 to $50. The original citation fine of not more than $124 was set to be in line with minor traffic infractions in the region, but it does not align with the cost of a parking ticket, which in Seattle ranges from $44 to $47. The workgroup recommended setting the fare evasion citation fine at $50 while the agency continues to explore whether the District Court allows early-pay incentives that would allow individuals cited for fare evasion to pay a reduced fine of $25 if paid within 30 days. 7. Review current training modules and SOPs to prioritize training in customer service, de-escalation, and anti-bias training. Sound Transit has an extensive list of current training topics for FEOs. The workgroup recommended continuously reviewing and updating the relevant SOPs and training plans. Enacting this recommendation would require updates to contracts, training, performance goals, and enhancing the budget for training because FEOs are contracted personnel. 8. Define parameters for times to suspend warnings and citations during severe weather. Under this recommendation, Sound Transit would avoid issuing fare evasion warnings and citations during times of extreme weather, particularly snow. King County Metro, another major transit provider in the region, already has a similar policy in place, believing that suspending the issuance of fare evasion warnings and citations under these conditions increases transit accessibility for passengers experiencing homelessness or other difficulties and increases safety by encouraging people to take transit to reach shelter rather than driving. 9. New resolution pathways through District Court. The workgroup recommended exploring whether fare evasion citations can be directed to a Seattle Community Court that resolves low-level, nonviolent cases. The Seattle Community Court differs from the traditional District Court process in that it seeks to identify and address the underlying challenges faced by citation recipients and connects individuals with support services during the adjudication process. The Community Court process would also enable judges to waive the fine and resolve a citation through alternate methods, such as enrolling in the ORCA LIFT low-income program. 10. Refine the role of fare enforcement officers to incorporate customer service more consistently into how FEOs perform core security and enforcement responsibilities. The workgroup recommended that Sound Transit revise FEOs’ job descriptions, training, and performance goals to better incorporate a customer service focus, track deployment and enforcement action (e.g., warning and citation) location patterns, and require FEOs to offer nonpaying passengers’ information about accessing fare media, including the ORCA LIFT low-income program. The agency is also considering actions to ensure that FEOs are more reflective demographically of Sound Transit’s passengers and the community served. 11. Evaluate and clarify the process for addressing bias or discrimination complaints. The workgroup recommended evaluating the current process for filing complaints or concerns about fare enforcement to standardize and update it to promote better tracking, investigation, and resolution of complaints. This recommendation would also promote methods of contacting customer service as well as Title VI investigations of fare enforcement activities.

Case Studies A-91   Sun Metro The Sun Metro Mass Transit Department, or Sun Metro, provides public transit services to the 250-square-mile area surrounding El Paso, Texas. Sun Metro is a department of the City of El Paso, the sixth largest city in Texas, situated across the Rio Grande from the Mexican city of Ciudad Juárez. Sun Metro operates fixed-route bus, BRT (branded as “Brio”), and streetcar services. The first of Sun Metro’s Brio lines opened in 2014 followed by two additional lines in 2019. A fourth line is under construction and is scheduled to open in late 2022. The city’s street- car system was launched in 2018 and features refurbished streetcars from the city’s historical streetcar system. When Sun Metro opened the Brio lines, there was an initial effort to make sure passengers understood how to use the service. Sun Metro educated passengers on how to use the TVMs and the transition to paying before boarding. Customer education materials included videos, fliers, and web presence. Sun Metro also stationed staff at Brio stops during the first few weeks. Access to Fares and Fare Payment Methods Sun Metro passengers have many options when paying their fares. Brio passengers are strongly encouraged to pay their fares before boarding. All Brio stations are equipped with TVMs, which accept cash and credit/debit cards. One-way tickets, as well as daily, weekly, and monthly passes, are all available at the TVMs. One-way tickets and daily passes are automatically activated when dispensed by the TVM, while weekly and monthly passes must be activated at a farebox on board any Sun Metro vehicle, including Brio BRT vehicles. When Brio operated as a proof-of-payment service, fare enforcement personnel could ask a passenger without valid proof of payment to purchase their fare at the onboard farebox. Initially, all TVM-issued tickets had to be activated at the farebox. Because Brio has all-door boarding, passengers would sometimes purchase their fare at the TVM and (intentionally or not) fail to activate their pass at the farebox. Sun Metro reconfigured the TVMs to activate one- way tickets and daily passes upon purchase to address this issue. Fares purchased at a TVM are also good on Sun Metro’s other services. In addition to the TVMs, cash is accepted on board all Sun Metro services. Passengers may also purchase their fares at Sun Metro’s transit centers, participating senior centers, by mail, and by using the onboard fareboxes. Recent Shift Away from Proof of Payment Sun Metro has recently shifted to have the BRT operator verify fares at the farebox, as opposed to continuing to operate as a proof-of-payment service. Although the system’s 10-minute head- ways make off-board fare collection critical to reducing dwell times, the dwell time impacts from moving from off-board fare payment with all-door boarding to front-door boarding is expected to be minimal. Operationally, Sun Metro believes that it will be easier to have the vehicle’s operator verify fares as passengers board than to use light-duty operators to conduct proof-of-payment fare inspections. Sun Metro still strongly encourages passengers to purchase their fares off board at a TVM rather than at the onboard farebox. Discussions are underway with Sun Metro’s planning team to add additional time to the schedules at main terminals to account for additional dwell time. The light-duty operators, who until recently were deployed to inspect fares, will be redeployed to major stops to help encourage pre-purchasing of fares at the TVMs and to help passengers use the TVMs as needed.

A-92 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion Sun Metro, El Paso, TX Overview of Agency Sun Metro is a department of the City of El Paso that operates bus, BRT, and streetcar services. Fare Collection Overview Passengers pay on board at the farebox on the bus or streetcar. For BRT, passengers can pay on board at the farebox or can purchase their fare at a TVM before boarding. All BRT stations are equipped with TVMs. Passengers can purchase fares for any of Sun Metro’s services at the BRT TVMs, Sun Metro transit centers, participating senior centers, and by mail. Definition of Fare Evasion All passengers are required to pay their fare. Fare Enforcement Overview Fare payment is observed by the operator at the time of boarding on bus, BRT, and streetcar. Before August 2020, BRT was a proof-of-payment system. The agency recently shifted to have BRT operators verify fares at the farebox instead of operating as a proof-of-payment system. Sun Metro plans to deploy light-duty operators to major stops to help encourage pre-purchasing of fares at the TVMs and to help passengers use the TVMs as needed. Fare Enforcement Personnel Fare payment is observed by operators at the time of boarding on bus, BRT, and streetcar. Before August 2020, light-duty operators approved for transitional duty (i.e., operators who are not currently eligible for vehicle operations) conducted fare inspections on BRT vehicles. Their only responsibility was to inspect fares. They were not intended to provide a customer service or safety presence. Light-duty operators were only authorized to request proof of payment, not to issue citations. Fare Enforcement Deployment Previously, light-duty operators were deployed, typically in pairs, on board BRT vehicles. Shifts and pairings were assigned based on how many operators were available for transitional duty. Sun Metro operates three BRT corridors. The intent was to have at least one operator pair inspecting fares for each corridor in the AM and PM. Light-duty operators surveyed each person on board for fare, checking passengers as they boarded as well as passengers already on board to check 100% of passengers on board. Fare Citation Practice Sun Metro personnel have the authority to request proof of payment but they do not have the authority to issue citations. Previously, a BRT passenger without proof of payment was asked to purchase a fare at the farebox, accompanied to a TVM at the next stop to purchase a fare, or asked to get off the vehicle if the passenger refused to purchase a fare. Fare Evasion Penalties According to the Texas Transportation Code, fare evasion is a criminal misdemeanor. The authority to issue civil citations to fare evaders would have required approval from the State Legislature. Further, the Texas Transportation Code only authorizes sworn peace officers and/or FEOs as defined by the code to issue fare evasion citations. As such, Sun Metro has chosen not to issue citations Fare Enforcement Technology and Capital Investments Previously, fares were visually inspected by light-duty operators. No equipment was issued to the light-duty operators performing fare inspections. Sun Metro does not have a database for tracking repeat offenders because it does not issue citations.

Case Studies A-93   Fare Evasion Citations As Sun Metro prepared to launch Brio in 2014, staff anticipated there would be a need for fare enforcement due to the barrier-free, honor system nature of BRT. Staff had planned to issue civil citations and prepared a fare enforcement policy, including a three-tier escalation policy for repeat offenders, but it was never put into place. According to the Texas Transportation Code, fare evasion is a criminal misdemeanor. The authority to issue civil citations to fare evaders would have required approval from the state legislature. During Brio’s operation as a proof-of-payment system, the use of light-duty operators was more cost-effective than the use of law enforcement for fare enforcement. Prior to August 2020, Sun Metro used light-duty operators assigned to transitional duty to perform fare inspections. Sun Metro was paying these operators on transitional duty anyway, so having them perform fare inspections was no additional cost. The Texas Transportation Code only authorizes sworn peace officers and/or FEOs as defined by the code to issue fare evasion citations. To provide sufficient coverage on Brio, Sun Metro would have needed to hire multiple fully burdened police officers, which would have cost a minimum of $60,000 per officer annually. Sun Metro staff estimated that lost revenue due to fare evasion amounted to approximately $15,000 annually under the earlier proof-of-payment service model. Even if this estimate is low, the cost to hire enough law enforcement officers to have provided coverage on Brio would have well exceeded the revenue lost due to evasion. Staff also noted that because fare evasion is a low-level offense, local courts are not inclined to pursue fare evasion prosecution or collection of unpaid fines. Even if they did, citations would be paid to the City, not to Sun Metro. Overall, Sun Metro concluded that the benefits of issuing citations did not outweigh the dis- advantages and costs. Initially when Sun Metro launched, it operated as proof of payment, because Sun Metro personnel are authorized to request proof of payment. However, since then, Sun Metro has decided to discontinue operating as proof of payment and returned to front-door boarding as discussed above. Fare Enforcement and Personnel by Mode In August 2020, Sun Metro transitioned away from proof of payment on board Brio to fare payment being observed by the operator as passengers board. Separate fare enforcement person- nel beyond the vehicle operator are no longer needed. As noted above, prior to this change, Sun Metro used light-duty operators to perform fare inspection on board Brio vehicles, which used a proof-of-payment service model. These light- duty operators were not currently eligible to operate a vehicle and were only responsible for inspecting fare; they were not intended as a customer service resource or safety presence. Field supervisors oversaw the light-duty operators in the field. One field supervisor was assigned to each Brio line. Deployment was influenced by the number of light-duty operators on transitional duty at a given time. The transit supervisor who assigns fare inspection shifts aimed to have at least one pair of light-duty operators assigned to fare inspection on each of Sun Metro’s three Brio cor- ridors during both the morning and afternoon peaks. There were typically 10 to 12 light-duty operators conducting fare inspections at any time. Although light-duty operators were typically deployed in pairs, they could be deployed solo if the number of operators available necessitated it. If additional light-duty operators were available beyond those needed to cover each corridor, they were assigned randomly to a corridor. Light-duty operators were instructed to ride the length of the corridor and then return.

A-94 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion When boarding a vehicle to inspect fares, light-duty operators used all three doors of the vehicle and then proceeded through the vehicle asking all passengers systematically for proof of payment. At terminals, light-duty operators would ask passengers for proof of payment as they boarded the vehicle to help ensure all passengers were asked for proof of payment. This practice of surveying all passengers on board or as they boarded helped minimize any perception of bias or discrimination in Sun Metro’s fare inspection process. Light-duty operators used “sweep sheets” (see Figure A-5) to keep track of the number of passengers inspected and the number of passengers without fare. Light-duty operators relied on visual counts to tally the number of passengers. Sweep sheets were submitted to dispatch or the field supervisor at the end of the shift and then consolidated into a spreadsheet. Sweep sheet information was initially used to help inform deployment, but prior to transitioning away from proof of payment, Sun Metro instead shifted to focusing fare enforcement efforts on areas with large ridership, such as terminals, bus stops near schools, and shopping centers. Fares were visually inspected by light-duty operators. When light-duty operators perform- ing fare inspection duties encountered passengers without proof of payment, the light-duty operators would direct the passengers to use the onboard farebox to pay their fare. Alternatively, light-duty operators would show passengers how to use the TVM to complete fare payment at the next Brio stop. Passengers generally did not challenge light-duty operators when asked to pay, although sometimes they would choose to exit the vehicle rather than pay the fare as requested. If a fare inspection encounter escalated and became a conflict, light-duty operators could call a field supervisor to meet the vehicle in order to address the issue. Light-duty operators could also call into dispatch to log a fare evasion incident. These data were used to identify problem areas that required additional fare inspections. If a light-duty operator encountered a passenger traveling using a reduced fare, the light-duty operator could request proof of eligibility for that fare if deemed appropriate. If a passenger was unable to produce proof of eligibility, the light-duty operator would remind the passenger of Sun Metro’s reduced-fare policy and encourage the passenger to either pay the full fare or travel with their proof of eligibility next time. On fixed-route buses and streetcars, and as of recently on Brio, the vehicle operator oversees collection of fares and encourages payment as necessary. The vehicle operator is instructed to observe fare payment at the farebox, check for proof of eligibility for passengers traveling with reduced fares, and make a reasonable effort to collect the proper fare in a courteous manner if a passenger does not automatically pay. Although Sun Metro reports that they do not have Source: Sun Metro. Figure A-5. Sun Metro fare enforcement sweep sheet.

Case Studies A-95   significant issues with fare evasion on board bus and streetcar, when it does occur, vehicle opera- tors are encouraged to report the fare dispute to dispatch. In particularly challenging situations or for known repeat offenders, the vehicle operator may ask that a transit supervisor be dis- patched to help resolve the issue. Vehicle operators are instructed not to hold the vehicle for fare disputes, and Sun Metro has a policy of “challenge and transport” for fare evaders. The Rapid The Rapid is located in Grand Rapids, MI, and offers both regular bus and BRT services. The agency launched its Silver Line BRT in 2014 as a proof-of-payment service with TVMs at each station. In 2019, The Rapid debuted its Wave account-based fare collection system that allows passengers to use a smart card to board regular and BRT buses. On August 24, 2020, The Rapid launched its second BRT line, the Laker Line, also as a proof-of-payment service with TVMs. Fare Enforcement Approach by Mode FEOs conduct fare inspection on The Rapid’s Silver Line BRT service and the new Laker Line BRT service. Passengers must pay before boarding using the TVMs at each station or by tapping their smart card on the wayside validators. Although passengers are expected to pay while at the station, BRT stations are not considered fare-paid areas where fare inspections can take place because they are in the City’s rights of way. On regular bus service, operators are responsible for enforcing fare payment. Passengers can pay either on board using cash or their Wave smart card, or purchase a paper ticket booklet in advance. This means that Wave smart card holders are expected to tap in advance of boarding on Silver Line BRT, but must wait to tap at the onboard farebox on regular bus service. This distinction between regular and BRT services is simplified in part by the fact that the stops for the two services do not overlap. If someone boards a regular bus and does not pay the fare, the procedure is for the operator to ask the passenger to pay the fare. If the passenger refuses to pay and is disruptive, the operator will call a supervisor or security to remove the individual from the bus. If necessary, the opera- tor can call law enforcement, but the policy is to avoid delaying the bus. Instead, the supervisor, security, or law enforcement meets the bus along its route. Fare Enforcement Officer Training FEOs are uniformed employees of The Rapid who do not have police powers. All three cities serviced by the BRT line enacted infraction ordinances that allow non–law enforcement personnel to conduct fare inspections so that these FEO positions could be created. The Rapid employs four FEOs. FEOs receive 40 hours of training on board the bus under the supervision of an existing FEO, although The Rapid is considering expanding this to 2 weeks, or 80 hours. The training covers all policies and procedures involved with the position, including standards for writing reports and use of force. Each FEO in training is issued a training manual that lists all training tasks that must be completed before they can work on their own. The probation period for an FEO is approximately 6 months, the same as the standard probationary period for any new admin- istrative employee. The agency is in the process of developing a safety component to add to the training program that would not be directly related to fare enforcement. Instead, the safety component would cover the locations of emergency items on board the vehicle or how to assist the operator in the event of an emergency, for example.

A-96 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion The Rapid (Interurban Transit Partnership), Grand Rapids, MI Overview of Agency The Rapid operates bus and BRT services. Fare Collection Overview The Rapid’s Silver Line BRT is a proof-of-payment system, and BRT passengers are expected to use a TVM to purchase a fare or tap their Wave smart card prior to boarding. Passengers on regular bus services pay cash, use a pre- purchased paper ticket, or tap their smart card at the farebox upon boarding. Definition of Fare Evasion The three cities in The Rapid service area each have their own ordinances pertaining to fare evasion and enforcement, but they all include the same definition of fare evasion: “No person shall occupy, ride in, or use a Silver Line public transportation vehicle without paying the fare established by the public transportation authority.” Internal SOPs at The Rapid specify that fare evasion includes a passenger having no fare media or expired fare media, or fraudulent/misuse of fare media. Failing to tap a smart card prior to boarding is also considered fare evasion. Fare Enforcement Overview Fare inspection occurs only on The Rapid’s Silver Line and Laker Line BRT service. On regular bus routes, the operator enforces fare payment at the farebox when a passenger boards. Fare Enforcement Personnel Fare enforcement is conducted by in-house, uniformed FEOs. FEOs are not police officers and do not have the authority to require passengers to show their IDs for proof of identity. Fare Enforcement Deployment FEOs work independently and have control over their inspection routes. FEOs work separately; they do not work in teams. The Rapid does not use targeted fare inspection. FEOs are instructed to be as random as possible so passengers cannot predict their schedules and to maximize their presence (and therefore fare evasion deterrence) on buses during their shifts. Inspection occurs only on board vehicles and not at BRT stops. FEOs choose whether to board at the front or rear door. Once on board, the FEO picks a starting point and walks through the bus, checking every passenger, including The Rapid employees. Fare Citation Practice The Rapid has a policy to always issue a warning for first-time offenses. FEOs have some discretion with regard to second offenses. Passengers who provide ID, either orally or with a form of ID, are permitted to ride to their destinations, while the FEO explains how to pay. Citations are not issued on the vehicle because there is no way to check for prior warnings or citations in real time. Also, FEOs are not issued any protective equipment and the agency wants to minimize the chances that they may face conflicts related to fares. Instead, the FEO enters each fare evader’s details into an Excel database at the end of the day. If the person had a prior encounter with fare enforcement, then they are mailed a citation. If it is their first fare evasion offense, they are issued a warning. Fare Evasion Penalties Citations are civil infractions and carry an escalating fine, starting at $65 for the first offense, $130 for the second offense, and $250 for any subsequent offenses. The fine is paid directly to the court, although the courts return some of that revenue to The Rapid. The State of Michigan does not allow The Rapid to intervene once the citation is issued, so the agency is not able to pursue alternative fine options outside of the courts (i.e., to reduce the fine if paid within a certain number of days). However, the agency can void an individual’s citation. Fare Enforcement Technology and Capital Investments FEOs use a handheld device to inspect electronic fare media. The agency uses an Excel spreadsheet to track fare evasion offenses by individual and determine whether to issue a warning or citation.

Case Studies A-97   Fare Enforcement Officer Deployment and Procedures The overall objective of fare enforcement is to deter fare evasion, and each FEO interprets that for their own approach to fare enforcement. The Rapid gives the FEOs considerable discretion in how they work, and each FEO develops their own approach to deployment and inspection. Because there are times when six to seven BRT vehicles are in service at once, FEOs work sep- arately even though they may be assigned to the same shift. FEOs are instructed to be as random as possible so passengers cannot predict their schedules and figure out when and where they might be inspected and to maximize their presence on BRT buses during their shifts. Apart from this instruction, FEOs are given considerable independence in both choosing which vehicles to inspect and how they conduct inspections. Some FEOs stand near the back door, where they are easily visible from outside the vehicle. Other FEOs sit down between stops so that passengers do not see them until after they board. There are standards for how FEOs board the vehicle and conduct fare checks. FEOs choose whether to board at the front or rear door. Once on board, the fare enforcement officer picks a starting point and walks through the bus, checking every passenger, including any employees of The Rapid. FEOs use a handheld device to inspect electronic fare media. Paper tickets are visually validated. When a passenger is unable to provide proof of payment, the FEO will ask the passenger for ID. Passengers who provide ID, either orally or with some form of ID, are permitted to ride to their destinations while the FEO explains how to pay. FEOs are not police and do not have the authority to force passengers to show their IDs. For passengers who do not provide proof of payment, the FEO may ask the passenger to get off the bus; if they refuse, the FEO may stop the bus and again ask the passenger to get off. If the passenger continues to refuse, the FEO must call law enforcement for assistance. The FEO does not pursue passengers who get off the bus as the FEO boards. FEOs complete an incident report for each fare evader, including the date, time, bus number, and details of the encounter. When a fare evader refuses to provide personal information, the FEO lists them as John or Jane Doe on the incident report. No incident report is prepared in instances when the passenger is not at fault (i.e., if it is confirmed that the ticket validator was not working). Fare Evasion Citation Issuance and Tracking At the end of each day, FEOs enter all of the data from their incident reports into the Excel spreadsheet that The Rapid uses for tracking fare evasion. As they enter the data, the FEO checks to see if the individual has been contacted before. If not, the individual is issued a warning for their first offense. If the individual has been contacted before, the FEO issues the individual a fare evasion citation, which is sent to the offender as a certified letter. Citations are also forwarded to the courts for processing at that time. Fare evasion citations are considered a municipal civil infraction and carry a fine. Under Michigan State Law, once the citation is issued, the courts are in charge of assigning and collecting the appropriate fine. The Rapid does not have the authority to implement any in-house resolution options. FEOs are allowed some discretion in issuing citations, mostly for second offenses that would result in the first citation. When an FEO does decide to issue a citation, they request video from the vehicle where the encounter occurred and save the relevant body camera footage. This foot- age is saved in case the fare evader tries to contest the citation in court by claiming that they were not the person cited for fare evasion.

