Southern California Transit Advocates is generally in support of the proposed June fare increase. We understand that the fare increase is necessary not only to increase passenger revenues, but also to maintain the same amount of formula funding due to the convoluted process under which state and local money is allocated.

We have a concern with the peak hour fare structure on Silver Streak for seniors and the disabled. Although the intent of the peak hour fare is to exclude all trips on commuter routes - including Lines 481 and 690 - from a discounted fare, the peak hour beginning and ending times are inconsistent with that of other agencies, such as Metro, which have a peak hour fare. The four-hour time frame during the middle of the day is too short for seniors to be able to take advantage of the service, and evening and early morning service is too infrequent for them to utilize the discount. In addition, there is a concern that a late-running bus could have the effect of doubling the fare for a senior at the shoulder of the peak hour, with no reasonable alternative other than waiting until 8:00pm to start their trip. We suggest that Foothill Transit adopt a fare structure that continues to charge full fare for Line 481, 690, and Commuter Express riders, while making the peak hour period on Silver Streak to be consistent with that of Metro (5:00 to 9:00am and 3:00 to 7:00pm) on weekdays which are not Federal holidays. In return, the discounted Silver Streak pass could be eliminated, as it is unlikely that many individuals are using that pass today given the limited hours of eligibility. Doing so will not decrease revenue or increase costs significantly, while improving customer service through consistency with other agencies' policies.

Similarly, Foothill Transit continues to require payment of a three zone express fare on the Silver Streak for EZ Pass holders. With the July 2010 EZ Pass fare increase, this will raise the cost of a joint Silver Line (Metro) and Silver Streak (Foothill) monthly pass to $150 from $124. This eliminates the incentive for even a daily commuter to purchase a pass and avoid the per-boarding cash upgrade surcharge, since the $66 in zone upgrade charges would be lessened if they chose to ride the Silver Line occasionally. The additional time needed to process these additional farebox transactions will likely have a derogatory effect on the operating schedule, by increasing the already long boarding. We suggest that the Silver Streak be declared a EZ Pass "Zone 2" line, consistent with Metro's fare policy, with a $128 EZ Pass eligible for full fare on the Silver Streak. This amount is still $23 above the regular Silver Streak pass, and is consistent with the $24 differential between Commuter Express and EZ Pass "Zone 5" pass price that will take effect in July 2010.

Due to the limited amount of time between ratification by the Governing Board and implementation of the fare, we feel it necessary to request that all passenger notifications begin immediately after implementation, that marketing and advertising on buses be aggressive to reach even occasional passengers, and that 31-day pass holders have an ample amount of time to use up all passes and request credit towards new passes for any unused passes they may have purchased (since some individuals may choose to purchase three or more months' worth of passes at one time).

In the future, we ask that, as part of long term planning, that Foothill Transit staff regularly bring fare increases forward every two to three years, similar to current practice at Metro, Omnitrans, and RTA, so that riders will not be surprised of fare increases and that adequate reserves can be maintained and necessary fuel and labor cost increases absorbed.