Operations & Customer Service Committee
September 8, 2015

• Summer 2014: Fare Study Initiated
– First phase was focused on fare structure
– Pricing was incorporated as part of the recommendations for public hearings
• Spring 2015: Public Hearings
– Included price increase for EcoPass consistent with the general fare increase
• May 2015: Board Action on Structure & Level
– Title VI concerns were identified for Business
EcoPass as part of the equity analysis
– Board action did not include EcoPass pricing
• September 2015: Recommendation for 2016
EcoPass pricing that reduces Title VI risk
2

• 36 Commuting Solutions
• City of Arvada
• AARP
• Arapahoe County LCC
•
Douglas County
• Downtown Denver Partnership
• DRCOG
• eGo Car Share
• Arc of Aurora
• Boulder Chamber of Commerce
• Boulder County
• City of Boulder •
•
•
• FRESC/AFTF
Jeffco LLC
City of Louisville
Livable Places Consulting
• Colorado Coalition for the Homeless • Mi Casa Resource Center
• Colorado Cross Disability Coalition • Mile High Connects
• CU Boulder • Servicios de la raza
• CWEE
• City and County of Denver
• Denver South EDP
•
•
•
Stapleton Foundation
City of Thornton
US 36 Mayors/Commissioners Coalition
3

• Recognition that EcoPass is a good program coupled with concern that increasing the price will result in fewer participating neighborhoods and businesses
• Frustration that tap data are not available
• Concern that there has not been enough outreach and stakeholder involvement in developing the recommendations
• Questions about the data and math that were used to develop the recommendations
• Concern that companies have not budgeted for an 18 percent increase
4

• Desire for an addition to the Business EcoPass matrix to allow for a master contract for lowwage businesses
• Opportunities to include changes to the
Neighborhood EcoPass program as part of the continued affordable fares discussions
• The entire fare study seems like a complicated process that was broken into individual pieces
– A summary of all of the fare policies and how they fit together would be helpful when the process is complete
5

• Increase Business EcoPass contracts by 18.3 percent
– Results in a projected average fare for EcoPass passengers that is equivalent to the overall average fare projected for 2016
– EcoPass riders will not be more heavily subsidized than other passengers
• Eliminate $2.50 upgrade charge for trips to and from DIA
• No changes to SLA boundaries to incorporate new lines until 2017 contracts
6

PRICE PER EMPLOYEE PER YEAR
Service
Level
Area Employees
Contract
M inimum Per
Year
1-24 employees
25-249 employees
250-999 employees
1,000-1,999 employees old new old new old new old new old new
A
B
C
D
2,000+ employees old new
1-10
11-20
21+
$ 972 $ 1,150
$ 1,944 $ 2,299
$ 2,915 $ 3,448
$ 83 $ 98 $ 72 $ 85 $ 63 $ 75 $ 54 $ 64 $ 51 $ 60
1-10
11-20
21+
$ 1,782 $ 2,108
$ 3,563 $ 4,215
$ 5,344 $ 6,321
$ 177 $ 209 $ 160 $ 189 $ 146 $ 173 $ 135 $ 160 $ 128 $ 151
1-10
11-20
21+
$ 2,429 $ 2,873
$ 4,859 $ 5,747
$ 7,287 $ 8,619
$ 450 $ 532 $ 417 $ 493 $ 397 $ 470 $ 388 $ 459 $ 367 $ 434
1-10
11-20
21+
$ 2,429 $ 2,873
$ 4,859 $ 5,747
$ 7,287 $ 8,619
$ 460 $ 544 $ 441 $ 522 $ 408 $ 483 $ 397 $ 470 $ 376 $ 445
7

• EcoPass contract prices have not gone up since 2011
• The per employee price of an annual
EcoPass in the Downtown area is comparable to providing a parking pass for
2 – 5 months
• Maximum EcoPass price well below the federal limit of $1,560 per year per employee transit pass tax exclusion of the
IRS Commuter Benefits program
8

• Currently contracts are paid in full at the beginning of the year
• Add two new contract payment options for
2016:
– Quarterly payments with an administrative processing fee of 1%
– Semiannual payments with no additional administrative processing fee
9

• Increase Neighborhood EcoPass contracts by 13.3 percent consistent with the general fare increase
• Eliminate $2.50 upgrade charge for trips to and from DIA
• Make a minor update to the survey for new neighborhoods
– Modify survey so pricing incorporates all participants eligible for half fare discount
10

• A review of the fare equity analysis in May of
2015 revealed Title VI risks for the Business
EcoPass program
• This recommendation was developed considering those risks
• Per FTA requirements and RTD Board Policy, this EcoPass recommendation was analyzed for any disproportionate adverse effect on minority and low-income riders
• The analysis of this recommendation does not reveal a disproportionate adverse effect
11

• Begin pricing EcoPass contracts with utilization data as soon as adequate smart card data are available
• Re-evaluate the 2009 Board Policy for utilization pricing as part of a Pass
Program Working Group that will include stakeholders from across the district
• Goal for future pricing: average EcoPass fare should be equivalent to the overall average fare
12

• Fare policies adopted in May included an assumption that EcoPass contracts would increase by 13.3 percent
• Additional increase in Business EcoPass contracts would result in approximately $1 million of additional fare revenue per year
13

• Send out 2016 contracts with new pricing
– Include payment options
• 2016: Convene RTD and Stakeholder
Pass Program Working Group to develop recommendations for future pricing
– Define goals for pass programs
– Reevaluate 2009 Board Policy for utilization pricing incorporating the new fare structure and average fare analysis
– Coordinated effort with the Affordable Fares
Task Force discussions
14