A-98 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion Passengers without proof of payment do not receive a citation or any other written materials while on board the vehicle. The reason for tracking fare evasion contacts and issuing citations after the encounter is twofold. First, FEOs do not have any means of checking for previous offenses in real time. Given the policy to issue a warning for first offenses, FEOs must wait until they return to the office and are able to check the Excel database to properly account for previous encounters and determine whether to issue a warning or a citation. Second, sending citations by mail instead of issuing them in person helps minimize conflict on board. FEOs do not have any protective equipment and are unable to protect themselves in the event an encounter escalates. There are times when fare evaders provide false identification information. However, there are a high number of repeat fare evaders who receive the majority of the citations issued, and FEOs become familiar with these individuals. In addition to incident reports, FEOs keep track of the number of individuals inspected in a day so that The Rapid can calculate a daily fare evasion rate. The Rapid has determined that on average they have a 2% to 3% fare evasion rate. The Rapid noted that a sweep to perform a 100% fare check may be more appropriate to measure fare evasion, but it would be difficult to justify the additional cost to conduct sweeps. Other than calculating the fare evasion rate, the incident report and inspection data are not used to perform any analyses or to deploy fare enforcement to specific locations or at specific times of day. Despite this low fare evasion rate, the public perception is that many BRT passengers are evading the fare and riding for free. The Rapid hired an independent consultant to review their process. The consultant confirmed The Rapid’s fare evasion rate within a small variance. Revenue Impacts of Fare Enforcement and Evasion As required by the fare evasion ordinances enacted by the three cities served by The Rapid’s Silver Line BRT service, fare evasion citation penalties are $65 for an initial offense, $130 for the second offense, and $250 for any subsequent offenses. The Rapid receives 80% of the fines col- lected by the cities in accordance with an amendment to the interlocal agreement between the Interurban Transit Partnership (dba The Rapid) and the three cities. Because these payments from the courts are delivered as lump sums, The Rapid does not know what the fare evasion citation payment rate is. The Rapid estimates that they lose less than $80,000 per year due to fare evasion, although this is an informal calculation. Prior to Wave implementation, The Rapid encountered some counterfeit magnetic stripe media. Customer Education and Outreach When The Rapid first launched the Silver Line BRT service, The Rapid scheduled agency staff from all departments to be present at the BRT stops. Staff interacted with passengers, helping them operate the TVMs and making sure they knew how to properly validate their fares. Staff was dressed in bright light green shirts to make them easily visible to passengers. Now, there is signage at every station to explain the process of purchasing and validating fares. Messaging on the TVMs also walk a passenger through the steps to purchase a ticket. The tickets sold by TVMs are activated at the time of sale, valid for 1 hour and 45 minutes, and can only be used on BRT. Although paper tickets are currently visually validated by FEOs, they will eventually have a barcode that can be scanned by FEO handheld devices. As part of a transit-oriented development plan for the BRT corridor, The Rapid has been con- ducting public outreach efforts aimed at understanding the equity and socioeconomic disparities

Case Studies A-99   along the corridor. During these efforts, many passengers have commented that the observable presence of fare enforcement makes them feel safer and provides a “visual cue of authority.” The Rapid has even heard this positive perception from immigrant communities, even though these communities are especially sensitive to the presence of uniformed law enforcement, in particular ICE agents. FEO uniforms are distinctive, which helps people easily distinguish them as employees of The Rapid rather than law enforcement officers. In terms of equity considerations and perceptions, FEOs are instructed to check all passengers for proof of payment, including The Rapid employees. When the agency has received pushback about asking for ID, The Rapid has clarified that only people without proof of payment are asked to produce identification. Although the agency does not track demographic data as part of its incident reports, these proof-of-payment procedures have helped The Rapid counter concerns from individual passengers about equity and racial/ethnic discrimination. TransLink The South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority, known more broadly as TransLink, is Metro Vancouver’s regional, multimodal transportation provider. The agency provides bus, rapid bus, medium capacity rail, commuter rail, ferry, and door-to-door custom transit services across 21 municipalities, one electoral area, and one First Nation. TransLink’s multi modal mandate extends beyond transit service provision, working with municipal and provincial partners to manage five regional bridges and investing in the Major Road Network and Regional Cycling Network. With a broad range of safety and security responsibilities across a substantial service area, fare enforcement is only one component of a broader range of activities undertaken by TransLink’s Police and Security services. Fare Payment on the System TransLink’s entire network is based on proof of payment. The conventional bus fleet oper- ates with front-door boarding and passengers are required to have proof of payment upon entering the vehicle because the entire vehicle is identified as a proof-of-payment zone. Fare payment occurs by purchasing a cash fare, validating a magstripe FareSaver ticket, or by tapping a Compass card, Compass ticket, Compass wearable, contactless credit card, or mobile device with NFC payment setup (e.g., Apple Pay, Google Pay, Samsung Pay). Cash and FareSaver ticket passengers are provided with a paper proof of payment that they must carry for the entire length of their journey. The paper proof of payment also entitles the passenger to unlimited transfers to other bus services within a 90-minute window. It does not provide transfer privileges to rail or ferry services. Proof of payment for passengers using electronic fare payment is the presence of a valid 90-minute transfer period on their Compass electronic fare media, contactless credit card, or NFC device. TransLink Rapid Bus and B-Line Bus services have the same payment approach as the conventional fleet, with the notable exception that they also allow all-door boarding. On medium capacity rail (e.g., SkyTrain and Canada Line) and ferry modes, fare gates delin- eate the fare-paid zone and discourage fare evasion behavior. Fare gates accept all Compass elec- tronic fare media, contactless credit cards, and mobile devices with NFC payment. Passengers wanting to pay with cash can purchase fares at a TVM and will be issued a Compass Ticket that will allow entry through the gates. Once again, proof of payment must be retained for the entire length of the journey, while on the vehicle, and within fare-paid zones. FareSaver magstripe tickets are not accepted on medium capacity rail, ferry, or commuter rail.

A-100 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion TransLink (South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority), Vancouver, British Columbia Overview of Agency TransLink operates bus, limited stop rapid bus, medium capacity rail, commuter rail, and ferry services. Fare Collection Overview Passengers pay upon boarding on bus and rapid bus, and are provided with proof of payment. Fare payment is required at fare gates when riding medium capacity rail and ferry services. Commuter rail passengers must pay in advance of boarding. TransLink accepts cash at the farebox on buses. Rail and ferry passengers can also purchase fares at TVMs. Compass electronic fare media, contactless credit cards and near-field communication (NFC)–enabled mobile devices are also accepted on board bus, at fare gates for medium capacity rail and ferry, and at platform validators for commuter rail. Definition of Fare Evasion South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority 2019 Tariff Bylaw 131- 2019 spells out in detail the fare payment requirements, including exit tickets for zoned fares. Per the bylaw, all persons entering a fare-paid zone must possess valid proof of payment at all times. Fare Enforcement Overview All TransLink vehicles (bus, rapid bus, commuter rail) and gated areas (medium capacity rail, ferry) are defined as “Fare Paid Zones.” Transit police and security may ask for proof of payment in fare-paid zones on all modes. Fare Enforcement Personnel Technically, any TransLink transit employee may exercise all of the rights of TransLink under this Transit Fare Tariff and enforce all provisions of the tariff. Fare enforcement, however, is conducted by transit police and security who have a much broader safety and security mandate. Although fare enforcement is not one of their primary operational priorities, it is an area of responsibility that they take seriously. Transit police and security will undertake enforcement activities periodically if fare evasion is observed during the course of their other duties. Both groups conduct proof-of-payment inspections in fare-paid zones throughout the system, including on bus, and both groups have the authority to inspect fares and cite passengers for fare evasion. Only transit police have the authority to make criminal arrests. Fare Enforcement Deployment Transit police and security are predominantly focused on safety and security across the system. Fare enforcement is only one component of their responsibilities and is undertaken when circumstances warrant. For fare enforcement activities, personnel are deployed to fare-paid zones to undertake inspections on vehicles and within gated areas. Fare Citation Practice Transit police and security have discretion as to whether to issue a warning or a citation for fare evasion. Customer education and greater fare payment compliance is preferred to issuing citations. Fare Evasion Penalties Fare evasion citations are civil infractions. Fines start at $173 CAD. If not paid within 6 months, an additional $40 CAD is added to the fine amount, and if not paid within a year, an additional $60 CAD is added for a total of $273 CAD. If a passenger does not pay their fine, they are not able to renew their driver’s license or reinsure their vehicle. This is made possible because the provincial government is the sole provider of vehicle insurance in British Columbia. Fare Enforcement Technology and Capital Investments TransLink’s largest effort to reduce fare evasion has been to add fare gates to the medium capacity rail and ferry portions of its system that were previously ungated. The agency believes this effort has been very successful in promoting fare payment behavior. Transit police and security are provided with handheld card readers for inspecting Compass electronic fare media. The devices can read recent fare transaction history, but do not have the ability to assess whether a passenger is a repeat offender at the time of inspection.

Case Studies A-101   TransLink’s commuter rail system is largely open platform with card readers on the plat- forms. Prior to boarding the train, passengers must tap their Compass electronic fare media, contactless credit card, or mobile device with NFC payment. Passengers wanting to pay with cash can purchase fares at a TVM on station platforms and will be issued a Compass Ticket that must be retained as proof of payment throughout the journey. Fare Enforcement Personnel and Roles TransLink employs two groups of personnel to undertake safety, security, and fare enforce- ment activities on the system: transit police and transit security. The Metro Vancouver Transit Police is a public police service with a primary mandate to ensure safety and security on and around public transit locations. They employ approximately 190 transit police officers regionwide. Transit police are designated provincial police officers with full police powers throughout the Province of British Columbia. Their authority is not restricted to transit property or transit-related incidents. They have the authority to make arrests and enforce provincial and federal laws throughout the course of their duties around the region and throughout the province. Transit police also have the authority to undertake fare inspec- tions and issue fare evasion citations. They can be found across the network on all modes con- ducting safety and security operations, but typically, they focus on rail and ferry modes for fare enforcement activities. Transit security is a separate group within TransLink, and employs approximately 65 team members. Their mandate is also focused primarily on safety and security. Similar to transit police, transit security personnel have the authority to undertake fare inspections and issue fare evasion citations. However, their overall authority and responsibilities are more limited, and they do not have the authority to undertake criminal arrests or issue citations for violation of provincial and federal laws. Transit security typically focuses their fare enforcement activities on the bus network. All transit police and security (TPS) personnel receive training on how to interact with pas- sengers in various circumstances. Both groups receive de-escalation training, and transit police receive use-of-force training. Fare Enforcement Approach TPS personnel are deployed throughout the region based on identified safety and security needs. Fare enforcement is not a primary priority when selecting deployment patterns, but once locations are selected teams may be directed to undertake fare inspections and enforce- ment during the course of their duties. Less frequently, TPS personnel may be deployed for dedicated fare inspection activities in known “hot spots.” In these cases, the location choice is data-driven, typically focused on higher volume stations, platforms, and routes where fare evasion is known to be an issue or where a large number of complaints have been received. TPS personnel are typically dispatched in teams of two or more for safety reasons. They are provided with a handheld card reader that can read all forms of Compass fare media, as well as contactless credit cards and NFC devices. Paper proof of payment is visually validated. On medium capacity rail and ferry modes, transit police typically stand inside the fare gate line and will inspect passengers as they enter or exit. Typical forms of evasion that transit police observe include passengers jumping over the fare gates or following another passenger through the fare gate. As the gated portion of the rail and ferry systems are proof of payment, transit police officers may ask for proof of payment from any passenger; however, they will typically

A-102 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion focus on directly observed evasion at the fare gates to avoid perceptions of targeting or bias toward specific passengers. On commuter rail, transit police will generally perform fare checks at the gate line at Waterfront station, because the vast majority of journeys originate/terminate at that single sta- tion. Waterfront is the terminal station for TransLink’s single commuter rail line and is the only gated commuter rail station. Because of the presence of gates and the high share of passengers that use the station, selecting this single location allows for very efficient fare inspection oppor- tunities without the need to deploy resources across the entire commuter rail network. On the bus network, transit security will have one transit security officer enter per door. Every passenger will be asked for proof of payment to avoid perceptions of targeting or bias. Transit security personnel will work from their entry door toward the back of the vehicle, ensuring that each section of the vehicle is inspected. Fare inspections are undertaken between stops, and the vehicle is not held at a stop for fare inspections. If a passenger does not have a valid proof of payment, they will be asked to step off the vehicle with transit security so as not to delay the bus. Fare citations can be written off board if a passenger was inspected on a vehicle, but primary inspections do not take place outside of the vehicle at stops. Bus vehicle operators may com- municate fare information to the passenger, but they are not expected to enforce fares as part of their responsibilities. TPS personnel have broad discretion as to whether to engage in customer education, issue a warning, or issue a citation for fare evasion. If a passenger cannot provide proof of payment, TPS officers will generally begin by asking whether they have sufficient funds to purchase a valid fare. If so, they may receive a verbal reminder on the importance of fare payment and any help required to purchase a valid fare. TransLink believes customer education and greater fare payment compliance is preferred to issuing citations. TPS personnel may also use discretion in how to handle certain offenses. For example, passengers using monthly passes or an unlimited use U-Pass sometimes forget to tap their Compass media when entering the fare-paid zone. According to the fare tariff, this behavior is subject to citation because the card does not have a valid proof of payment (90-minute transfer period). However, there are no revenue loss implica- tions from this failure to tap because the pass is prepaid, and thus, if the TPS officer believes this action is due to a lack of knowledge of the fare requirements, they may opt to educate or warn passengers instead of citing them. Fare Evasion Estimation Prior to the public launch of Compass in 2015, TransLink conducted a comprehensive survey throughout the year with the primary goal of estimating ridership across modes and sub-regions within the service area. The design of the survey was beneficial in that the results could also be used to estimate various types of fare evasion, as a secondary benefit. However, with the launch of Compass, ridership estimation was replaced with direct measurement of cash, magstripe, and electronic fare collection data, so the primary need for the survey ceased. At this moment, TransLink does not estimate fare evasion or revenue loss due to fare evasion. TransLink is in the midst of developing a pilot program to assess whether a fare evasion tracking method can be reintroduced. The pilot seeks to introduce plainclothes observers to gate lines and on vehicles to record passenger fare payment behavior. The plainclothes nature of the pilot design is believed to be an important component to minimize changes in passenger fare payment behavior by having a uniformed TPS officer undertaking the survey (TPS officers are all in uniform). In early 2020, TransLink staff was working to assess the pilot design, level of effort, and cost associated with introducing the new survey approach. Care was being taken to ensure that the

Case Studies A-103   sampling plan was an appropriate size to yield statistically valid results across modes, days of the week, and times of day. The initial focus of the pilot was to identify easily observable instances of fare evasion, including fare gate jumping, passengers closely following each other through the fare gates, and zero payment on buses. TransLink was considering how the pilot design could estimate types of fare evasion that are more challenging to observe or require direct passenger interaction (such as improper use of concession fare products) but had not yet settled on an approach. In spring 2020, the pilot was undertaken and demonstrated that visual inspection by plainclothes observers at fare gates and on vehicles was operationally feasible for measuring many types of fare evasion occurring on the system. TransLink will continue to evaluate the cost of implementing the estimation approach systemwide against the expected benefits of more accurate fare evasion information before deciding whether or not to proceed with full implementation. However, due to impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, no further decisions have been made on the fare evasion method. Fare Evasion Citations TPS personnel issue warnings and citations on paper and a copy is issued to the fare evad- ing passenger. At the end of the day, warnings and citations are transcribed into an electronic system. TPS personnel do not have a way to check if an evader is a repeat offender at the time of inspection. In the office, the electronic system can identify repeat offenders, but it is generally used to analyze aggregated data, such as the number of warnings and citations issued and the location of warnings and citations. Fare evasion offenses are a civil infraction and are handled internally by TransLink. Fines for fare evasion start at $173 CAD. If fines have not been paid within 6 months, the fine increases by $40 CAD. If the fine has not been paid within 1 year, it increases by an additional $60 CAD for a maximum penalty of $273 CAD. Fare evaders are not offered any alternatives to paying their fine. If fines go unpaid, the evader may lose the ability to renew their driver’s license and/or their vehicle insurance (the provincial government is the sole provider of vehicle insurance in British Columbia). Approximately 30% of citations are paid. TriMet TriMet operates local bus services as well as Metropolitan Area Express (MAX) light rail and Westside Express Service commuter rail. TriMet also provides Portland Streetcar with per- sonnel, funding, and other services under an intergovernmental agreement with the City of Portland. The region’s Hop Fastpass fare collection system enables passengers to pay their fares using a smart card, smartphone, Hop ticket from a TVM, contactless debit/credit card, or mobile wallet. The agency’s light rail and commuter rail services all operate under what TriMet calls “self-service, barrier-free fare collection,” meaning that passengers must tap to validate their fare before boarding the vehicle to have proper proof of payment, and then these services are monitored by fare inspectors who check passengers for proof of payment. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, TriMet temporarily suspended fare enforcement and cash collection on board the bus. Instead, cash passengers had to purchase a paper Hop ticket good for 2.5 hours at a rail TVM or transit center or load cash value into their Hop account at a retail outlet. TriMet resumed cash collection on buses on October 1, 2020, once new protective panels were installed. When TriMet suspended acceptance of cash on board the bus, the agency gave out over 9,700 free Hop cards to customers.

A-104 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion TriMet (Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon), Portland, OR Overview of Agency TriMet provides bus, light rail, and commuter rail service. Fare Collection Overview Passengers can use a Hop Fastpass smart card, Hop virtual card on their phone, contactless debit/credit card, mobile wallet (Android Pay, Apple Pay, Samsung Pay), or a Hop ticket to pay their fare. Passengers paying with cash can purchase a 2.5 hour or daily pass on board bus or from a TVM at rail stations and transit centers. TVMs are not integrated with the Hop system. All passengers using Hop, contactless debit/credit card, or mobile wallet must tap a validator prior to boarding light rail or commuter rail services or upon boarding a bus. The same Hop fare collection system is used on board the Portland Streetcar and C-Tran (the transit provider in Vancouver, WA, with service across the Willamette River to Portland). Definition of Fare Evasion TriMet Code, Chapter 29: Regulations Governing Proof of Fare Payment prohibits and makes it unlawful “for any person to occupy, ride in or use, any District Vehicle without paying the applicable fare . . . [or] without carrying proof of fare payment.” It also requires proof of payment for any passenger disembarking any rail vehicle or occupying specific designated platforms where signage is posted requiring proof of payment. Chapter 29 defines what constitutes proof of payment and requires an individual to provide any fare identification or documentation required by Chapter 19: Fares (e.g., driver’s license providing proof of age eligibility or TriMet Honored Citizen Card with photo). Fare Enforcement Overview Fare inspections occur on light rail, commuter rail, and bus services to ensure all passengers have valid proof of payment. On bus, operators inform passengers of the fare and are not expected to perform fare enforcement. TriMet has asked bus operators to take a reduced role in enforcement as operator assaults have risen. Fare Enforcement Personnel TriMet hires civilian, in-house fare inspectors to check passengers’ fares. Each fare inspector is accompanied by a contracted customer safety officer whose role is to support and protect the fare inspector during the course of their duties. Customer safety officers cannot request proof of payment or issue citations. They also report serious concerns to police and emergency responders, assist riders, and encourage safe behavior around buses and trains. On commuter rail, the train conductor requests proof of payment but cannot issue citations. Although TriMet police officers can check fares and issue citations, TriMet has begun decreasing their role in fare inspection to focus instead on general safety and security of the system. Fare Enforcement Deployment On rail, fare inspections are conducted on board the vehicle and on station platforms. TriMet also conducts “fare missions” during which everyone’s fares are checked on the platform and on the train going through the station. For onboard inspections, fare inspectors board at opposite ends of the car and work their way toward each other, asking every passenger for proof of payment. On buses, fare inspectors request proof of payment while walking down the aisle of the bus. If two fare inspectors are present, they board from opposite ends and work toward each other. Historically, fare inspectors spent about 50% of their time in the central business district with their remaining enforcement shifts spread throughout the system. More recently, TriMet has been working toward spending an equal amount of time performing fare inspections across the entire system, regardless of potentially known varying rates of evasion in specific areas. This was a strategic decision to help further minimize any possibility of targeting certain groups during inspection activities.

Case Studies A-105   Fare Enforcement Personnel—Types and Responsibilities Bus operators serve as “fare informers” and instruct passengers to validate their fare using the Hop validator upon boarding. The bus operator console alerts the operator when some- one boards with a reduced fare and specifies the type (e.g., “Honored Citizen,” youth), and the operator will then ask for proof of eligibility for the reduced fare. TriMet has begun instruct- ing operators to take a reduced role in enforcement as operator assaults have risen. They are instructed to let people know what they should pay but otherwise let the passenger board and press the fare evasion button on the operator console in order to avoid any conflict escalation. TriMet uses data from the fare evasion button, including location information, to produce monthly “heat” maps identifying where fare evasion is the biggest issue across bus services, although these maps are not necessarily used for deployment purposes. In the case of a short fare, operators are instructed to issue a passenger the ticket closest to what the passenger paid because TriMet issues both 2.5-hour tickets and day passes on board buses. Operators can radio for backup if there is a safety issue or if a confrontation with a passenger over fare escalates. Unionized, in-house fare inspectors are in charge of conducting fare enforcement on board the light rail and bus systems. TriMet is in the process of rebuilding its fare enforcement pro- gram. About 10 years ago, TriMet largely got rid of their dedicated fare enforcement program. Instead, field operations bus and rail supervisors were expected to enforce all aspects of the TriMet Code, including fare payment. TriMet instructed these field operations supervisors to spend at least an hour a day enforcing the code, but that did not occur at the desired levels. This TriMet (Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon), Portland, OR (Continued ) Fare Citation Practice TriMet is piloting a new SOP that allows issuing a warning if it is a passenger’s first time being caught without proof of payment and they comply in handing over identification or otherwise properly identifying themselves to the fare inspector. TriMet is finding that the warning-first strategy is effective in encouraging passengers to comply with the request to provide identification. For subsequent fare evasion offenses, it is up to the fare inspector’s discretion whether a warning or a citation is issued. Fare Evasion Penalties Fare evasion citations are civil, not criminal, citations. Individuals with eligible citations (i.e., adults whose only violation is fare evasion) can resolve their citations directly with TriMet within 90 days before unresolved citations are transmitted to the court system. TriMet employs escalating consequences for repeated fare evasion and also offers alternatives to paying a fine. Fare evasion citations that make it to the court system are subject to the presumptive fine of $175 up to the maximum fine of $250. Fare Enforcement Technology and Capital Investments TriMet fare inspectors carry three devices: an all-in-one citation device, an Ingenico reader for reading fare media, and a mobile device connected to the Ingenico reader via Bluetooth with the fare inspection app on it that displays inspection information. The all-in-one citation device can scan ID barcodes, check for prior warnings and citations, and has a built-in printer. The device prefills the name of the fare inspector issuing the citation, the time and date, stop ID (if GPS is connected), and all of the information required on the Oregon Unified Citation form. The device can also pick the next available court date in case an individual does not resolve their citation with TriMet within 90 days or if the citation is not eligible for resolution administratively with TriMet.

A-106 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion helped spur TriMet to begin regrowing its dedicated fare enforcement program in the last few years. Today, fare enforcement is primarily focused on its bus and rail services and at transit centers. TriMet employs 20 fare inspectors, eight of whom were hired in fiscal year 2020. Fare inspectors are accompanied by contracted, nonunionized security personnel called cus- tomer safety officers who help to support the fare inspectors during the course of their work. Minimum eligibility requirements for becoming a customer safety officer are higher than stan- dard security contracts and require prior law enforcement experience, such as peace officer or military experience. Although it took time and effort to build a working relationship between these union and nonunion workers, in part because of a fear of lost union jobs, the pairing now works very well, and fare inspectors feel safer with the customer safety officers present. Although TriMet is ensuring that the ability to cite passengers for fare evasion will stay with unionized personnel, the agency is exploring the ability to have customer safety officers cite and exclude passengers for other behavioral violations of the TriMet Code. Currently, customer safety offi- cers work to address the behavior and will track these types of contact, but they cannot issue citations for the behavior. On the Westside Express Service, the commuter rail line, the train conductor inspects every- one who boards. There is one conductor who is responsible for each train. Train conductors are not TriMet employees; they are employees of the railroad that operates the service under contract to TriMet. As such, TriMet does not have the authority to control or direct their fare inspection activities. Although train conductors can ask for proof of payment, they cannot issue fare evasion citations. Instead of citing, they are instructed by their supervisors to ask any pas- senger caught without valid fare to deboard and pay their fare before getting back on a com- muter rail vehicle. TriMet believes that train conductors are generally successful in promoting fare compliance because they are on board the same train each day checking fares and become familiar to passengers who expect that their fares will be checked. TriMet also has intergovernmental agreements with the City of Portland and other cities and counties in TriMet’s service area to provide Transit Police Services. Together, about 68 TriMet transit police officers have the authority to check fares, but this is not their primary duty and they do not carry fare inspection devices. About 2 years ago, TriMet decided to reduce transit police officer involvement in checking fares. During ID checks, transit police officers can see a passenger’s entire record when attempting to identify them for a fare evasion citation, which means that some passengers were being arrested as a result of fare evasion for outstanding warrants, as ordered by a judge. This escalation of fare evasion to an arrest was viewed very negatively by the community. Community members were pleased with the decision to decrease transit police officer involvement in fare evasion citations, although fare inspectors had a more difficult time adjusting to this change as they viewed transit police officers’ participation as adding to their personal safety and their enforcement ability with passengers. Over time, TriMet leadership has seen fare inspectors adjust to the change by expanding their skill sets and iden- tifying new methods for achieving compliance and identification. TriMet sees this as a positive cultural shift. Although not involved directly with fare enforcement, transit police officers continue to pro- vide support in case of problematic behavior from a passenger. For example, transit police officers will respond to situations that threaten the personal safety of fare inspectors or other passengers or when a passenger found to be evading fare is uncooperative in leaving TriMet property. For the most part, transit police officer involvement is limited to instances where a passenger’s behavior becomes a criminal violation, as opposed to fare evasion and compelling a passenger to provide proof of identification.

Case Studies A-107   TriMet also uses contracted, unarmed TSOs to patrol the system, providing a security pres- ence. They are not able to issue citations or exclusions but do try to verbally enforce TriMet Code. TSOs are infrequently involved in supporting fare enforcement. Fare Enforcement Personnel—Uniforms Fare inspectors have a casual uniform of navy blue pants or navy blue or beige shorts and a white uniform top or navy blue or yellow coat. Their uniforms also include a patch with the TriMet logo and the words “Fare Inspector.” They are not provided protective vests to wear underneath their uniform, although there has been some pressure to begin providing protective vests to them. TriMet does not use plainclothes fare inspectors because the focus is on changing behavior and getting passengers to pay fares, so they want a visual presence of fare inspection personnel. Customer safety officers wear black pants and a blue/black top or high-visibility blue/yellow vest or coat. They are unarmed, but do carry a flashlight, tourniquet, and more recently flex cuffs in response to a significant increase in assaults. Contracted security personnel, including customer safety officers, have the option of wearing a protective vest underneath their uniform in accordance with personal preference. The vest must be worn underneath their uniform in order to avoid a tactical appearance. TriMet police officers wear a standard law enforcement uniform and have a badge and patch that lists their home agency; they may also have a “Transit Police” patch affixed to their uniform. Unlike customer safety officers, police officers do wear an external protective vest. This decision was influenced primarily by ergonomics. Police officers carry more tactical gear, and so they need the ability to remove the vest and gear easily when on break. There has been some confusion among the public about the various types of fare enforcement personnel and their uniforms. TriMet receives complaints from passengers that they do not under- stand the roles and authority of each group of personnel, especially with regard to which per- sonnel are considered law enforcement. In order to help address this concern, TriMet has all fare enforcement personnel wear identifying patches or name tags, and they have created a page on their website titled “TriMet personnel & security staff” that lists the duties and uniforms of each group of personnel with a picture of their uniforms as well. Fare Inspector Nomenclature TriMet is working toward changing some of the language in the agency’s business plan, including the nomenclature used for various types of personnel. TriMet would like to change the names of fare inspectors to something more along the lines of code compliance supervisors because they are empowered to and responsible for addressing any violations of TriMet code. Complying with fare payment is just one part of the code. Clear messaging to the community is important. This was especially illustrated by an experience last year when the TriMet com- munications team thought they were employing a sound communication and public relations strategy by publicly announcing plans to hire additional fare inspectors. However, the public’s attention was drawn specifically to the term “fare inspector,” and this resulted in negative per- ception and feedback, delaying hiring. TriMet believes that had these positions been labeled as code compliance supervisors, or something more indicative of their overall responsibilities, TriMet may have not received as much pushback in response to the hiring announcement. TriMet also believes that the new name would help deepen the connection in the public’s mind

A-108 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion between enforcement and safety, and the idea that greater TriMet presence on the system means that passengers will have a more pleasant, safer experience. Fare Enforcement Personnel—Training TriMet has recently worked to expand and enhance its training programs for fare enforce- ment personnel. TriMet’s Safety and Security Training Curriculum is organized around eight key learning objectives: 1. Demonstrate knowledge of the TriMet comprehensive safety and security training curriculum 2. Communicate TriMet’s core value of safety and commitment to customer service 3. Provide the tools to assess and sensitively serve the needs of internal and external customers, including those from culturally diverse backgrounds 4. Reduce negative and costly incidents through verbal de-escalation, situational awareness, and consistent application of policy and SOPs 5. Learn techniques for effectively managing workplace stress, to improve productivity and per- sonal well-being 6. Ensure a clear understanding and application of TriMet code, administrative rules, and cita- tion procedures 7. Provide a basic understanding of the challenges related to providing security in a public transit environment 8. Assess and sensitively serve the needs of the internal and external customers, including those from culturally diverse backgrounds, the elderly, and persons with access and functional chal- lenges and other vulnerable community groups The fare inspector training period lasts for 7 weeks, with 3 weeks of classroom instruction and 4 weeks of in-field training. Contracted customer safety officers must undergo standard annual training for unarmed security officers, in accordance with state requirements. They are also subject to enhanced hiring standards in that they must have prior law enforcement experience, and thus, bring training and experience to their current jobs as well. Both fare inspectors and customer safety officers also participate in ongoing quarterly in-service training and recertification. TriMet transit police officers attend a TriMet basic orientation that covers the specifics of working as a transit police officer and the TriMet code. In addition, they must maintain the State of Oregon’s Department of Public Safety Standards and Training as well as home unit requirements. Recently, TriMet added quarterly in-service training that brings these three groups together for joint information sharing and learning. Transit police officers, contracted security, and TriMet staff have provided the material for many of these training sessions. TriMet also works to bring in outside resources and specialists to cover specific topics. For example, mental health experts and individuals who have previously dealt with mental illness have been brought in to talk with security staff about what it is like to experience mental illness and what some of the triggers for an episode or breakdown might be. Local experts have also been brought in to educate personnel on de-escalation strategies to use when they encounter aggressive and mentally ill individuals as well as to provide local resources for personnel. The goals of these quarterly in-service trainings are to move toward a blended security model that encourages cross-personnel collaboration and learning as well as to give security staff the tools and knowledge to enhance community trust and build legitimacy. For the coming fiscal year, TriMet has specifically committed to expanded annual training and recertification for security staff that includes teachings on de-escalation, cultural compe- tency, and assisting individuals experiencing a mental illness crisis.

Case Studies A-109   Fare Enforcement Personnel—Deployment Strategies TriMet does not have a target inspection rate. The goal instead is to conduct as many inspec- tions as possible, as the agency believes this strategy provides the greatest impact. Fare inspection shifts span from 4 a.m. to midnight on weekdays and from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. on weekends, cov- ering peak passenger ridership hours. Although resources do not allow inspections to cover all hours, TriMet would like to have inspection coverage 7 days a week and later into the evenings. Historically, TriMet fare inspectors spent approximately 50% of their dedicated enforcement time in the central business district and then spread their remaining enforcement shifts through- out the system. However, a 2018 study by Portland State University analyzing fare inspection data for evidence of bias noted that the location of enforcement can impact the passenger demo- graphics that one encounters, because different locations within a system of TriMet’s size will have different racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic makeups. This was not previously taken into account when scheduling locations for fare inspection activities. Starting in 2019, TriMet has been very strategic in spreading out enforcement activities and working toward spending an equal amount of time performing fare inspections across the entire system, regardless of potentially known varying rates of evasion in specific areas. This was a strategic decision to help further minimize any possibility of targeting certain groups during inspection activities. Fare inspector and customer safety officer deployment schedules are developed manually. TriMet found that once they had developed the deployment schedules a few times, a pattern emerged, and it is not difficult to create them. Fare inspectors and their customer safety officer partners are deployed to specific zones of the system. The three zones are based on the central business district as a central zone with East and West zones. Each zone has its own dedicated radio frequency for communications, which helps to keep the distinctions clear and facilitate easy communication between inspection teams. At the beginning of the day, the fare inspection teams report to one of three facilities: the central bus garage, the eastside railyard, or the westside railyard. Under normal circumstances, fare inspectors and their accompanying customer safety offi- cers are instructed to spend approximately 25% of their shift inspecting fares on board buses within their assigned zone. However, onboard bus inspections were paused when TriMet tem- porarily suspended cash fare collection on buses due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, TriMet would also conduct one morning and one after- noon “fare mission” during which everyone on the platform and everyone on the train going through the station was inspected for proof of payment. High staffing levels are critical during these fare missions to minimize the impact on service operations and delays to customers. It is important for TriMet to keep the system moving, because during peak service a train arrives every 1.5 minutes at some stations. Fare Inspection Standard Operating Procedures Inspections are generally conducted by teams of two fare inspectors supported by customer safety officers or by larger groups of fare inspectors working together at a location for fare mis- sions. TriMet uses three primary strategies for conducting fare inspections, although this list is not meant to be exhaustive. Following are the three strategies as defined by the Bus and MAX Platform Inspections SOP: • Strategy 1—On Board Rolling Inspections (Trains and Buses). On trains, fare inspectors should enter the rail car and move through the vehicle in a systematic manner in an effort to inspect as many customers as possible. Options for systematic inspections include: (1) start- ing at the outer ends of the vehicle and working toward the middle; (2) entering the middle

A-110 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion doors and working toward the ends; or (3) inspecting those near to the doors working toward the middle. On buses, request proof of payment while walking down the aisle of the bus. • Strategy 2—On Platform/Stop Inspections (Trains and Buses). Fare inspectors should position themselves by the door at the stop, request proof of payment as customers exit and continue to check fares at the stop as passengers arrive. For customers arriving at the platform or stop, a citation for fare evasion can only be issued at a paid platform or stop. • Strategy 3—Platform Inspections with Train Hold Inspections (Trains Only and with Approval by Management). This is a combination of rolling and platform inspections. Fare inspectors should generally enter the same rail car, one at each door per two-car train, pro- vided that adequate staff is available. Announce the inspection and contact the first person behind the door continuing clockwise/counterclockwise. Fare inspectors are given guidance in the SOPs on when to hold a train during fare missions (Strategy 3), including considering current or previous delays. Prior to conducting a fare mis- sion, fare inspectors must notify Control of the plan to conduct fare enforcement, including the location and direction of the train. A personnel member is also positioned near the front end of the platform to enable communication with the operator to ensure that the train is held during the fare inspection mission. In the past, with the support of transit police officers, TriMet would attempt to stop or track down passengers who exited the vehicle upon seeing fare enforcement personnel. Since then, TriMet has determined that it is not worth the effort to pursue potential fare evaders who flee the vehicle. If an individual must be chased down for a fare evasion citation, there is a higher likeli- hood that use of force will be needed to get the passenger to comply with the citation process, and contractors were concerned about encouraging staff to put themselves in a situation that could escalate when the passenger’s only offense was fare evading. TriMet has been conducting a pilot during the afternoon fare missions to help address the lack of accurate personal information given during inspection encounters by passengers with- out valid proof of payment. If it is someone’s first fare evasion offense, fare inspectors will com- municate to the passenger that if they cooperate and provide their ID, they will only be issued a warning. TriMet believes it is more important to educate the individual on the fare system than to try to cite them, and passengers have been more receptive to this communication approach. The pilot has resulted in increased cooperation from passengers found to be evading fare, de-escalation of the interaction, and better collection of accurate information. Fare Inspector Discretion Under TriMet’s SOPs, fare inspectors may use their discretion as to whether they issue a cita- tion or a warning to a passenger found without valid proof of payment. Passengers who do not tap their Hop fare media do not pass a fare inspection and are considered to be without valid proof of payment. The appropriate action for failure to tap varies based on whether a fare is due or whether the individual has a valid 2.5-hour pass or has earned a day or month cap. The typical practice at this time is to issue a warning for passengers with an untapped 2.5-hour pass, earned caps, annual passes, or similar situations. TriMet sees this as an opportunity to continue to educate the public about the fare system, while still documenting the noncompliance. Prior warnings and citations are documented in TriMet’s citation system. When fare inspec- tors scan a government-issued ID or enter an individual’s name and date of birth into their all-in-one citation device, fare inspectors can check whether the individual has any previous warnings or citations. Fare inspectors can also contact Control to access the citation system and obtain additional information.

Case Studies A-111   Warnings are documented in TriMet’s citation system so that fare inspectors can see any previously issued warnings for a specific individual. Prior warnings can play a role in a fare inspector’s decision as to whether the passenger should be issued a citation. Prior to TriMet’s new administrative process for citations, explained below in Fare Evasion Citations and Alter- native Resolution Options, TriMet only maintained records of warnings for 2 years. When the new administrative process was rolled out, TriMet decided that a period of 3 years was more appropriate. Individuals are not required to carry ID in the state of Oregon, but passengers must be able to provide ID showing they are eligible for the fare type they are using. This ID does not have to be government-issued and may be provided by TriMet as part of the reduced-fare Hop program. However, in the state of Oregon, it is a criminal offense if an individual provides false informa- tion when this information is requested for the purpose of issuing a citation. If an individual refuses to provide ID or provides false information, the fare inspector may cite the individual for failure to provide ID or providing false information in addition to the fare evasion citation. Occasionally TriMet will cite youth for fare evasion, although youth typically only receive warnings. There is not a lot of community comfort in citing youth for fare evasion. If youth do receive a citation rather than a warning, it is typically due to a behavioral issue, not fare evasion. It should be noted that TriMet partners with Portland Public Schools to provide transit passes to students because the City of Portland has no yellow bus service. Reduced youth or student fares are available. Fare Collection and Inspection Technology Fare inspectors carry three devices: an all-in-one citation device, an Ingenico reader for read- ing fare media, and a mobile device connected to the Ingenico reader via Bluetooth with the fare inspection app that displays inspection information. The all-in-one citation device can scan ID barcodes, check for prior warnings and citations, and has a built-in printer for issuing the physical citation. This device has helped to speed up the citation process, especially because it can prefill information for fare inspectors, including who the inspector is (based on log-in information), the time and date, the stop ID (if GPS is connected), and all of the information required on the Oregon Unified Citation based on the scanned ID. The speed helps fare inspectors inspect more passengers and reduces the interaction time fare inspectors have with fare evaders; thus, it is viewed as a means of reducing the likeli- hood of escalation. The device has additional capabilities as well, such as the ability to select the next available court date if an individual does not resolve their citation using TriMet’s in-house administrative process within 90 days. The citation device also has a list of predetermined fare evasion instances or notes that a fare inspector can choose from when logging warnings and citations, such as “No Honored Citizen Card,” “Monthly Pass but No Tap,” etc., to differentiate between different types of fare evasion. Categorization of the type of fare evasion enables TriMet to analyze the prevalence and locations of various types of fare evasion. The fare inspector can also manually enter additional notes. TriMet encourages fare inspectors to log anything that helps TriMet document what the issue was. This includes information on the type of fare evasion and specific evasion circumstances, which is helpful if a citation is appealed. The Ingenico reader and connected mobile device loaded with a fare inspection app is used to read all Hop fare media, and presents the fare inspector with information about a passenger’s last valid tap (i.e., fare payment). In effect, this is the device that aids a fare inspector in determin- ing whether the passenger being inspected is evading fare.

A-112 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion TriMet is exploring next-generation fare inspection devices that would allow the agency to reduce the number of devices fare inspectors are required to carry. TriMet is also hoping that the next generation of inspection devices will allow the fare inspectors to see more detailed transac- tion information so they can make more informed decisions. At the moment, only a passenger’s last valid tap can be read by the Ingenico reader, and the device does not return a result indicat- ing whether or not that tap is valid and whether the passenger has hit the daily or monthly cap. Because the relatively new Hop Fastpass fare collection system (implemented in July 2017) includes innovative payment methods, including Hop virtual cards and mobile wallets, both fare inspectors and passengers have had to become accustomed to the new technology. Although inspections of the Hop virtual card and mobile wallets have been generally smooth, there have been some challenges, especially in unique cases introduced by the new technology. For exam- ple, if a passenger has paired their Apple Watch with their iPhone, Hop payment information is not communicated between the two devices, and fare inspectors must inspect the specific device that the passenger tapped. There is also a challenge where passengers using the virtual card on an Android device can disable the NFC on their phone and have their card pulled up and go through the motion of tapping on the validator in front of an operator, without the virtual card actually being read. This behavior is usually intentional misuse by the passenger. Fare Evasion Citations and Alternative Resolution Options Fare evasion is a civil citation. TriMet came to an agreement with local prosecutors that someone caught evading fare would no longer be charged with criminal trespass or interference with public transportation if they failed to cooperate or provide their ID information for the issuance of a citation. In 2016, TriMet undertook a yearlong study to review its citation process. This included out- reach to a dozen other transit agencies on their processes. TriMet’s Director of Legal Services also put an emphasis on conducting meaningful outreach and engagement with community stakeholders to help shape any changes, and community partners played a role in helping deter- mine the timeline for resolution and the alternative resolution options available. As a result of this process, TriMet implemented an innovative process to enable fare evaders to administratively resolve citations directly with TriMet before unresolved citations are sent to the courts. This new process required legislative action, House Bill (HB) 2777, which passed in 2017, to amend the Oregon Revised Statutes to enable a mass transit district to resolve citations through an administrative process to adjudicate ordinance violations. TriMet also implemented technology improvements, including enhancements to its electronic devices and analytics to support the new process. TriMet must also provide an annual report to the state on its program and outcomes. The new process for resolving citations, which took effect July 1, 2018, gives an individual 90 days to resolve the citation directly with TriMet through administrative options. If cited for fare evasion, passengers now have the following options to resolve a citation before it is for- warded to the court: 1. Request an appeal hearing within 45 days. If the citation is not dismissed, the passenger still has the following options. 2. Pay a fine within 90 days: 1st offense—$75, 2nd offense—$100, 3rd offense—$150, 4th offense and beyond—$175. TriMet can also choose to reduce the fine. 3. Perform community service at one of TriMet’s selected institutions within 90 days: 1st offense— 4 hours, 2nd offense—7 hours, 3rd offense—12 hours, 4th offense and beyond—15 hours. 4. If qualified, enroll in a reduced-fare program and load $10 on the personalized Honored Citizen Hop card within 90 days.

Case Studies A-113   If the citation has not been resolved within 90 days of issuance, TriMet’s citation system auto- matically sends the ticket to the court system. Fare evasion citations that make it to the court system are subject to the presumptive fine of $175 up to the maximum fine of $250. If the evader fails to pay the fine or appear in court, the court will try to reach them by mail. In the state of Oregon, if a citation can be linked to an individual that files a state tax return, unpaid citations may be withheld from a future state tax refund. When printed at the time of issuance, citations are placed in a special envelope printed with the options for resolving the citation with TriMet. When fare inspectors give an evader their ticket in the wrapper, they take that opportunity to explain the options for resolving the citation with TriMet. This process has been an effective de-escalation tool since fare inspectors are able to explain to the passenger that they have alternative resolution options that do not require the involvement of the court system. Of the 15,570 fare evasion citations issued in 2019, 3,514 or 23% were resolved using one of TriMet’s in-house administrative options. Of those resolved administratively, the greatest number (56%) of fare evasion citations were resolved by paying the reduced fine. As to lessons learned, TriMet notes that it takes staff to support an administrative citation process. When TriMet started this program, it had only one staff member. In hindsight, it would have been a good investment to staff the program for success from the start since bringing on some of the administrative workload previously handled by the courts requires administrative support. Customer Education TriMet has made significant efforts to revamp fare enforcement across its system following several years when enforcement was lacking. In a passenger survey, TriMet found that even people with the means for paying the fare were fare evading because of the low probability of being checked. In addition to encouraging fare payment through fare enforcement, TriMet has undertaken various efforts to educate the public about paying fares, especially as it relates to the Hop Fastpass electronic fare collection system. The Hop system provides daily and monthly fare caps to pas- sengers paying with a physical Hop smart card or a virtual Hop card on their smartphone. All Hop system users receive a 2.5-hour pass when they pay their fare, which allows them to ride as much as they want for as long as the pass is valid. Messaging around Hop has focused on the simplicity of the system, the benefits to passengers, and the importance of tapping every time you board to receive those benefits. Particular attention has been paid to educating passengers on this last point—the importance of tapping for each boarding. Under the Hop system, a passenger can technically have a valid fare (e.g., an organization pass or a valid 2.5-hour pass) and yet still be cited for fare evasion if they have not tapped to enter the vehicle. This tapping policy is motivated by the agency’s data needs for pricing and revenue allocation throughout the region, as well as by the idea that it is easier to educate passengers on the need to tap for every boarding, rather than tapping in only certain circumstances. TriMet has continued to support a large campaign through the agency website, social media, stickers, and channel cards on rail and bus vehicles that focuses on edu- cating passengers to tap every time they board. Buses and trains also have recorded messages stating that valid fare is required on TriMet, and some stations feature stamps in the concrete platform notifying passengers of the fare-paid area. As more employer programs have been brought onto Hop, TriMet has also had educational conversations with those companies to ensure their employees understand that they are supposed to tap every time they board.

A-114 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion Customer Perception and Engagement Different members of the public feel differently about fare evasion and fare inspection. Although there is a vocal part of the population that supports nothing short of a fare-free system, TriMet receives several customer comments every day asking for more fare enforcement. These passengers associate feeling safe on TriMet with fare and code enforcement. Passengers also see staff in uniform and associate that with accountability. At the same time, TriMet recognizes that transit plays an important social equity role, in particular to provide access to jobs and mobility for those who do not or cannot drive, and the need to provide service safely and equitably. On July 1, 2020, TriMet reallocated $1.8 million in funding from traditional police services and other sources and undertook a community outreach and engagement effort to inform change in TriMet’s transit safety and security. The initiative was structured to determine how best to redirect those funds to community-supported programs and to expand TriMet’s approach to safety beyond the use of traditional law enforcement approaches to public safety. TriMet initi- ated three efforts to inform a reimagined public safety approach. They included: • Conducting community-wide listening sessions to gather feedback from customers, frontline employees, and community members on the best approaches to providing security that is free from bias on the system. • Establishing a panel of local and national experts to advise on national best practices for transit security, equity, and community engagement in safety and security. • Piloting new nonpolice response resources, such as mobile crisis intervention teams for mental and behavioral health issues, similar to the Crisis Assistance Helping Out On The Streets (CAHOOTS) program in Eugene, OR. TriMet initiated community outreach efforts, which included engaging with local leaders and community groups and listening to passengers, employees (specifically frontline workers and security officers), and the general public, as well as TriMet’s Transit Equity Advisory Committee, Safety & Security Committee, and Committee on Accessible Transportation. Through this pro- cess, TriMet gathered feedback on roadblocks to safety over a period of several months. During that time, TriMet developed a “Reimagining Public Safety & Security on Transit” web page and conducted an online survey in seven languages, which generated over 13,000 responses. Overall, TriMet conducted dozens of community and agency-partnered focus groups and hosted listen- ing sessions in English and Spanish. The responses from these outreach efforts showed that most passengers and employees feel safer knowing that transit police are available to respond to emergencies. In late September 2020, TriMet formed a Transit Public Safety Advisory Committee to iden- tify and evaluate approaches to safety and security that foster a safer, equitable, and welcoming transit system for all. The Committee included regional thought leaders on community and equity as well as national transit security experts. The Committee’s recommendations for redi- recting the $1.8 million, which were informed by TriMet’s outreach efforts, were presented in November 2020. The recommendations call for supplementing and supporting the current mix of unarmed and armed personnel. They do not call for TriMet to dismantle any of its existing rider service safety or security programs, including the transit police. The Committee’s top three recommendations are to: • Expand training for TriMet employees in anti-racism, cultural competency, mental health, and de-escalation. • Increase the presence of TriMet personnel to support passengers on the transit system. • Work with community and jurisdictional partners to develop a crisis intervention team model to address issues on the system that do not warrant a response by law enforcement.

Case Studies A-115   Longer-range recommendations include using technology, such as a smartphone app with real-time reporting functionality, to support passengers and employees, maintaining and upgrading system infrastructure with features like improved lighting to create safer and more welcoming environments, and improving communication, accountability, and reporting on safety and security initiatives. TriMet plans to implement the recommendations over the short, medium, and long term. TriMet is also preparing a 5-year strategic plan for transit police that will support the broader reimagine public safety initiative; the plan will establish performance measurements for transit police activities. As the role of the Transit Public Safety Advisory Committee winds down, TriMet is estab- lishing a permanent advisory committee, the Reimagining Public Safety Advisory Committee, focused on further development and implementation of the safety and security recommenda- tions. TriMet is looking for members of the public to fill nine positions on the committee. Monitoring Fare Evasion and Potential Bias TriMet conducts an annual fare evasion survey every spring on MAX light rail using a random sample with a baseline goal of 10,000 contacts. It takes temporary staff about 3 weeks to conduct the survey, during which passengers are not issued citations if they have not paid the fare. TriMet collects data on whether the individual has a valid fare (yes/no), the reason the individual does not have a fare (e.g., took a chance because . . .), and demographics of the individual as perceived by the surveyor. This information helps TriMet understand the size of the issue, the customer education needs, and the needs for additional fare enforcement resources. The results from this survey supported the regrowth of the fare inspection program since at the time, many of those who did not have fare answered that they did not purchase fare because they perceive the odds of encountering fare inspection low, and they were willing to chance being caught. TriMet also commissions regular studies to analyze whether there is evidence of bias in fare inspection and enforcement on their services. When fare inspectors record warnings and citations, they include race/ethnicity and other demographic information as perceived by the fare inspector. TriMet has partnered with Portland State University’s Criminal Justice Policy Research Institute in the past to provide third-party analyses of TriMet’s citation data in com- bination with data from the annual fare evasion survey described above to establish whether there is a disparity in who is being inspected and cited as part of TriMet’s fare enforcement activities. Portland State University has conducted this study twice previously for TriMet and is partnering with the agency again in 2020 to update the study with TriMet’s latest data. The previous two studies (2016, 2018) have shown no systemic racial bias. This independent, third- party study has been one of TriMet’s biggest tools in dismantling public perception of inequity or racial discrimination in enforcement. TriMet plans to continue performing these studies. It is likely that the agency has built enough expertise through the previous engagements to bring the analysis in-house. TriMet is also conducting a new study that seeks to look at what exactly leads to criminal citations on its system. TriMet is interested in determining whether it is due to an escalation of another noncriminal issue, such as fare evasion. Constitutionality of Fare Enforcement TriMet has faced three high profile cases regarding the constitutionality of fare inspection. Two cases occurred in Washington County. In those cases, the trial judges ultimately ruled that a fare inspection to request proof of payment is not a stop but an interaction due to the system’s

A-116 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion open, “honor system” design. In the third more recent case that occurred in Multnomah County (State of Oregon v. Rosa Giovanna Valderrama), the trial judge dismissed the case on the basis that the stop was unlawful. In 2018, the TriMet Board of Directors approved an ordinance to revise TriMet code to clearly identify the transit agency’s existing authority and practices to require and inspect fares in response to the trial judge’s ruling. State legislative bills have been introduced with the intent to minimize TriMet’s ability to enforce fares. In 2015, HB 2826 would have amended what constitutes “interfering with public transit” such that someone who is caught on TriMet property without a ticket or under an exclusion would no longer be subject to a criminal charge. In 2019, two bills were introduced. HB 3336 would have made it no longer a crime to provide false information when being cited for fare evasion, posing issues with processing the citations because the name provided may be a preferred name and not align with a legal name or may be a false name. The second bill, HB 3337, would have prohibited police officers from participating in or supporting fare enforcement. HB 3337 was reintroduced as HB 4097 in 2020. Although HB 4097 was approved by the House and made it to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Oregon’s 2020 legislative session adjourned without passing the bill. TriMet spent a lot of time working to educate legislators on the potential impacts of the various proposed bills on TriMet’s operations. TriMet anticipates more attempts like these to reduce the agency’s ability to enforce fares. If a bill restricting the use of police to support fare enforcement were passed, TriMet would need to explore how its fare enforcement personnel could verify an individual’s identity. Without the involvement of law enforcement, TriMet does not have the ability to verify someone’s identity, if needed. Due to increasing scrutiny by the legislature of TriMet’s fare enforcement practices, TriMet is collating and documenting customer comments requesting additional enforcement. The agency believes it is important to document these comments because, although constituents call their legislators to complain about TriMet fare enforcement activities, passengers also call TriMet to request more security and enforcement. TriMet is reviewing the last 3 years of comments to have that information available going forward. Toronto Transit Commission The Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) is an agency of the City of Toronto, Canada. The TTC operates bus, subway, and streetcar services in the city of Toronto and neighboring York Region with connections to systems serving surrounding municipalities. The TTC works with Metrolinx, an agency of the Government of Ontario, to plan and implement transit expansion projects and transit improvement projects in Toronto. Metrolinx manages PRESTO, the smart card fare collection system used by TTC and a number of other transit service providers in Ontario. Revenue Protection Resources In early 2020, TTC divided its Transit Enforcement Unit into two departments: TTC Special Constable Service and Revenue Protection. The reason for dividing the unit was to focus on two distinct TTC priorities: (1) deliver a safe and reliable service for customers and (2) max- imize fare revenue. The TTC uses two types of revenue protection personnel to conduct fare enforcement, fare inspectors and special constables, who are deployed together as fare inspection teams. Fare inspec- tors and special constables have the authority to request proof of payment anywhere within

Case Studies A-117   Overview of Agency TTC operates bus, subway, and streetcar services. Fare Collection Overview On bus and streetcar, passengers pay on board. On bus, passengers board through the front door and pay with cash/TTC student or senior ticket/token at the farebox or tap their PRESTO card or ticket. Passengers paying with cash/TTC student or senior ticket/token receive a transfer that serves as proof of payment. On streetcars, student or senior tickets are validated for single ride use. Streetcar is all-door boarding, and passengers either tap their PRESTO card/ticket on the validator or pay with cash/TTC student or senior ticket/token at the fares and transfers machines on board the streetcar and receive a transfer as proof of payment. The subway system is gated and passengers must tap a PRESTO card or ticket to enter the station. PRESTO cards can be purchased and loaded at FVMs at all subway stations, select streetcar stops, Shoppers Drug Mart locations, TTC’s Customer Service Centre, online or through the PRESTO app. PRESTO cards can also be reloaded at self-serve reload machines at subway stations. Definition of Fare Evasion Types of fare evasion and associated fines for a given offense are set by TTC Bylaw No. 1. The types of fare evasion can be summarized as: ● Illegal entry into a subway station from a street through a bus bay ● Entering a fare gate without paying, including pushing a gate, hopping over a gate, walking behind someone—also known as tailgating—or holding a gate open for others to enter ● Boarding a bus or streetcar without paying ● Using a fare type without qualifications (child, youth, senior or post- secondary student) ● Misuse of or tampering with paper transfers, fare media or ID Fare Enforcement Overview On bus and streetcar, fare enforcement is conducted on board the vehicle. On bus, the operator observes fare payment, but is not responsible for fare enforcement; instead the operator pushes a fare dispute key in cases of fare noncompliance. All streetcar routes require proof of payment and use all-door boarding. On streetcar, the operator is also not responsible for fare collection and is in a separate compartment. In the past, fare enforcement had also been conducted as passengers alight the streetcar at subway stations. The subway system is gated and fare enforcement may be deployed at the fare line to observe and identify passengers illegally entering the station or using a concession PRESTO card (i.e., child, youth, post-secondary, senior). Passengers paying with cash/ticket/token are not required to take a transfer, unless on a proof-of-payment route. Fare Enforcement Personnel Fare enforcement is conducted by fare inspectors and special constables assigned to revenue protection activities. Passengers must be ready to provide proof of payment if requested by a fare inspector, special constable, operator, station collector or customer service agent. However, only fare inspectors and special constables have the authority to issue citations for fare evasion; other personnel are authorized to request proof of payment, but cannot cite. Fare Enforcement Deployment The TTC is increasing the use of data to inform deployments, identify risks, and make deployments more systematic in determining the coverage period and fare inspection locations for each route and station. Fare enforcement is primarily focused on streetcar, on which fare inspectors and special constables are deployed together as teams and assigned to a zone and route. In the subway, TTC positions special constables and supervisors at the fare lines to observe fare payment at the fare gates and request proof of eligibility for concession fares. On bus, TTC deploys special constables on an exception basis to respond to specific issues (e.g., using fare dispute data). Toronto Transit Commission (TTC), Toronto, ON (continued on next page)

A-118 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion the TTC system and to issue warnings and citations. In addition to fare inspectors and special constables, other TTC uniformed staff (e.g., station agents and station supervisors) can request proof of payment but do not have the authority to issue warnings or citations. Fare inspectors are customer-focused representatives responsible for fare enforcement and revenue protection, executed in a fair, consistent, and nondiscriminatory manner. In Q3 2019, secondary duties, such as crowd control and incident response, were removed from fare inspector responsibilities to increase the amount of time for fare inspections. These safety and security responsibilities are still within the responsibilities of special constables, who are also respon- sible for customer-focused fare enforcement and revenue protection. Special constables provide support in more complex investigations and assist with noncompliant passengers. Special con- stables have greater authority to compel cooperation because individuals are not required by law to produce ID to a fare inspector. Furthermore, as sworn peace officers, special constables have arrest and release authority while conducting investigations and enforcement. Special con- stables on patrol assignments also provide support for fare enforcement. When not actively attending security or safety incidents, they may be positioned at primary and secondary subway station entrances to observe fare payment. In addition to the special constables, the Toronto Police Service also provides support for safety and security incidents. However, they are not used for fare enforcement activities. In the first few months of the COVID-19 pandemic, when fare enforcement was suspended, TTC redeployed some of its special constables used for revenue protection assignments to assist with patrol. Others were deployed with fare inspectors to assist passengers and promote social distancing. Under the new structure, special constables on revenue protection assignments report to the Special Constable Service Department; fare inspectors report to the Revenue Protection Department. Despite fare inspectors and special constables being in separate departments, Fare Citation Practice Enforcement actions progressively range from education to warnings, tickets, and court summons. The appropriate action is subject to the discretion of the fare inspector/special constable. The TTC has a zero-tolerance policy for those who are fraudulently using a concession card (e.g., adult using a Child PRESTO card). Child PRESTO cards provide access to the system but do not deduct a fare. Fare Evasion Penalties Under TTC Bylaw No. 1, individuals can be issued a Part I Notice or a Part III Summons. Part I infractions are subject to a set fine amount based on the type of offense. In addition to the set fine, the Province of Ontario adds a victim fine surcharge that is not specific to fare evasion. For Part III infractions, if found guilty, the amount of the fine to be paid and/or conditions are determined by the justice of the peace overseeing the trial. Individuals can also be charged under the Criminal Code of Canada for “Fraud Transportation.” Fare Enforcement Technology and Capital Investments The TTC has implemented a number of initiatives to better control fare lines through enhancements to fare gate software and hardware (e.g., gates close faster to reduce tailgating), fare-deterrence cameras at secondary entrances, and installation of barriers to eliminate gaps between fare lines and collector booths. TTC has plans for additional improvements such as a different colored light indicating use of Child PRESTO cards, new software (e.g., mobile by-law ticketing), and performance improvements of Inspector handheld devices. Toronto Transit Commission (TTC), Toronto, ON (Continued )

Case Studies A-119   there is significant coordination between the departments. The Revenue Protection Department develops the deployment plans for fare enforcement and directs special constables on where to focus efforts. Conversely, in the field, personnel are supervised by special constable sergeants. The TTC is reviewing whether transit special constables and fare inspectors could be deployed together, but without special constables in a supervisory role. Revenue Protection Resource Hiring and Training The TTC has greatly increased its revenue protection staffing. In 2019 and 2020, the TTC Board approved 120 new revenue protection resources. In the 2020 fiscal year, TTC has 111 fare inspector and 72 special constable positions budgeted for revenue protection. This includes 70 new budgeted positions in 2019 (45 fare inspectors, 22 special constables and three admin- istrative support staff) and an increase of 50 new budgeted special constable positions in 2020. Filling of the new positions, including 2019 vacancies, has been delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Recruitment was also temporarily paused in the last quarter of 2019 to promote diversity and inclusion, review position requirements, engage in outreach and modify onboarding processes (e.g., hiring, training and evaluation). This was conducted as part of a culture shift to increase the focus of fare enforcement on customer service. Another main reason for pausing recruit- ment was to remove any barriers that prevent staff racial and gender diversity from reflecting the demographics of customers served. TTC widened its outreach process for hiring by commu- nicating openings to diverse communities through advertising, newspapers, websites, job fairs and community organizations. TTC also changed the makeup of its interview panel to ensure gender and racial diversity. The TTC also reviewed position requirements to minimize barriers for applicants and evalu- ated what prior relevant experience was necessary for candidates and whether candidates would be able to gain that experience on the job. It identified disconnects between requirements and responsibilities. For example, candidates for Toronto police and special constable positions required a high school education, while candidates for the fare inspector role, which has fewer job responsibilities, required 2 years of law enforcement experience. TTC now only requires fare inspector applicants to have completed high school or a recognized equivalent, combined with several years of customer service/hospitality, social services, or equivalent experience. TTC also reviewed potential financial barriers, including the fitness test that had been required for candidates for special constables to apply, but did not guarantee an interview. TTC now pays for the fitness tests for applicants. Fare inspectors and special constables are provided extensive training on customer service, diversity and inclusion, human rights, and confronting anti-Black racism, aimed at preventing racial/ethnic bias. There is also a particular focus on mental health awareness with a mandatory training program developed with input from various organizations and members of the com- munity. Other training includes de-escalation, crisis and tactical communications, officer safety, and use-of-force laws and application. Training programs are continually evolving to provide an up-to-date curriculum. In addition to training during onboarding, fare inspectors and special constables must undergo annual refresher training and recertify each year. The Fare Inspector Training Program consists of 30 training days (6 weeks), for a total of 240 hours. The academic and practical skills training program is followed by a comprehensive field training program of up to 3 months with a coach officer. The field training program does not have a set curriculum and is at the discretion of the coach officer. However, TTC plans to develop a curriculum and evaluate how coach officers are selected and matched with fare inspectors, including reviewing coach officer performance on a periodic basis.

A-120 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion The Special Constable Training Program and Field Training Program is longer. The class- room training program is 8 weeks with additional training at the City of Toronto Police College. The field training program is 6 months. Initially, when TTC was creating its training program for fare inspectors in 2014/2015, TTC used a group of former Toronto police officers to provide training on use of force, by-law enforce- ment, and criminal codes. However, as TTC’s revenue protection program has matured, strong internal knowledge has eliminated the need to rely on external trainers for these topics. Most training for fare inspectors and special constables is done in-house by a shared training unit. For specialized training, TTC may use external resources (e.g., a mental health awareness multiday course done by an external psychiatrist) or other organizations (e.g., 2- to 4-hour modules done by Alzheimer’s Society of Toronto and the City of Toronto Streets to Homes). The TTC also brings in paid actors for scenario role-playing (e.g., to act out de-escalation techniques). Although similar topics are covered for both fare inspectors and special constables, TTC tailors the depth of the training based on type of personnel. For example, the use-of-force training for special constables is more intensive because they carry batons and handcuffs, whereas fare inspectors do not. Similarly, because special constables are peace officers with law enforcement powers and authorities, special constables spend more time learning the Canadian Criminal Code. As an agency in the City of Toronto, all TTC staff must complete confronting anti-Black racism (CABR) training conducted by the City of Toronto’s CABR Unit. First implemented in 2019, the Special Constable Service and Revenue Protection departments have priority for receiving the training, which makes special constables and fare inspectors aware of unconscious biases that could potentially impact their interactions with Black passengers and community members, and how to prevent such biases from having detrimental impacts. This training dove- tails with TTC’s commitment to provide a fair, equitable service to all passengers in a way that respects their dignity and human rights. This training is ongoing, and will form part of the Special Constable and Fare Inspector Training Programs for all new members. The TTC also plans to incorporate the training as part of the annual refresher training. Deployment Uniformed and Plainclothes Deployments Generally, revenue protection resources are deployed in uniform to provide a visible deter- rence to fare evasion. The TTC discontinued the use of fare inspectors and special constables in plain clothes. Although plainclothes audits can provide insight into problem routes, it was found that increasing the visibility of TTC employees by requiring them to wear a uniform can have a positive impact on customer payment behavior and deter fare noncompliance. Special constables and fare inspectors wear protective ballistic vests. The vests are important for protection, especially for fare inspectors who do not carry defensive equipment and do not have somewhere to escape if attacked (e.g., collector booth, operator cabin). TTC understands the sensitivity of some passengers to over-policing and does not want to trigger negative responses when passengers see special constables and fare inspectors. As such, TTC is exploring alternative uniform options to make staff in uniform more approachable by “softening” the militaristic look of the uniforms. TTC is evaluating and plans to obtain public feedback on new uniform designs that would minimize the prominence of the protective vest (e.g., adopting a gray-on-gray design) while still enabling passengers to recognize personnel.

Case Studies A-121   Streetcar Deployment Streetcars have all-door boarding and operate as proof-of-payment environments. Fare enforcement on streetcars is conducted by fare inspectors and special constables. Given the higher rate of fare evasion on streetcars, the 2020 deployment strategy is focused on a concen- trated presence of fare enforcement to reinforce the “tap every time” behavior. TTC streetcars are low-floor light rail vehicles with an enclosed compartment for the opera- tor, diminishing operator/passenger interaction and increasing the risk of fare evasion. The number of doors also appears to have an impact on fare evasion rates. The new streetcars have four doors while the older legacy streetcars had only two doors. During the TTC Audit, Risk and Compliance Fare Study in 2019 (discussed below), TTC found a higher level of noncompliant passengers on the newer streetcars than on the older streetcars, which are no longer in service. The TTC assigns its revenue protection resources to specific routes within geographic fare inspection zones. Using consistent resource deployment, TTC assigns teams to the same zones, routes and times so that personnel get to know their customers. In developing deployment plans, TTC has increased analysis of assignments to ensure that all routes and zones are being inspected. High-priority deployment zones are centered around the urban core. See Figure A-6 for a streetcar zone coverage map. There are three types of zones, with the highest-frequency inspec- tions in downtown and lessening inspections farther out. In defining the zones and inspection levels, TTC is mindful of socioeconomic factors. The size and composition of assignments are based on ridership and may change focus from day to day (i.e., fewer resources sent to lines with lower ridership). For routes with higher rider- ship, TTC generally assigns four personnel to a fare inspection team (e.g., two fare inspectors and two special constables) to cover each of the doors of the vehicles. Currently, TTC focuses on conducting onboard inspections. Fare inspection teams board a streetcar with one member entering through each door. Personnel then move systematically through the streetcar to conduct 100% inspections while the streetcar is in motion (the streetcar is not held for inspections). If personnel encounter someone with a concession card, they will verify proof of eligibility. To ensure that all passengers are inspected, personnel watch the doors during inspections to identify anyone that has boarded after inspections began. If a passenger boards the streetcar mid-inspection, then the inspection teams are to observe the passenger tap the PRESTO validator. If the validator declines a transaction or indicates a concession fare, the passenger’s PRESTO card is inspected to determine the appropriate action. Once the fares of all of the passengers on a streetcar are inspected, the team disembarks and inspects another streetcar, staying on the assigned streetcar route within the assigned zone. The TTC has suspended conducting “offboarding” inspections, where fares are inspected for passengers alighting streetcars in subway stations because, at the time, not all passengers could be inspected due to the sheer volume of passengers alighting. Offboarding inspections also created lines of passengers waiting for inspections and delayed their travels. When success ful, offboarding inspections enable a high number of inspections (hundreds of passengers every 8–10 minutes). The TTC is exploring ways to reinstitute offboarding inspections by using multiple fare inspection teams to be able to inspect all alighting passengers and minimize “walkaways.” TTC may also consider the installation of validators at streetcar exits in subway stations to have passengers tap and prove fare payment. All changes to offboarding are intended to ensure that there is a fair, objective and consistent practice for selecting which customers are inspected.

Source: TTC Revenue Protection Strategy, Presentation to TTC Board, February 25, 2020. Figure A-6. TTC streetcar zone coverage map.

Case Studies A-123   Subway Deployment TTC’s subway system is gated. TTC uses various staff to assist with monitoring the fare line. Customer service agents (CSAs) are located at primary station entrances. TTC is in the process of having CSAs actively engaged at the fare line rather than in the booth. During peak periods (6:30 a.m. to 10 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. to 7 p.m., Monday through Friday, or any other times as determined by TTC), TTC also assigns station supervisors and special constables to fare lines, including secondary station entrances, when they are not actively attending security or safety incidents. As TTC increases the number of fare inspectors, it is exploring the possible use of fare inspectors for this activity. Personnel observe fare payment as passengers tap to enter the fare gates. If special constables observe transactions that are declined or indicate a concession fare, they are to inspect the passenger’s card using a handheld unit to determine why it was declined or request proof of eligibility for a concession fare. They also monitor for other fare evasion tactics, such as tail- gating, gate manipulation, gate-hopping, etc. Special constables and fare inspectors may be deployed on the subway for special assign- ments to target identified risks associated with concession card fraud, improper use of transfers and fare gate tailgating. Although these assignments may be sporadic, TTC undertook a con- centrated effort to conduct these special assignments from April through August 2019. Team members may be deployed in plain clothes or uniform for these assignments. Unlike special constables and fare inspectors, CSAs and station supervisors cannot issue cita- tions or enforce fare payment. However, CSAs and station supervisors report in-field obser- vations to guide deployment of revenue protection resources. They can also request special constables to assist if they observe someone evading payment. Bus Deployment Bus operators may state the fare, but are instructed not to engage in fare enforcement and do not check for proof of eligibility for concession cards. Instead, bus operators are instructed to press the fare dispute key on the operator console. The TTC then uses the fare dispute key data to prioritize the deployment of revenue protection resources. TTC deploys special constables to buses on an exception basis to respond to specific issues. The special constables are deployed to support bus operators, educate passengers on fare pay- ment and enforce, as required. More resources would be required to conduct fare enforcement on board buses on a consistent, systematic basis. TTC uses operator reports, fare dispute key data and analysis of routes/locations with high risk for concession card fraud to deploy personnel. Assignment of special constables tends to be on routes at high risk for concession card fraud. The TTC is exploring strategies, including use of APCs, to remove the reliance on bus operator reports and fare dispute key data for deploy- ment. APCs are installed on all buses; TTC is in the process of installing APCs on its streetcar and rail vehicles. Currently, TTC deploys only special constables to bus routes. However, TTC may consider the use of fare inspectors on buses as staffing of fare inspectors increases. Fare enforcement on bus may change if TTC implements all-door boarding permanently. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, TTC initiated rear-door boarding on bus and temporarily suspended fare inspections and issuing citations. On July 2, 2020, TTC reintroduced front-door boarding and resumed accepting cash, tickets, tokens, and transfer fare payments; fare inspec- tions resumed in mid-August 2020. PRESTO passengers are still permitted to enter through rear

A-124 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion doors, enabling all-door boarding and promoting social distancing. All TTC buses are equipped with PRESTO validators at all doors. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, approximately 90% of passengers paid using PRESTO on buses. Deployment Strategies The TTC is increasing the use of data to inform deployments and identify risks, and make deployments more systematic in determining the coverage period and fare inspection locations/ routes. TTC deployments are informed by the identified risk, available resources, required mix of resources (e.g., fare inspectors versus special constables) and other operational requirements. Reports developed by Finance’s Revenue and Ridership Analytics Section help to identify high- risk locations based on relevant revenue data correlated against ridership data. The TTC is also using in-field observations by frontline staff at subway stations, customer and employee com- plaints, and the monitoring of other key fare evasion elements (e.g., concession card fraud) to identify fare evasion risks. The evidence-based deployment plans are developed and refined on a monthly basis based on revenue and ridership trends, risks, and other operational requirements. They may combine one or more risk areas, such as AM/PM peak coverage, concession card fraud checks, and insights from revenue and ridership data. TTC has reviewed and revised scheduling to increase coverage and the number of hours that inspections are performed. In partnership with Canadian Union of Public Employees Local 5089, TTC has implemented changes to scheduling practices to better align revenue pro- tection resources with coverage requirements. These changes have increased the number of shifts for inspection personnel by 29% over 2019 levels. As part of these changes, TTC has begun implementing 10-hour shifts (January 2020) and 8-hour shifts (February 2020). The TTC now uses a combination of 8-, 10-, and 12-hour shifts for revenue protection resources (special constables used for nonrevenue protection are still typically on 12-hour shifts). By using various shift lengths, TTC is able to increase coverage, especially during AM and PM peak periods, by overlapping shifts. TTC also increased the number of reporting locations from three to seven locations, which enabled an increase in the number of hours for revenue protection per- sonnel to perform inspections by reducing their travel time between reporting location and assignments. Fare Evasion Infractions and Fines TTC Bylaw No. 1 regulates the use of the TTC local transportation system. Bylaw offenses are governed by the Provincial Offences Act, a statute that sets out procedures for the prosecution of offenses under other provincial statutes in Ontario and regulations and municipal bylaws. Fare inspectors and special constables have been designated as Provincial Offences Officers under the Provincial Offences Act. TTC Bylaw No. 1 establishes the requirement to pay the fare as a condition of use. Types of fare-related offenses are defined by TTC Bylaw No. 1, under which individuals can be issued a Part I Notice or a Part III Summons, as described below. In rare instances, individuals can also be charged under the Criminal Code for Fraudulently Obtaining Transportation. The City of Toronto’s Court Services Division provides administrative and support services to the public and a range of stakeholders, including TTC, using the Provincial Offences Courts in Toronto. TTC is required to file all Part I Notices and Part III Summons with the City of Toronto’s Court Services Division within 10 days. The division’s services also include default fine collection management.

Case Studies A-125   Part I Notices Part I infractions are subject to a set fine amount, to which the Province of Ontario adds a victim fine surcharge that is not specific to fare evasion. The victim fine surcharge, which is typically 20% of the set fine, is deposited into a special fund to help victims of crime. The City of Toronto also adds a $5 fee for court administration costs. The total payable amount for fare- related Part I Notices is $235 to $425. TTC does not receive revenue from fines paid for Part I Notices. Table A-5 indicates the sections of TTC Bylaw No. 1 related to fare evasion and the set fine amounts. In 2019, 20,764 tickets were filed with the courts, resulting in 17,993 cases in which a fine was imposed. The $235 fine is used most frequently for tickets. More than 80% of the tickets issued in 2019 were attributed to two offenses: • 3.13a Failure to Comply with Posted Sign (58% of tickets) • 2.3b Failure to Comply with Conditions of Use of Fare Media (25% of tickets) Section Part I Offense Set Fine Amount ($) Admin. Fee + Victim Surcharge ($) Total Payable($) 2.1 Refuse to pay fare (e.g., entering a paid area (station or vehicle) and not paying or declining to pay when asked) 195 40 235 2.2a Alter fare media (e.g., altered transfer to appear valid, ‘splitting’ a ticket) 345 80 425 2.2b Travel with altered fare media (e.g., altered transfer to appear valid, ‘splitting’ a ticket) 345 80 425 2.2c Alter identification card (e.g., altered TTC photo ID to appear valid) 345 80 425 2.2d Travel with altered identification (e.g., fake ID) 345 80 425 2.3a Invalid fare media (e.g., expired transfer, old (already used) ticket, use of Child PRESTO by adult) 345 80 425 2.3b Failure to comply with conditions of use of fare media (e.g., no TTC photo ID for student fare) 195 40 235 2.4a Invalid identification card (e.g., expired TTC photo ID) 195 40 235 2.4b Failure to comply with conditions of use identification card (e.g., not following any conditions of use on the TTC photo ID) 195 40 235 2.6 Failure to surrender fare media or identification card (e.g., not providing fare media, TTC photo ID, or proof of payment) 345 80 425 2.12 Improper use of transfer (e.g., not following conditions of use for transfer) 195 40 235 3.3 Enter or exit transit system through nondesignated entrance or exit (e.g., walk in illegally through bus bay) 345 80 425 3.13a Failure to comply with posted sign (e.g., not having proof of payment on a proof-of-payment service, such as streetcar that has a proof-of-payment decal on all doors) 195 40 235 Table A-5. TTC Bylaw No. 1 Part I Notice offenses and fine schedule.

A-126 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion Misuse of a Child PRESTO card accounted for 13% of the fare evasion matters within the court system in 2019. Although there is not a specific offense for the misuse of a Child PRESTO card, 2.3a Invalid Fare Media is commonly used to issue a ticket for this type of fare evasion. Defendants for Part I Notices are given the option to exercise one of three options regarding their charge, through the City of Toronto: • Pay Full Fine: Fine paid, individual pleads guilty, matter concluded. • Early Resolution: One-on-one meeting with the TTC prosecutor, typically ending with a reduced fine (individual pleads guilty) or the option to proceed to trial at a later date. • Trial: Issuing officer (fare inspector or special constable) and defendant are required to attend for an examination of the evidence in front of the justice of the peace. Although TTC does not have any alternative resolution options, the justice of the peace can impose a fine lower than the minimum amount or even suspend the sentence if the defendant agrees to plead guilty. Suspended sentences are often based on the defendant’s socioeconomic circumstance, mental health, effects on the defendant, etc. Defendants may be allowed to per- form a period of probation rather than paying a fine or being offered a payment plan. If the individual does not exercise one of the options within 15 days of receiving the notice, they will be deemed not to dispute the charge and the court may enter a conviction against them. If a trial has been requested by the defendant, the court services coordinator will receive a “Notice of Trial” from the City of Toronto (the turnaround time is typically 3–5 months from the offense date, but will fluctuate depending on volume). Notices of trial indicate the date/time/ location of the trial, provincial offenses officer in charge (fare inspector or special constable), defendant information, offense information, etc. Part III Summons Although less commonly used for fare evasion than Part I Notices, an individual can be issued a Provincial Offences Act Part III, which is a summons to appear, with no set fine amount. If found guilty, the amount of the fine to be paid and/or any conditions are determined by the justice of the peace overseeing the trial. For Part III fare evasion charges, defendants have the option to conclude the case on the first appearance date with a guilty plea and a $400 CAD fine. For a reduced fine, defendants have the option to return to court at a later date to pay a fine of $300 CAD ($200 CAD in restitution made payable to TTC and $100 CAD to be collected by the City of Toronto). The maximum fine for Part III Summons is up to $5,000 CAD and/or a probation order for a term of not more than 2 years, with conditions. On average, Part III fines levied are approxi- mately $400 CAD, including $200 CAD in restitution payable to TTC. Fines have been levied as low as $25 CAD or as high as $1,200 CAD. A probation order (e.g., suspension from service) can only be implemented through judicial process. Suspension from service is generally reserved for more serious criminal offenses, not fare evasion. Conditions for suspension may vary, including but not limited to “not to be found” at a particular station, on a particular bus route, etc. If the defendant breaches the probation order terms, they may be charged with a breach of probation, which upon conviction may result in incarceration of up to 30 days per charge. Criminal Charges Individuals found to be intentionally committing fare evasion through fraudulent means may be charged with fraud or obtaining transportation by fraud as per the Criminal Code of Canada. The crime is codified in Section 393 (3) of the criminal code which reads: “Everyone who, by any

Case Studies A-127   false pretense or fraud, unlawfully obtains transportation by land, water or air is guilty of an offense punishable on summary conviction.” The offense carries a maximum penalty of up to 6 months in jail and a criminal record. As with any fraud-related offense, which is a crime of dishonesty, it can have a severe, permanent negative impact on a person’s reputation, travel, and employment opportunities. Court Administrative Process Review The TTC has engaged the City of Toronto’s Court Services Division that administers the pro- vincial offense notice process and fine payment, to initiate an end-to-end review of the inspec- tion to court administration process to ensure it is integrated, efficient, and effective. TTC is also considering changes to fines and potential creation of an administrative citation, or “courtesy fine,” and reducing the fine amount to align more with the fare (currently $3.25). Since 1987, there have been three set fine schedules approved by the court. With respect to failing to tender proper fare or refusing to pay proper fare, the fine amount has increased from $53.75 in 1987 to $195 in 2009. These changes to fine schedules require discussions with the courts and updates to the bylaws. Standard Operating Procedures and Discretion The TTC is reviewing and revising its Fare Inspection Policies, Procedures and Rules Manual. TTC conducts periodic reviews and implements modifications based on legislative changes related to case law, City of Toronto court administration and courtroom procedures, or organizational changes. The nature and/or complexity of the change determines whether personnel are advised of the proposed changes through a memo, online learning, or instructor- led training. As part of current revisions to fare enforcement policies and procedures and as part of the Anti-Racism Strategy (discussed below), TTC will be engaging the public to gather input. Fare Enforcement Discretion The TTC is focused on creating a fare-compliant culture and reinforcing “tap every time” behavior. For passengers who have a valid fare product (i.e., monthly pass, 2-hour transfer) but do not tap, TTC focuses on education. The overarching objective is to increase taps, but revenue protection resources will apply discretion and issue tickets, as appropriate (e.g., no tap, no proof of payment, no transfer). While other transit agencies in the Toronto region impose zero-tolerance for fare evasion, TTC finds that discretion is important given the diverse populations served and provides the flexibility to focus on education when appropriate. The TTC sees a broader range of incomes, more diverse demographics, and more occasional passengers (e.g., tourists) than other transit agencies in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area. Based on the situation, fare inspectors and special constables are to use their discretion to determine where the case lies within the progressive model (from education to warnings to tickets). Fare inspectors and special constables are able to look up a passenger’s past transaction history on their PRESTO handheld inspection devices, inquire about why they do not have a valid fare, educate them on the importance of tapping and paying a fare, and have a conversa- tion with them about why they are not paying. They are trained to treat passengers in a fair and equitable manner, including those who are unable to pay. However, a zero-tolerance (no warn- ing) approach is applied for those fraudulently using a concession card for which they do not qualify (e.g., Child PRESTO card).

A-128 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion As noted earlier, revenue protection personnel are consistently deployed to the same times, lines, and zones, providing an opportunity for fare inspectors and special constables to get to know TTC customers. This also provides an opportunity to identify passengers who continually fare evade and to progress from education to warnings to citations, when appropriate. Although TTC recognizes that fare inspectors and special constables need discretion, it is important that discretion is uniformly applied to minimize potential bias or discrimination. Currently, TTC has a single page on discretion in their standard operating procedures. A rec- ommendation in the Ombudsman report (described below) was to develop a formal discretion policy, a draft of which is being reviewed internally. The policy will help improve consistency by providing guiding principles for scenarios that personnel may encounter, to provide direction and more prescriptive steps. Recent Revenue Protection Initiatives Fare evasion is a major concern to TTC, because revenue losses contribute to the need for fare increases and increased subsidies and create inequities for paying passengers. Although a certain level of evasion is inevitable, the cumulative impact of significant changes implemented by TTC since 2010 to improve operational efficiencies, modernize the customer experience, and enhance access through fare policy changes have inadvertently increased fare evasion risk. As such, a fundamental element of TTC’s updated Revenue Protection Strategy is enhancing the presence of TTC representatives and interaction between TTC representatives and passengers to promote awareness of fare policy and consequences of noncompliance. The TTC has been revising its fare enforcement program in response to a recent Ombudsman Toronto Enquiry Report and a two-phase Revenue Operations Audit by the City of Toronto Auditor General. Recent work has included updates to their Revenue Protection Strategies, the 2019 TTC ARC Department’s Fare Evasion Study, development of an Anti-Racism Strategy, and initiation of the Racial Equity Impact Assessment—all discussed further below. Ombudsman Toronto Enquiry Report In February 2019, the Ombudsman of the City of Toronto requested that TTC investigate a February 18, 2018, incident involving three fare inspectors and a Black passenger that occurred on a streetcar route. There was interest in understanding why the individual was detained, whether unnecessary force was used, and/or whether anti-Black racism was a factor. The Ombudsman reviewed TTC’s investigation report released in July 2018. The Ombudsman Toronto Enquiry Report, released in July 2019, identified concerns with TTC’s investigation process and produced recommendations to strengthen the independence of its complaint review process and improve fairness to enhance public trust. In July 2019, the Toronto City Council adopted the recommendations contained within the Ombudsman Toronto report and directed TTC to adopt the Toronto Action Plan to Confront Anti-Black Racism and work with the City of Toronto’s CABR Unit to address racism through ongoing learning and development initiatives. The TTC also accepted all six recommendations and has simplified its complaint process, revised its investigation procedures, and created a dedicated, independent Unit Complaint Office with additional training for investigators. Underlying the ombudsman’s report was a suggestion to change the culture of the Transit Enforcement Unit to ensure and protect against racial bias in the process. Revenue Operations Audit In 2018 and 2019, the City of Toronto Auditor General conducted a two-phase audit to review the efficiency and effectiveness of TTC’s revenue operations. Phase One focused on fare evasion and the estimated loss of passenger revenue and produced recommendations intended to decrease fare evasion and increase fare revenue. Phase Two focused on PRESTO equipment,

Case Studies A-129   TTC’s contract with Metrolinx and the completeness of PRESTO revenue transaction data. TTC accepted the recommendations of the City of Toronto Auditor General and continues to implement the recommendations. The TTC used these recommendations in the development of its Revenue Protection Strategy and tracks the status of the recommendations, including actions taken to implement them as part of the Revenue Protection Strategy. Revenue Protection Strategy The TTC formally developed a Revenue Protection Strategy in 2019 in response to Phase One of the auditor general’s audit, with a work plan that included four work streams: • Fare Inspection and Collection: Development of a Fare Inspection and Collection Framework, which involves revisions/development of supporting procedures, systems, and training, as well as review of the organizational structure, roles and responsibilities, tools, and authority levels. • Concession Card Fraud Prevention: Reduced fraud by tightening controls around third-party distribution of concession cards, increasing identification of concession cards, and enabling “hot-listing” fraudulently used concession cards. • Metrolinx Equipment/TTC Fare Gates: Hardware and software changes to TTC fare gates and Metrolinx equipment in order to increase reliability and availability. • Foundational: Supportive actions, including customer communications, employee aware- ness, data-driven decision-making and controls, and reporting and oversight. A cornerstone for this strategy is increasing the use of data to inform deployments and iden- tify revenue protection risks. For example, the Revenue Protection Department and the Revenue and Ridership Analytics Section of the Finance Department collaborate on data collection and analytics activities to help inform and study the effectiveness of the Revenue Protection Strategy. In 2020, TTC documented the work completed in 2019 and focused on systematic deploy- ment plans, resulting in the 2020 Revenue Protection Strategy. To inform the 2020 Revenue Protection Strategy and the Fare Inspection Deployment Tactics by Mode, TTC conducted the 2019 ARC Fare Evasion Study (discussed below), performed some proof of concept activities in the third and fourth quarters of 2019, and completed senior staff field observations of fare inspection processes in the first quarter of 2020. As part of the proof of concept activities, fare inspectors and special constables completed several concentrated deployment assign- ments to validate the deployment and inspection tactics. As part of the field observations, senior staff observed fare inspections on streetcars to identify firsthand challenges experi- enced by passengers in relation to equipment reliability and to understand revenue protec- tion deployment considerations in the context of daily transit operations. Resulting fare inspection deployment tactics and strategies are shown in Table A-6. 2019 ARC Fare Evasion Study In November 2019, TTC’s ARC Department partnered with the Transit Enforcement Unit and commenced the 2019 Fare Evasion Study, including 6 weeks of proof-of-payment inspection observations. The ARC Department, which provides oversight of TTC departments, including the Revenue Protection Department, has been tasked with completing an annual fare evasion study for public review. As part of the 2019 Fare Evasion Study, ARC used a stratified random sampling technique to measure fare evasion. ARC staff observed special constables in plain clothes as they conducted proof-of-payment inspections using mode-specific inspection tactics: • Streetcar—proof-of-payment inspections, 100% sweeps (i.e., all passengers asked to provide proof of payment) • Bus—proof-of-payment inspections of boarding customers • Subway—entrance observations with request for proof of eligibility for concession fares

A-130 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion Special constables only issued warnings to maximize the number of observations for the study. However, a zero-tolerance approach (i.e., issued ticket instead of warning) was applied for those fraudulently using a concession card for which they did not qualify (e.g., Child PRESTO card). The fraudulent use of Child PRESTO cards is of particular concern to TTC as Child fares are free, essentially allowing those passengers using the card fraudulently unlimited access to TTC services with no revenue collection whatsoever. The 2019 Fare Evasion Study surveyed a larger sample in a wider range of areas through- out the system than the Revenue Operations Audit conducted by the City of Toronto Auditor General. The additional depth of the study enabled TTC to establish a baseline for future studies, obtain data on fare evasion incidents by mode, estimate a systemwide fare evasion rate, and provide insight into the types of fare evasion and root causes of revenue losses from fare evasion. In addition to developing mode-specific fare evasion rates, the study categorized the types of fare evasion. Results are shown in Table A-7. Objective Tactic Strategy Details Streetcars Increasing customer confidence/ Getting to know our customers Consistent resource assignment To raise customer confidence around fare inspection, and encourage a positive customer culture and behavior to tap every time, the same TTC revenue protection resources will be consistently assigned to the same routes, times, days of the week and zones Inspection of all customers on a streetcar during peak travel times “Crush load” inspection Customers can expect teams of four to inspect fares on streetcars during peak travel times to enable more efficient inspection of all customers Disturbing customer fare inspection avoidance behavior “U-turn” customer inspection Revenue protection personnel in uniform will be placed on several consecutive streetcars to disturb this pattern Inspection of all customers during offboarding Offboarding inspection Multiple revenue protection teams will be assigned to conduct vehicle alighting (offboarding) inspections to enable inspection of all customers Increasing the probability of encountering revenue protection personnel Zone assignment To increase the probability of customers encountering revenue protection personnel on their journey, resource assignment will be zone-based Distributing revenue protection personnel proportionally based on ridership Proportional network coverage Revenue protection resources will be scheduled to provide proportional coverage across the network. The majority will be focused on high ridership routes, times and days Stations Reducing unauthorized entry at secondary station entrances Increasing uniformed staff at secondary station entrances Supervisors and special constables will be assigned to secondary station entrances when not actively attending security or safety incidents Buses Reducing concession card fraud Focused deployment Special constable will be deployed in locations identified to be at high risk for concession card fraud Leveraging fare dispute data from buses Responsive assignment on bus routes Special constables will be assigned to bus routes based on fare dispute data to support operators, educate customers on fare payment, and enforce, as required Source: TTC 2020 Revenue Protection Strategy, February 25, 2020 (modified based on edits from TTC on current practices as of November 2020). Table A-6. 2020 TTC fare inspection deployment tactics, by mode.

Case Studies A-131   Anti-Racism Strategy and Racial Equity Impact Assessment The TTC is committed to promoting and supporting diversity and inclusion and is actively responding to concerns that have been raised regarding racial profiling, anti-Black racism and racial inequities, including the performance of fare enforcement by special constables and fare inspectors. TTC is actively engaging with the City of Toronto’s Indigenous Affairs Office and CABR Unit, racialized communities, legislative authorities, and other experts and leaders in addressing systemic racism. Activities include ongoing training and review of fare enforcement policies and practices. The TTC is focused on identifying, preventing and addressing racial dis- crimination and racial disparities in service delivery, policies, practices, procedures, and hiring processes. In addition, TTC has commissioned a third-party report on policies and procedures in place to govern the enforcement, training, collection, retention, access, sharing, and destruc- tion of personal information collected as part of the fare inspection program. The TTC has also committed to developing a systemwide Anti-Racism Strategy. To initiate this strategy, TTC adopted the Toronto Action Plan to Confront Anti-Black Racism and began developing a TTC-specific Anti-Racism Strategy. To complement the corporate strategy, a work plan for the Revenue Protection and Special Constable Service departments is underway. The framework for the Anti-Racism Strategy has four components: • Customer and Employee Engagement and Consultation, • Race-Based Data Collection, • Policy Review, Recruitment and Advancement, and • Continued Learning and Anti-Racism Competency Building. A Racial Equity Impact Assessment of Revenue Protection and Special Constable activities is being conducted by experts from the University of Toronto with support from TTC’s Diversity and Human Rights staff. This work includes reviewing historical enforcement data and devel- oping a framework for data collection, retention, and use of disaggregated race/ethnicity data. Type of Fare Evasion Streetcar (%) Bus (%) Rail (%) Main Entrance Secondary Entrance Fare evasion rate 15.9 6.3 1.9 4.9 No valid proof-of-payment 97.2 48.8 Expired legacy transfers 1.2 0.6 Post-secondary card abuse 0.7 8.7 4.1 Fraudulent use of PRESTO Child Card 0.6 36.6 44.2 30.5 Senior/youth card abuse 0.3 2.9 11.1 Incorrect fare 1.7 Employee card abuse 0.6 Illegal entry through collector fare gate 27.8 Tailgating 9.1 56.5 Pushing through the gate 3.9 Going through the gap in the gate 3.9 Hopping over the gate 2.6 Opening the gate for another person to enter 2.6 Othera 3.7 aIncludes illegal entry through bus bays and abuse of employee or pension cards. Data source: TTC 2019 ARC Fare Evasion Study Presentation, February 11, 2020. Table A-7. TTC fare evasion rates and type, by mode and entrance.

A-132 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion Experts from the University of Toronto will be conducting information sessions, focus groups, public town halls, and surveys to enable the public and community groups to share their experi- ences with special constables and fare inspectors. Community engagement provides an oppor- tunity to obtain input with respect to race/ethnicity-based data collection and ideas to eliminate bias and improve community relations. Data Analytics and Reporting To increase the use of data to identify potential fare evasion risks and inform deployment, TTC has implemented several tools to analyze ridership and revenue data, identify risks, and monitor trends. For example, to respond to Child PRESTO fraud issues, the Revenue and Rider- ship Analytics Section in the Finance Department has developed bi-weekly Child PRESTO card usage reports to assist revenue protection in determining strategic deployment of staff. The TTC also uses a Fare Inspection performance dashboard that is updated weekly and monthly. TTC is in the midst of revising the dashboard and fare evasion calculations (e.g., to include inspection avoidance in the fare evasion rate). In addition to data collected by revenue protection in-field observations, fare collection, and ridership data, TTC uses data collected from the various recent audits and fare evasion studies described earlier: • City of Toronto Auditor General Revenue Operations Audit—Q3/Q4 2018, • ARC Tapping Observations—Q3 2019, and • 2019 ARC Fare Evasion Study—Q4 2019. The TTC is also planning on increasing transparency. ARC intends to support revenue pro- tection to provide quarterly reporting to the Board on fare evasion, targeting key elements to measure the impact of implemented revenue protection initiatives. Although it had been antici- pated that quarterly reporting would start in 2020, reporting has been delayed due to the tem- porary suspension of fare enforcement during the COVID-19 pandemic. Unit Complaints Office The Ombudsman report discussed earlier identified recommendations to strengthen the independence of TTC’s internal investigations of the Revenue Protection and Special Constable Service departments. Previously, a single Investigator reviewed and investigated the complaints. In 2020, TTC began the establishment of the Unit Complaints Office to process complaints against fare inspectors and special constables. The 2020 fiscal year budget includes the hiring of 10 personnel for the new office; TTC posted the positions in July 2020. The new Unit Com- plaints Office will include a manager, senior and intake investigators, a coordinator, and a data analyst. The additional staffing will increase the number of complaints that can be investigated more fully. In response to the Ombudsman report, TTC also revised the process for individuals to submit a complaint and established TTC’s investigation procedures. Customer service improvements to the complaint submission process have been implemented so that an individual can submit a complaint more easily. Now, individuals can call or submit a form by mail or online, free of charge. Previously, individuals had to fill out a form and pay a small fee. The TTC also elimi- nated the distinction between a concern and a complaint; all matters are treated as a complaint requiring investigation. The Unit Complaints Office will intake each complaint and gather evidence, investigate, and document the resolution. The investigation process includes ascertaining the facts and may

Case Studies A-133   include pulling video from the vehicle if a complaint is filed within 72 hours. Although all com- plaints related to fare inspectors and special constables will be initially received by the Unit Complaints Office, complaints that involve the misconduct of a special constable are sent to the Toronto Police Services division for review in accordance with the requirements under TTC’s Special Constable Agreement. TTC’s Human Resources and/or Human Rights and Investiga- tions departments may also be involved in the process. For serious misconduct, TTC may have an external investigator investigate the complaint while TTC is building its in-house capabilities in the Unit Complaints Office. Serious misconduct includes allegations of harassment, discrimi- nation, use of force, and violence. As part of the creation of the Unit Complaints Office, TTC has developed a specialized train- ing plan. Personnel in the new office will take the Anti-Black Racism Training from the City of Toronto’s CABR Unit and investigation training. The investigation training will help educate the staff on identifying issues and facts in dispute, procedural fairness, making and explaining factual findings by considering and weighing all relevant evidence, standards of proof, and effec- tive communication. Inspection Handheld Devices and Applications Fare inspectors and special constables carry PRESTO handheld inspection devices. These devices enable revenue protection personnel to look up card history (approximately 10 trans- actions), fare product type, and card balance. This information can be helpful in determining whether to educate, warn, or ticket a passenger if a passenger claims to be tapping consistently, but the card history shows otherwise. The TTC has developed an application for revenue protection to input inspection data in real time using a smartphone. The software was created by TTC’s information technology depart- ment and implemented in the summer of 2020, prior to the resumption of fare inspections. The application enables revenue protection personnel to input the number of inspections, warn- ings, tickets, summons issued, etc. Prior to implementing this application, these details were manually entered into a spreadsheet to run statistics. The application will also track the street- car line, vehicle number, route, direction of travel, stop/intersection where boarded, and stop/ intersection where disembarked. The TTC is considering a new records management software application to track offenses. While TTC maintains a previous database to capture bylaw-related, provincial offense notice information, it is not a records management software product, and revenue protection personnel are unable to see previous history while in the field. The data that will be collected in the appli- cation (e.g., demographics) and how those data will be analyzed (e.g., racial disparity analysis, internal review of Inspector behavior) are being informed by an external review and a future policy on data collection, analysis, and reporting. The TTC is also exploring mobile bylaw ticketing, which would enable fare enforcement per- sonnel to use their smartphones to scan licenses and issue tickets using a Bluetooth printer. This mobile bylaw ticketing application may be integrated with the records management system to provide access to historical records that may be helpful in determining whether to issue a warn- ing or citation. Fare Line Control, Cameras, and Fare Collection Equipment Capital Investments The TTC is implementing various station improvement and fare collection related projects and pilots to further deter fare evasion.

A-134 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion Stations Fare Line Controls In 2019, TTC implemented a number of initiatives to better control fare lines. This was achieved through enhancements to fare gate software and hardware (e.g., gates close faster to reduce tailgating), reduced fare gate maintenance response times, and installation of barriers to close gaps between fare lines and collector booths. This effectively created a physical barrier between paid and unpaid areas in stations. Camera Coverage and System Security In 2019/2020, TTC installed secondary station entrance fare-deterrence camera proof of con- cept systems at 17 high-risk stations, which included 2-foot by 2-foot public-facing TV screens with live video, allowing passengers to see themselves at the fare line. The TTC also imple- mented a 360-degree view camera pilot at Bloor-Yonge Station connected to an advanced video management system. This is expected to be the new video management system standard in TTC stations with camera feeds connected to key station “hubs” starting in 2020. In addition to specific pilots, TTC is developing a corporate camera strategy, including the potential use of body-worn cameras in the future. As TTC expands its camera network, there are plans to explore video analytic software because TTC staff is unable to watch footage from every camera. Fare Collection Equipment The TTC is working with Metrolinx on updates to its fare gates. These updates will include a software update enabling the use of different colored lights to indicate the type of concession card used. Currently, the same color light is used for all concession cards and there is no way to differentiate between them without physically examining them. TTC is particularly interested in a separate color to indicate Child PRESTO cards due to the fraud that TTC is experiencing with misuse of these cards by ineligible passengers. The TTC is also considering installing PRESTO validators in subway stations where pas- sengers alight streetcars to assist with offboarding fare inspections. If the passenger taps the validator and the light is green, then the passenger can proceed. Fare inspectors and special constables would only need to contact passengers without PRESTO fares or with a conces- sion card. The TTC continues to work with Metrolinx to improve PRESTO handheld inspection device performance and speed and to develop some end-of-shift statistics from the devices. These data will supplement data collected by the new inspection application developed by TTC’s IT Department. Marketing Campaigns to Increase Fare Compliance The success of TTC’s Revenue Protection Strategy is highly dependent on building a fare- compliant culture and disrupting negative customer behavior. TTC has made concentrated efforts to educate its customers and emphasize the importance of tapping and paying proper fares while maintaining equity and respecting the dignity of its diverse customer base. TTC has conducted various marketing campaigns to encourage fare payment compliance over the past few years: • Fall 2018: “Fare is fair.” • May-December 2019: “Pay your fare, pay your share.” • Early 2020 (pre-pandemic): “There are no excuses not to pay your fare/tap every time.”

Case Studies A-135   These campaigns have ranged from encouraging fare payment to shaming fare evaders. In response to the marketing campaigns, TTC has received varied feedback from customers. While some customers appreciated bringing the issues of fare evasion to the forefront in these campaigns, other customers found “the recent campaign of intimidation, harassment and shaming transit riders over fare evasion is an abuse of power and misuse of funds.” As part of the campaigns, TTC has used digital mediums (e.g., TTC.ca, platform video screens, and social media); print ads in the now discontinued free paper, Star Metro; ads on board vehicles and in stations; decals above card readers; wrapped streetcars; and messaging in TTC’s Ride Guide. Community Engagement Unit The TTC is focused on increasing community engagement with its Community Engagement Unit in the Special Constable Service Department and is exploring whether a similar unit is needed for the Revenue Protection Department to support the different focuses of the newly separated departments and to sustain communications with the public. The Community Engagement Unit engages with city agencies, partners, and other community stakeholder organizations for community outreach and public awareness efforts. In addition to educating the community on TTC’s fare enforcement approach, the Community Engagement Unit has also been involved in increasing recruitment efforts by augmenting outreach activities and visiting diverse communities. The Community Engagement Unit may also serve an important role in involving the com- munity as part of the Anti-Racism Strategy, Racial Equity Impact Assessment, and the review of policies, systems, and practices. Public consultations will be conducted to collect input on the discretion policy, uniform design ideas, body-worn camera pilot approach, racial equity impact assessment data collection approach, complaint procedures, and anti-racism policy. Valley Metro Valley Metro is the regional public transportation agency that provides and coordinates multimodal transit options in the greater Phoenix area. Valley Metro plans, builds, operates, and maintains the regional bus and light rail systems and alternative transportation programs for commuters, seniors, and people with disabilities. Valley Metro is governed by two boards of directors: the Regional Public Transportation Authority Board consists of 19 public agencies (18 member cities and Maricopa County) and provides direction for all modes of transit except light rail; the Valley Metro Rail Board provides direction for light rail transit and includes representatives of the three cities where service operates (Phoenix, Mesa, and Tempe), plus Chandler and Glendale. On Valley Metro’s local, express, and RAPID bus services, fares are paid or validated on board at fareboxes. If a bus passenger does not pay on boarding, the operator explains the fare and how to pay it, but has some discretion as to whether to allow a passenger to board even without a valid fare. The proof-of-payment light rail system, Valley Metro Rail, requires all passengers to be in possession of a valid fare on station platforms and in light rail vehicles. Security officers con- duct proof-of-payment fare inspections and violators are subject to fines of $50 to $500. Valley Metro has implemented several changes in the ways that it conducts fare enforcement since the service debuted in 2008. Currently, they deploy uniformed, contracted civilian security officers

A-136 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion Valley Metro, Phoenix, AZ Overview of Agency Valley Metro is the regional public transportation agency that provides and coordinates multimodal transit options in the Greater Phoenix region, including fixed-route bus, light rail, and alternative transportation programs for commuters, seniors, and people with disabilities. Fare Collection Overview On local, express, and RAPID bus services, fares are collected on board at fareboxes. Valley Metro Rail (light rail) fares are paid off board and may be purchased at TVMs on rail platforms or through retail outlets. 1-Ride tickets are printed on paper ticket stock and are activated when purchased at bus fareboxes and TVMs on light rail platforms. Other fare products (e.g., multiday passes) are printed on magnetic stripe media that are inspected using handheld verifiers. Valley Metro also has a smart card fare collection system that accepts the Platinum Card, Valley Metro’s smart card that is used for employer pass programs, as well as smart cards issued by Phoenix Union High School, Arizona State University, and the City of Tempe. Smart cards must be tapped at validators at bus fareboxes or at TVMs or validators on the light rail station platforms. Definition of Fare Evasion Respect the Ride, the Valley Metro Code of Conduct and transit ordinances, prohibits using or attempting to use the system without a valid fare and refusing to show a valid fare or a transit pass to any Valley Metro personnel or law enforcement officer upon request. It also specifies that passengers must pay the proper fare (i.e., reduced fares can only be used by eligible passengers). Fare Enforcement Overview Fares are paid on boarding buses at the onboard fareboxes or by displaying a valid paper pass. Light rail operates as proof of payment with paid-fare zones. Fare Enforcement Personnel Bus operators observe fare payment and visually verify paper tickets on buses. Fare enforcement on Valley Metro’s light rail system is conducted by contracted civilian security officers. Valley Metro does not have sworn police officers. The Phoenix Transit Police Department provides support when necessary but does not conduct fare enforcement. Valley Metro also has Customer Experience Coordinators who work at stations to educate and answer questions but do not conduct fare enforcement. Fare Enforcement Deployment Valley Metro light rail recently (before the COVID-19 pandemic began impacting transit operations) adjusted their fare enforcement deployment model. Teams of two security officers board a train at about the midpoint of the line and travel either east- or west-bound in a loop, checking fares, returning to the origin station, and then boarding another train. One security officer inspects each car. Security officers sometimes get off a train with a passenger to help them validate their fare or purchase a fare and get back on the next train. Previously, security officers were deployed to inspect in one of five fare zones, using a “Board Two Ride One” model. Fare Citation Practice Security officers do not immediately issue citations to passengers who have no previous violations of fare requirements. Valley Metro’s policy is that security officers should educate first, informing passengers that they must have valid proof of payment in their possession when riding transit, and then try to recover the fare by having the passenger tap at the end of their trip or buy a fare if they have the means to pay. Security officers will sometimes deboard with a passenger to help them understand how to use a TVM to purchase a fare.

Case Studies A-137   in teams of two to perform fare inspections, with a goal of providing as much coverage of the system as possible. Security officers provide coverage during Valley Metro Rail service hours and extend coverage to nonoperating hours to patrol stations and infrastructure. Field security officers are deployed on foot during the hours that light rail is in service. Mobile security officers, who are deployed in vehicles, provide coverage during nonoperating hours, patrol stations and infrastructure, and can assist in shuttling staff. Oversight for security officers is provided by shift supervisors, who report to a field supervisor. Valley Metro fares include a combination of paper, magnetic stripe, and smart card media requiring different methods of activation and validation. 1-Ride tickets may be purchased at bus fareboxes and light rail TVMs. These tickets are activated automatically when purchased and are valid only on the mode on which they are purchased (e.g., 1-Ride tickets purchased at a TVM are not valid on bus). Magnetic stripe passes valid for 1, 7, 15, or 30 days may also be purchased at TVMs, as well as retail outlets or online. These passes must be activated on first use and validated for subsequent uses at bus fareboxes or light rail TVMs in order to be accepted as proof of payment. Valley Metro also has a smart card fare collection system that accepts only passes issued through pass programs. In addition to the Platinum Pass, which is Valley Metro’s smart card used for employer programs, the smart card fare collection system accepts cards issued to stu- dents by Phoenix Union High School and ASU, and those issued through the City of Tempe’s Youth Transit Pass Program. Smart cards must be tapped at validators at bus fareboxes or at TVMs or validators on light rail station platforms. Valley Metro, Phoenix, AZ (Continued ) Fare Evasion Penalties Riding light rail without valid fare may result in a civil citation ranging from $50-$500. Penalties may escalate for repeat fare offenders and may result in exclusion from the system for a set period of time, which Valley Metro refers to as “trespassing a passenger.” Security officers are able to identify repeat fare evaders by using an agency-maintained database of individuals who have been cited or warned. Penalties for passengers with fines that exceed an accrued maximum of $500 (including court fees, administrative fees, late fees, etc.) can escalate to a criminal offense for theft of service but only after several violations and with evidence of unpaid fares. Criminal charges can affect the individual’s credit rating. A progressive trespass SOP allows Valley Metro to elevate a trespass to a longer term through the court system. Once a citation is issued, it becomes the responsibility of the courts, which set the fines and pursue collection in perpetuity through collection agencies. Courts can also take fines that they are owed out of state income tax refunds of persons with outstanding citations. Fare Enforcement Technology and Capital Investments Security officers use handheld verifiers and personal digital assistants (PDAs) to check fares and issue civil e-citations. Data are downloaded daily from security officers’ devices to a database used to track enforcement activity and repeat fare evaders. Security officers do not have access to the database in the field, but they can contact the Operations Control Center to determine whether an individual is a repeat fare evader. Valley Metro is procuring an electronic, account-based fare collection system that will move the agency away from using primarily magnetic stripe and paper tickets, extend the use of smart cards to the general public, and introduce mobile ticketing. There are also plans to leverage the new system to better manage eligibility criteria for reduced fares.

A-138 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion Valley Metro is having conversations about how it might leverage a new fare collection system to help address fare evasion, especially misuse of reduced fares, although implementation of the new system is still several years away. Evolution of Fare Enforcement Responsibilities The initial segment of Valley Metro light rail served 28 stations in Phoenix, Tempe, and Mesa, with those three jurisdictions sharing the operating costs. Each of the three cities had responsi- bilities for fare enforcement. In Tempe and Mesa, a private contractor initially conducted fare enforcement through a contract with Tempe (Mesa participated in Tempe’s contract). This required an update of those cities’ ordinances to authorize the use of contracted civilians for fare enforcement. The Phoenix Police Department was initially responsible for fare enforcement in Phoenix. Over time, the department concluded that its resources and services could be better used to focus on law enforcement and in a supporting role for fare enforcement. Working with the State Legislature, Phoenix secured changes to the city charter to permit nonpolice entities overseen by the City Manager to write transit citations on the light rail system. This paved the way for Valley Metro to contract for the civilian security officers that currently conduct fare enforcement on light rail. Security services, including fare enforcement, for the entire light rail system are now contracted through Valley Metro. The Phoenix Police Department continues to have a Transit Police unit that works with the City’s Public Transit Department to provide law enforcement on Valley Metro bus services in the City of Phoenix (particularly to respond to situations when fare challenges escalate to crimi- nal violations) and support Valley Metro’s security officers with law enforcement services on light rail as needed. Transit police officers can write fare evasion citations, but they focus primar- ily on responding to criminal situations and safety and security, including proactive control and community-based policing for the transit system. Security officers are able to check fares and issue citations to passengers who do not have or refuse to show valid proof of payment. They may occasionally be deployed to locations experi- encing crime to provide an increased security presence, not specifically for fare enforcement. Security officers are required to have a State Guard Card to perform their duties. The contract Valley Metro has with the firm that provides security officers requires 2 weeks of training at an academy prior to becoming a security officer, as well as quarterly refresher training to address issues or concerns, build morale, and cover defensive tactics, use of pepper spray and handcuffs, and use of force. Both the contractor and Valley Metro are involved in use-of-force reviews when security officers are involved. Fare Enforcement Deployment and Procedures Valley Metro initiated its “Respect the Ride” program in October 2019. According to the agency’s website, “the ‘Respect the Ride’ Code of Conduct is focused on creating a safe and positive customer experience, while also discouraging disruptive, intrusive, unsafe or inappro- priate behaviors in a public setting.” Security officers are deployed in a manner that focuses on reinforcing the “Respect the Ride” program by having them present on board light rail vehicles as much as possible, deploying them equally across the system, and providing as much visibility and exposure to passengers as possible. Security officers are authorized to issue citations for all ordinance violations, including fare evasion. Prior to initiating “Respect the Ride,” security officers conducted fare inspections in fare zones and followed a “Board Two, Ride One” procedure. For example, a team of security officers

Case Studies A-139   working in one of the five fare zones would secure a station platform by checking everyone on the platform for proof of payment. They would then do a cursory inspection for code of con- duct violations on the next two trains arriving at the station, each time returning to the station platform to check the fares of any new arrivals. The security officers would then board separate cars of the third train, stay on board for one or two stations while performing onboard proof- of-payment checks, and then get off and repeat the process, traveling in the assigned fare zone for the duration of their assignment. Valley Metro implemented the “Respect the Ride” program in response to passenger com- plaints about code of conduct violations and a lack of Valley Metro presence on board light rail vehicles. At that time, Valley Metro also changed its security officer deployment strategy to improve onboard coverage by uniformed personnel. The fare zones were modified, and security officers now board trains at about the midpoint of the line (50th Street/Washington) and ride either east into Tempe and Mesa or west through Phoenix, making a loop and returning to 50th Street, and remaining in the same car the entire time. Once they have completed the loop, both security officers board a different train. One security officer enters and is responsible for checking the first car of the train, and the other boards and checks the second car. Although the objective normally is to conduct fare inspections so as to achieve effective coverage and make security officers easily visible to passengers, due to security concerns during the COVID-19 pandemic, security officers have been working together in the same car. Valley Metro schedules field security officers to provide on-the-ground coverage during the hours that light rail is in service, from approximately 5 a.m. to midnight during the week and extending to 3 a.m. on Saturday and Sunday. Valley Metro also deploys mobile security officers to augment the presence provided by the field security officers and to extend coverage to provide a security presence on the system 24/7. This mobile security service is deployed via automobile, primarily to patrol and monitor stations and infrastructure and to assist in shuttling staff. With this schedule and the new deployment approach, security officers inspect approximately 15% to 20% of the ridership daily, with a goal of keeping the agency within a 94% to 97% fare payment compliance rate. In general, Valley Metro tries to follow a 20% inspection guideline but lowered the target a few years ago to 15% to 18% without seeing a change in the compliance rate. The lower inspection target allows a better use of agency resources, and Valley Metro will maintain this target range until the agency is able to address its reduced fare issues. Using the current deployment strategy, Valley Metro is able to cover about 40% of the agency’s light rail service when fully staffed at 32 security officers. Within a week of switching to the new deployment strategy, the agency began to receive positive feedback about security presence and fare enforcement from passengers and saw a reduction in reported incidents. In addition to fare inspection, the security contract assigns passenger security to security officers and directs them to provide that security “in a manner most consistent with visibility and exposure to passengers,” by maximizing their visibility and exposure to passengers, and minimizing overlap of security officers in any given area. The coverage strategy also aligns with Valley Metro’s focus on providing equal service and distributing security officers evenly throughout the system. Valley Metro only deploys security officers to specific locations if they see an increase in violent crime in a particular area of the system but not necessarily for fare compliance. Valley Metro staff observed that in general, the public does not seem to connect efforts to reduce fare evasion with improved safety and security on the system. While passengers have responded positively to increased onboard presence of security officers when Valley Metro introduced new deployment policies, passengers interpreted this presence more as an effort to elevate security than to reduce fare evasion. Calls about incidents and disorderly conduct did decline as the presence of security officers increased, so staff has associated greater fare inspec- tion and enforcement with increased perceptions of safety.

A-140 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion Fare Inspection Process, Tracking, Citations, and Penalties Security officers are usually deployed in teams of two to conduct fare inspections on light rail vehicles. Normally, security officers board separate cars of a train, announce that they are going to do a fare inspection, and ask everyone to get out their passes. Each security officer then moves through a car, from one end to the other, inspecting everyone on board. In this process, they identify passengers boarding at intervening stops, ask them to get out their fares, and check them as well. The security contract explicitly states: “It is not permissible to skip a passenger just because you believe the passenger is in possession of valid fare media. Conversely, a person who is suspected of having invalid/no fare media cannot be targeted.” While most inspections are done on board the light rail vehicle, security officers can inspect fares on the platform as the platforms are designated as paid-fare zones. Paid-fare zones have signage and are delineated with orange painted lines labeled in English and Spanish. Security officers are instructed generally to not inspect fares of passengers alighting as they may be trans- ferring to another vehicle. Security officers are also instructed to not pursue fare evaders who alight the vehicle or leave the station prior to issuing a citation. When inspecting fares, security officers visually inspect paper 1-Ride tickets for a stamped expiration date. Security officers use handheld verifiers to determine whether magnetic stripe and smart card fares have been validated and are valid as proof of payment. For paper fare media purchased through retail outlets that have not been activated, and if the passenger is not able to exit the train to activate the ticket at a TVM, the security officer may write the date and their radio call sign on the back of the fare with a Sharpie, making the pass valid for the rest of the ser- vice day. The security officer may confiscate fare media if the picture on the card does not match the customer or if the handheld verifier identifies it as being on the “hot list.” When a security officer encounters a passenger without proof of payment or one who refuses to produce a valid fare, the Officer has the authority to write a citation, although they may “educate first” passengers who have not previously been cited and are not in the agency’s database of repeat offenders. The inspection devices track tap data and citations, which are downloaded at the end of each day and maintained in a database that can be used to check passengers without proof of payment for repeated fare evasion. Egregious repeat offenders are considered for progressive enforce- ment, such as suspension from the service, issuance of citations, and/or charge of theft of service. Valley Metro’s Finance Department also uses the downloaded data to create weekly reports capturing inspection rates, compliance rates, use of reduced-fare media, evasion rates, types of fares inspected, and unreadable passes. The inspection devices do not track geolocation data, so the agency is not able to use the data to see where fare evasion rates are high. In any case, Valley Metro’s objective is to distribute security officers evenly throughout the system in order to provide equal service. Security officers are not deployed based on fare evasion rates. When Phoenix transit police officers are on the scene with Valley Metro security officers, the police officers can check the City of Phoenix’s Surface-transportation Top Offender Program (STOP) list to see if an individual is listed. STOP is a program designed by the Phoenix Police Department in partnership with the court system that can attach acceptance of social services to an individual’s release or probation terms. If the person is listed in the STOP database, then the City of Phoenix handles the disposition for that individual. Mesa and Tempe handle repeat offenders in a similar manner. Security officers issue civil citations to fare evaders. By state law, anyone issued a citation must present a photo ID to verify their identity. Valley Metro accepts any type of photo ID, including government-, employer-, or school-issued identification. Information from the ID, including demographic information, must be copied into the citation. PDAs are issued to security officers and used to write e-citations. If a person does not produce a photo ID (possession of a photo ID

Case Studies A-141   is not required to ride public transit) and cannot be properly identified, and a police officer is not available, a warning may be given. If the individual is listed in the database of repeat fare evaders, a police officer may be called to try to identify the person before issuing a citation. Although security officers cannot check the repeat fare evader database in the field, they can contact the Operations Control Center to check the database to determine whether an indi- vidual has previously been warned or cited for fare evasion. The database is not always an effec- tive tool, however. Despite the requirement to present a photo ID when receiving a citation, the utility of the database depends on individuals actually producing ID or giving the same name to security officers each time they are caught without proof of payment. A passenger may be given a trespass warning for ordinance violations, including refusal to pay, refusal to show a fare, or refusal to abide by other provisions of the code of conduct. Pas- sengers without fare who become belligerent may be given a verbal trespass warning and then cannot re-enter the Valley Metro system for the remainder of the day. Trespass warnings can be issued by either security officers or Customer Experience Coordinators and, when necessary, these personnel can contact the local law enforcement agency for assistance with issuing a tres- pass warning and/or removing the passenger from the system. All trespass warnings are entered into the system for recordkeeping and potentially to escalate future citations. If an individual who has been issued a trespass warning returns to the Valley Metro system within the trespass window and is caught, they may be charged with a criminal misdemeanor for trespass. Citations are issued for violations of the fare enforcement ordinance for the city in which the violation occurred. The security officer team conducting the inspection will ensure that the pas- senger leaves the train at the next station, either to terminate the trip or to purchase valid fare media to continue the trip on a subsequent train, and will remain with the violator until the final disposition is determined. The amount of the fine for a fare evasion citation is determined by the city in which the citation is given. The cities in the Valley Metro service area set their own fines, starting at the minimum $50 fine and with a maximum penalty of $500. If an individual accrues unpaid fines totaling $500 or more (including court fees, administrative fees, late fees, etc.) for citations for transit-related ordinances, including fare evasion and other code of conduct violations, sub- sequent citations may become criminal violations, but only after several violations and with evidence of unpaid fares. Although these criminal violations do not result in a warrant being issued for the individual’s arrest, they can affect the individual’s credit rating. The courts are responsible for all citations once they are issued. They set and collect fines, handle the ultimate disposition of all citations, and will continue to try to collect fines in per- petuity through collection agencies. The courts may attempt to collect fines owed by deducting them from an individual’s state income tax refund(s). Any appeals must be handled through the courts. Valley Metro’s only involvement is to provide documentation where needed (e.g., to escalate a citation). Customer Perception and Education Because the Valley Metro light rail system is barrier-free, the agency has had to counter the perception among some passengers that others are not paying their fares. This perception stems in part from passengers seeing others boarding without purchasing or validating a fare at a TVM or a platform validator, not understanding that some passengers use paper passes that do not need to be validated prior to boarding. Data collected by Valley Metro show that most passengers have some form of fare with them as they board and that very few passengers have

A-142 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion no fare at all. Staff ’s main concern is passengers who purchase reduced fares that they are not eligible to use, as noted in the discussion of compliance issues below. In addition to the security officers responsible for fare enforcement, Valley Metro deploys Customer Experience Coordinators to help counter this perception of prolific fare evasion and educate passengers on how to pay and use the system. Customer Experience Coordinators are Valley Metro employees who work in teams at a station for 60–90 minutes before moving on to the next station, serving as ambassadors and aiding passengers as they pass through the sta- tion. The agency has 10 budgeted Customer Experience Coordinator positions. These personnel wear distinctive yellow and black uniforms meant to make them very visible to passengers. They do not perform fare enforcement or issue citations, but they can ask disruptive individuals to leave Valley Metro property. Customer Experience Coordinators also help assess platform and train conditions for maintenance needs in addition to their passenger education and assistance responsibilities. Valley Metro staff report that Customer Experience Coordinators have been very well received by passengers. The focus on customer service and education extends beyond the Customer Experience Coor- dinators. Valley Metro’s approach to fare enforcement today focuses on customer education first. The security contract describes the role of security officers as being “to educate customers on the proof-of-payment system and to take enforcement action against violators to gain com- pliance with Fare Enforcement Ordinances.” Security officers inform light rail passengers found riding without valid proof of payment of the need to have a fare and the options for securing proper fare. Security officers are encouraged to help recover the fare where possible, for example by having the person validate their farecard at the end of their ride if they forgot to validate prior to board- ing, or buy a fare if they have the means to pay. In some cases, a security officer may accompany the passenger to a TVM to help them understand how to purchase a ticket. When a security officer gets off a train to assist a passenger with purchasing a fare, the team communicates by radio. Both team members deboard together, assist with the purchase, and then board the next train. Most of the passengers that security officers encounter do want to understand the rules, and an education-first approach works well with these individuals. On bus services, if a passenger does not pay on boarding, the operator educates first, explain- ing the fare and how to pay it, and has some discretion as to whether to allow a passenger to board even without valid fare. If an individual routinely boards without paying the fare or becomes combative, the operator can contact the Operations Control Center who will send someone, likely a member of the Transit Police unit in Phoenix, or local police in the city where the incident occurs, to provide assistance. Because the fare is nominal, the foundational expecta- tion is that people should pay their fare to ride. Compliance Issues—Reduced Fare While few passengers have no fare, Valley Metro has estimated revenue loss from misuse of reduced fares to be somewhere between $2 and $5 million annually. Valley Metro is working to address this concern. Valley Metro also works to address compliance issues with pass programs and special event tickets, as discussed below (see Special Events). Valley Metro offers reduced fares for children under the age of 5 (who travel free), seniors age 65 and over, persons with disabilities, Medicare card holders, and youth between the ages of 6 and 18. Other free or reduced-fare programs are also available, as noted below in Compliance Issues—Pass Programs. Eligibility for reduced fares is required to be checked at points of sale, such as retail outlets, although it is not clear that they do so consistently. Bus operators are also

Case Studies A-143   required to check eligibility as passengers board. Valley Metro’s security contract requires secu- rity officers to check for eligibility as they conduct fare inspections on rail. Valley Metro issues reduced-fare photo IDs at a charge of $5, but eligible individuals are not yet required to have one, and other forms of identification are also accepted. In February 2020, the Internal Audit Department of the City of Phoenix reported the results of an audit of reduced fare compliance on Valley Metro light rail, concluding that inspections were meeting the contractual 15% target, but fare compliance was under target at 93% instead of 94% to 97%. In their response to the audit’s recommendation, the City of Phoenix’s Public Tran- sit Department agreed to work with Valley Metro to determine the feasibility of implementing a process to check for reduced-fare eligibility. Valley Metro’s response to the audit observed that challenging passengers about their fares results in more interactions with passengers than any other reason and noted that they were already working to update retail agreements to require and confirm that retailers check for proof of eligibility before selling reduced fares. The Public Transit Department was also gathering data to assess the effectiveness of the change to the retail agreements, which took effect in early 2019. Valley Metro is procuring a new fare collection system that is expected to provide a technological solution to the reduced fare compliance issue, by requiring mobile ticket and smart card users to be certified for reduced fares, as discussed further in Future Technology Opportunities below. In fall 2019, Valley Metro conducted fare inspection details to evaluate reduced fare compli- ance. The sweep was conducted without advance notice and performed by Phoenix transit police officers who were supported by security officers. The exercise attracted the attention of local media, and there were community concerns about using police officers for this purpose. As a result of this feedback, Valley Metro paused the fare inspection detail process to reassess. Since then, the process has been put on hold by the COVID-19 pandemic. Although they paused the fare inspection details, Valley Metro staff recognized that fare inspection sweeps that inspect everyone on board are the only way to get an accurate fare com- pliance rate. To develop a better estimate of the compliance rate on light rail and to better under- stand passengers’ perceptions of reduced-fare eligibility, Valley Metro staff made about a half dozen trips on light rail to conduct onboard inspections and assess passengers’ knowledge of eligibility requirements for reduced fares. These inspections were conducted purely for learning purposes and helped to more accurately assess reduced fare compliance among passengers than is possible with the fare checks typically done by uniformed security officers. They confirmed that very few passengers have no fare at all. Compliance Issues—Pass Programs Valley Metro’s Platinum Pass employer program, student pass programs (e.g., ASU Student U-Pass, Phoenix Union High School pass), and the Tempe Youth Transit Pass Program are supported by Valley Metro’s smart card fare system. For all of these smart card-based pass programs, the pass must be validated for each boarding by tapping the smart card targets on TVMs or platform validators at light rail stations or fareboxes on buses. Individuals who do not tap may be subject to a citation for fare evasion. Tapping provides data about travel patterns and, in the case of the Platinum Pass employer program, tap data are required to bill employers. Participating Platinum Pass employers are billed based on the number of taps made by each employee, at the applicable fare for the service (local bus/light rail or express/RAPID bus); monthly charges are capped at the price of the corresponding monthly pass. The school and youth pass programs are contracted at fixed prices. Although participants generally comply and tap their smart cards on board buses, enforcing the tapping requirement on light rail has been an ongoing challenge. Communicating the need

A-144 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion to tap is much more difficult on light rail than on bus because light rail passengers do not interact with an operator. Some passengers think of their passes as flash passes that only need to be visu- ally displayed, not tapped. From Valley Metro’s perspective, if a passenger has not tapped before boarding, the individual has not paid and does not have proof of payment. This is particularly critical for the Platinum Pass program, because employers are billed based on the number of taps made by their employees. To address these misunderstandings, Valley Metro has launched education efforts, par- ticularly for students, who tend to have some of the highest incidences of not tapping before boarding, since every year there are new students who enter the pass programs and may not know about the tapping requirement and the potential to be cited for not having proof of payment. Valley Metro educates students on how to ride, rules, fares, use of fare cards, and available ticket programs, and directs students to information available on the Valley Metro website that reiterates the requirement to tap and the possibility of being cited. Staff is also deployed to stops near schools to monitor student boardings and remind them to tap before boarding. Special Events After special events, Valley Metro stations security officers at each end of a light rail platform to inspect passengers as they enter the platform. If the crowd is too large, security officers ask everyone to hold their pass up for visual verification as they enter because it is not practical to check every person in crowded conditions. Valley Metro’s RailRide program encourages light rail use and streamlines fare collection for special events at Talking Stick Arena in downtown Phoenix by accepting event tickets as proof of payment on light rail and deploying security officers to light rail platforms to inspect fares after events. The RailRide arrangement is valid for events that include concerts, NBA Suns and WNBA Mercury basketball games, and other special events at the arena. It entitles ticketed attendees and arena employees to travel on the light rail system on the day of the event using their event tickets or employee badges, respectively. This arrangement is valid for travel up to 4 hours before an event (6 hours for employees) and until the end of the service day after the event. Under the RailRide agreement, Valley Metro receives reimbursement for events held at the arena that use Talking Stick Arena/Ticketmaster ticketing. One challenge has been that although there are numerous additional event venues in down- town Phoenix, the RailRide agreement exists only with Talking Stick Arena. Some passengers mistakenly believe that all event tickets are valid on light rail, when in fact only Talking Stick Arena event tickets are accepted. Valley Metro has conducted some educational efforts with passengers about this agreement and to educate them about fare payment. Future Technology Opportunities Valley Metro has selected a vendor to implement a new electronic, account-based fare collec- tion system that will help the agency move away from magnetic stripe and paper tickets, extend smart cards to the general public, and introduce mobile ticketing. One of the priorities for the new fare collection system is to address concerns about the misuse of reduced fares. One approach may be to require reduced-fare passengers to be certified as eli- gible and to associate that eligibility with their smart card and mobile ticketing account in order to be able to purchase reduced fares. Reduced-fare passengers could also be issued a reduced- fare smart card ID with their photo on it, to enable security officers to confirm a passenger’s reduced-fare eligibility. Once this is in place, Valley Metro could then also limit the availability

Case Studies A-145   of reduced fares at TVMs and retail outlets to control fraudulent purchase and use of reduced fares, whether intentional or unintentional. As part of this new fare system, Valley Metro is also interested in consolidating the number of devices security officers must carry to perform their duties. Currently, they must carry both a handheld verifier to inspect fare media and a PDA to issue civil e-citations. It is hoped that in the future security officers will carry a single device that can scan and verify fare media as well as issue and print citations. The agency is also considering a number of emerging techno Bluetooth devices on board transit vehicles to detect a passenger’s boardings and alightings and potentially to deduct a fare. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority WMATA, commonly referred to as Metro, was created in 1967 through an interstate compact among the District of Columbia (DC), Maryland, and Virginia. WMATA operates bus, BRT, and heavy rail service. There are 91 rail stations (47 underground, 38 surface, and 6 elevated stations). All stations are gated. WMATA’s service area consists of DC; the Maryland counties of Prince George’s and Montgomery; the Northern Virginia counties of Arlington, Fairfax, and Loudoun; and the cities of Alexandria, Fairfax, and Falls Church. Fare Payment on the System On bus, passengers board through the front door and may pay cash or tap their SmarTrip smart card at the farebox. Passengers can also load cash onto their smart card at the farebox. On rail, the fare structure is distance-based with peak/off-peak pricing, meaning passengers are required to tap their smart card as they enter and exit the fare gates. Passengers in rail stations can load value at Fare Vending and Add-Value machines located at the entrance of every sta- tion. For bus and rail, passengers can load value and/or passes online or at retail point-of-sale locations. All passes are electronically loaded onto SmarTrip smart cards. SmarTrip in Apple Wallet is now available for full-fare and senior passengers. WMATA also accepts the Maryland Transit Administration’s CharmCard. When WMATA launched its card-based fare collection system, SmarTrip, on its rail service in 1999, it was the first contactless transit smart card in the United States for a major transit agency. In 2002, SmarTrip was expanded to bus service. Since 2008, WMATA has implemented several fare policy initiatives to increase the adoption of SmarTrip, including implementing fare differentials, eliminating paper transfers, and transitioning passes to SmarTrip. These have helped SmarTrip market penetration grow. WMATA also offers discounts and special programs, including discounted fares to seniors and people living with disabilities, the U-Pass program, and free ride programs for youth. The DC Kids Ride Free program, for example, allows students to ride free on Metrobus, the DC Circulator, and Metrorail within Washington, DC, to get to school and school-related activities. Students are required to carry their Kids Ride Free smart card or be prepared to pay the regular fare for their trip. Fare Enforcement Personnel WMATA’s Metro Transit Police Department enforces fares on bus and rail using sworn police officers. In total, there are nearly 500 Metro Transit police officers. The focus is on hiring

A-146 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA), Washington, DC Overview of Agency WMATA operates bus, BRT, and heavy rail service in Washington, DC, and the surrounding counties and cities in Maryland and Virginia. Fare Collection Overview On bus, passengers board through the front door and may pay cash or tap their SmarTrip smart card at the farebox. Passengers can also load cash onto their smart card at the farebox. On rail, the system is gated and passengers must tap their smart card when entering and exiting the fare gate as fares on rail are based on the distance traveled and time of day. Passengers in rail stations can load value at Fare Vending and Add-Value machines located at the entrance of every station. Passengers can also load value and/or passes online or at retail point-of-sale locations. SmarTrip in Apple Wallet is also now available for full- fare and senior passengers. Definition of Fare Evasion Under the WMATA Tariff on Ridership Rules and Guidelines (Tariff Number 37), WMATA reserves the right to refuse to transport a person or persons exhibiting unacceptable and prohibited conduct, including “failure to pay established fare.” The WMATA Tariff on Metro Fares and Rates (Tariff Number 39) further states “any person who boards a passenger-carrying vehicle or passes through a fare gate without paying the established fare or presenting a valid Pass is subject to arrest and prosecution.” The Tariff also restricts transit benefit program funds (such as SmartBenefits) to be used by the qualified employee/recipient only; use by nonqualified passengers is subject to arrest and/or prosecution. Fare Enforcement Overview Fares are only checked when a transit police officer observes a passenger not paying. WMATA is not a proof-of-payment system. Therefore, neither transit police officers nor other designated personnel can inspect passengers’ fares randomly and without evidence of failure to pay. Fare Enforcement Personnel WMATA’s transit police officers provide security and enforce fares on bus and rail. On bus, due to concerns for bus operator safety, the bus operator does not enforce the fare and no longer states the fare. Instead, there is a programmed automated fare announcement as passengers board. Bus operators use a farebox key to record instances when passengers board without payment. Fare Enforcement Deployment WMATA uses transit police officers to enforce fares. Officers are deployed primarily to patrol the system and address safety and security issues. In certain instances, Officers may be deployed to bus routes experiencing increased or high fare evasion or stationed at fare gates where WMATA has received complaints about fare evasion from Station Managers. Fare Citation Practice Whether to cite a fare evader is at the discretion of the transit police officer. Upon determining that a passenger failed to pay fare, the officer requests proof of identification and then conducts an NCIC check prior to issuing a citation. This process is being revised in the DC area in response to the decriminalization of fare evasion in that jurisdiction. Fare Evasion Penalties Fare evasion penalties are based on the jurisdiction where fare evasion took place. Each jurisdiction has different citation processes and penalties. The specific fine amount ranges from $50 to $100 and is determined by the jurisdiction. In general, citations carry criminal penalties. In Montgomery County, Maryland, the transit police officer can choose whether to issue a criminal or civil citation for fare evasion. In Washington, DC, fare evasion was decriminalized by a City Council action in 2019. Fare Enforcement Technology and Capital Investments WMATA uses APC and farebox ridership data to estimate fare evasion rates and revenue loss on buses. WMATA is investing in temporary modifications to gates at 12 stations to be able to better count fare evaders on rail. These include sensors on the front and back of each gate to measure the difference between the number of passengers passing through the gate and the number of smart card taps. WMATA is also purchasing new fare gates that are expected to be more difficult to pass through without payment.

Case Studies A-147   police officers to provide safety and security, not for fare enforcement. WMATA does not con- tract with local law enforcement. Metro Transit Police probationary officers receive a total of 1,492 hours of academic and performance-based training with an additional 10 weeks of field training in compliance with tri-state standards. WMATA uses an external police academy for training (Northern Virginia Criminal Justice Academy) with additional training provided by the Metro Transit Police Department. Because WMATA serves a tri-state area, probationary officers also must complete the Maryland Comparative Compliance basic officer training for out-of-state police academies and DC basic officer training. Mandatory police in-service training is also conducted in compli- ance with tri-state standards. WMATA also conducts specialized training that provides hands-on applications of practical skills. For example, WMATA recently started partnering with Strategies for Youth for training to help transit police officers connect better with the community and learn strategies for inter- acting effectively with youth. In addition to transit police officers working on rail, WMATA has one to four Station Man- agers at each of the 91 rail stations. Due to the risk of assault, Station Managers are directed to avoid risking confrontations with fare evaders. However, Metro’s Transit Police Department relies on information reported by Station Managers to assist in deployment. WMATA recently started specialized de-escalation training for Station Managers, the Station Manager Assault Reduction Training (SMART). Fare Enforcement Procedures and Deployment WMATA is not a proof-of-payment system, and therefore, does not inspect passengers’ fares randomly and without evidence of failure to pay. Transit police officers are only authorized to check fares when they observe passengers not paying. If an officer receives a complaint that a passenger did not pay, the officer may have a conversation with the individual but cannot ask to see proof of payment. Because it is not a proof-of-payment system, the constitutionality of WMATA’s fare enforcement procedures has not been challenged. Transit police officers are deployed throughout the Metro system and may be in uniform or plain clothes. On bus, WMATA primarily deploys officers in plain clothes and in pairs. On rail, officers may be deployed in uniform or in plain clothes, and work in pairs. To address bus routes and rail stations experiencing increased or high fare evasion levels, WMATA deploys officers to specific bus routes based on farebox and APC data and to rail locations based on information from Station Managers and cameras. WMATA has also been piloting new sensors on fare gates at 12 stations to monitor fare evasion. Transit police officers do not have handheld devices to check SmarTrip smart cards. If an officer observes an individual evading fare, the officer checks the individual’s smart card at the Station Manager’s kiosk to see remaining value and location and date/time of last payment. If the individual has a valid fare, the individual is not cited and may continue their journey. If the individual does not have a valid fare, then the transit police officer initiates the citation process. Development of an app to read smart cards is underway; however, it is anticipated that citations will continue to be handwritten because each jurisdiction has its own citation form. The process for issuing citations is defined by SOPs that are broader than just fare enforce- ment and apply to any criminal behavior. The citation process is the same whether an individual is being cited for fare evasion or some other prohibited activity (e.g., drinking alcohol on a train). The specific charge is indicated on the paper citation. Upon determining that a passenger failed to pay fare and that the incident meets the standards for citation, the transit police officer

A-148 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion requests proof of ID and then conducts an NCIC check for any outstanding warrants, missing persons reports, etc. prior to issuing a citation. In response to the decriminalization of fare evasion in Washington, DC, the Metro Transit Police Department is updating its procedures for handling fare evasion incidents in the District. Fare evaders will no longer be required to provide ID. As a result, it is expected that the level of cooperation with a civil citation will be lower than with a criminal citation, and there is greater potential for an individual to give a false name. There are also concerns that decriminalizing fares may encourage fare evasion behavior, resulting in additional revenue losses for WMATA. Whether to issue a citation to a fare evader is at the discretion of the transit police officer. If a person is from out of town, the officer likely will not cite the individual. However, if an indi- vidual has a local address and is likely a regular user, the officer may choose to issue a warning or citation. If the officer saw the individual purposefully evading, the officer may be more inclined to write a citation. The officers track everything that they do that is measurable, including cita- tions, warnings, calls, etc. Because fare evasion is a misdemeanor, fare citations must be issued in the jurisdiction where the offense occurred. Citations are issued off board because officers cannot let the individual being cited cross jurisdictional boundaries. Bus Operator Safety One of the common causes of employee assaults is escalation of fare issues. Due to concerns about operator safety, WMATA bus operators no longer state the fare. Instead, there is a pro- grammed automated fare announcement as passengers board. WMATA has also taken other measures to protect bus operators and minimize confrontations with passengers, including installation of security cameras on every bus and protective bus operator shields on some of its bus fleet. In addition, bus operators receive de-escalation training. When bus operators did state the fare, it led to altercations and assaults. WMATA now instructs bus operators to press a fare evasion key on the farebox but otherwise not to become involved in fare enforcement. Although there is potential for bus operator error, separate keys are used to differentiate the type of passenger (adult/student) evading fare, in part to track student fare evaders separately due to the free youth fare programs (e.g., Kids Ride Free programs in Washington, DC, and Montgomery County). Farebox data are downloaded daily when the farebox is probed. These data are used for monthly reporting and to identify routes to deploy transit police officers to address fare evasion issues. Fare Evasion Citations and Fines Jurisdictional codes in DC, Maryland, and Virginia make it unlawful for a person to refuse to leave a vehicle if ordered to do so by a bus or train operator or other authorized agent. WMATA’s Tariff on Ridership Rules and Guidelines (Tariff Number 37) reserves the right for WMATA to refuse to transport person(s) exhibiting unacceptable and prohibited conduct, including “failure to pay established fare.” WMATA’s Tariff on Metro Fares and Rates (Tariff Number 39) further defines fare evasion by making “any person who boards a passenger-carrying vehicle or passes through a fare gate without paying the established fare or presenting a valid Pass subject to arrest and prosecution.” Tariffs further restrict the use of SmarTrip value added using transit benefits to the qualified employee/recipient. Citations for fare evasion are issued for the jurisdiction where fare evasion took place. WMATA serves eight county and municipal jurisdictions in two states and DC. Each has different citation

Case Studies A-149   processes and fine schedules. These complexities limit WMATA’s ability to issue citations elec- tronically. As a result, citations are still handwritten on forms specific to each jurisdiction. In most jurisdictions, fare evasion is a criminal citation. In Montgomery County, Maryland, transit police officers are able to choose whether to issue a criminal or civil citation for evasion. In 2019, fare evasion in Washington, DC, was decriminalized by a City Council action. Pro- cedures for issuing fare evasion citations in Washington, DC, were still being developed as of February 2020. Fines generally range from $50 to $100 but vary by jurisdiction (see Table A-8). Revenue collected from fines is retained by the local jurisdiction. WMATA does not receive any fine revenue from the citations issued for fare evasion. As such, the focus for transit police officers is to increase compliance and fare revenue collected. Although WMATA does not exclude anyone from service for repeat offenses or not paying their fines, certain jurisdictions have escalating fines with the potential of up to 10 days in jail for unpaid fines or subsequent offenses. Transit police officers may also arrest an individual if they have a number of infractions and unpaid fines. Complaints and Contested Citations Complaints about the conduct of transit police officers are reviewed internally. WMATA uses video from its extensive camera network with coverage across bus and rail and data from the SmarTrip smart card system in conducting investigations. The Metro Board of Directors also created the Investigations Review Panel to review completed Metro Transit Police Department investigations on a quarterly basis. Individuals can contest citations through the court process. Once a citation is issued, the process is handled by the courts and WMATA’s involvement is limited, although transit police officers may be involved in testifying at a court hearing. Monitoring Fare Evasion Although WMATA does not conduct audits or surveys to measure fare evasion, WMATA does use technology to monitor and measure fare evasion rates when possible. WMATA prepares Source: https://ggwash.org/files/4A-Fare-Evasion-Quarterly-Update.pdf. Table A-8. WMATA citation penalties by jurisdiction.

A-150 Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion quarterly and annual reports for the WMATA Board of Directors on the number of citations and arrests. The reports focus on the number of occurrences, with actual evasion rates provided only for bus. Estimated revenue loss due to fare evasion is calculated by applying the average fare to the number of occurrences. On bus, two methods are used to measure fare evasion: farebox key data and comparison of APC data and number of fares paid. The latter comparison assists in identifying variances between the number of fares paid and the number of passengers that boarded the vehicle. WMATA uses these data to track fare evasion rates by route and determine routes with high fare evasion to deploy transit police officers for fare enforcement. On rail, it is more difficult to estimate fare evasion as WMATA does not conduct surveys to measure fare evasion. Instead, WMATA would need to rely on the number of citations, which does not include all occurrences of fare evasion. WMATA is piloting new sensors on fare gates at 12 rail stations to measure fare evasion by comparing the number of individuals passing through a gate against the number of smart card taps. As part of efforts to improve fare evasion monitoring, WMATA has also been exploring ways to measure and quantify fare revenue losses attributable to fare evasion. Monitoring Demographics Transit police officers collect demographic information for all policing activities, including assistance contacts. The demographic information is entered on citations and is based on infor- mation from the individual and/or their ID. WMATA conducts a demographic comparison of the citations against the community composition on an annual basis. The demographic data are generally proportionate and reflective of the communities where the citations are issued. Fare Gate Modifications and Replacements WMATA is in the process of planning and procuring new fare gates. In the short term, WMATA is piloting technology at 12 rail stations to count fare evaders. These include sensors on both sides of the fare gate paddles to measure differences between the number of passengers passing through the gate and the number of smart card taps. Installing sensors on the front and back enables WMATA to measure the number of individuals who are passing through the gate, including fare evaders piggybacking, scissor walking, or jumping the gate. These data will be available through a dashboard that will enable WMATA to estimate the number of passengers who evade fares each day by location to determine where to deploy transit police officers. WMATA is also purchasing new fare gates that are expected to make it more difficult to pass through the gate without payment while still being compliant with ADA standards. The new, higher gates will make it difficult to step over the paddles, require more force to open, and have a smaller gap between the paddles (currently 4–6 inches) to reduce piggybacking and scissor walking. They will also have lights to indicate the type of smart card used (e.g., adult, senior) to better identify fare evasion by inappropriate use of concession/discount card. All-Door Boarding There have been conversations about implementing all-door boarding on buses, but WMATA does not allow all-door boarding at this time. WMATA’s Metroway BRT service is front-door boarding with onboard fare payment.