By Jack Brittle, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter
On December 2, Burlington City Council held their monthly Committee of the Whole meeting and discussed many topics relating to the city; a big topic on this month’s agenda was in relation to public transit. Jacqueline Johnson, the commissioner of community services, introduced a report considering the pros and cons of a fare-free transit system in Burlington.
Last year, the city directed staff to undertake a study to “examine the benefits, risks, impacts, implications, and fiscal sustainability of providing free transit to all Burlington riders,” according to Johnson.
The report was led by consulting firm Left Turn, Right Turn (LTRT), in collaboration with city staff, with the engagement of council and the community.
Dennis Fletcher, a transit and transportation planner who worked with LTRT on the report, spoke about the criteria used in their analysis.
The four criteria used were ridership, cost-effectiveness, community benefit, and transit sustainability (risk).
The two groups not currently covered by the city’s free fare system are adults and youth during school hours, which combined make up the majority of Burlington Transit’s ridership.
Fletcher explained that a key group of adults, adult regional commuters (i.e. riders commuting to Toronto), already effectively ride for free within the Burlington part of their trip. These commuters account for 14% of Burlington’s ridership. Fletcher also said that riders transferring to HSR (Hamilton public transit) or Oakville Transit will also not benefit from the expanded program.
Fletcher referenced two communities in Canada that have completely fare-free transit programs, Bow County in Alberta and Orangeville in Ontario. Fletcher said that while both cities experienced significant increases in ridership numbers after the implementation of the program, they each have circumstances that differ when compared to Burlington.
Orangeville has a very small transit system, with an annual budget and cost recovery ratio of less than 10% compared to Burlington.
In Bow County, only residents ride for free and only on local routes. Non-residents make up the majority of ridership in the county.
Increases in ridership after the introduction of fare-free programs are typically in the range of 30–60%, Fletcher conveyed. However, he also cautioned that if the program is not paired with increased investments in available capacity, “the resulting crowding can result in a decline in customer satisfaction, which can actually work to offset the ridership gains.”
Fletcher identified five key benefits that could arise from the fare-free transit systems, the most obvious being the fact that transit would be completely free for all users. Increased employment participation by non-drivers, active travel health benefits and a reduction in road traffic, congestion, and collisions were all listed as hypothetical benefits of the system.
The possibility of deterioration of customer experience when talking about the risks that fare-free transit presents was noted again: “While this can be mitigated by advanced planning and strategic service increases, this also increases the cost of fare-free transit,” Fletcher said.
Fletcher also said that Burlington’s provincial gas tax share would increase to about $1 million over time with fare-free transit. In addition, fare-free transit would result in a loss of data collection due to a decrease in the use of Presto cards. He said this data could be collected in other ways but would not be as accurate.
In conclusion, Fletcher said that fare-free transit is costlier than service investments to the transit system for similar benefits and also has a higher risk for service and funding challenges, as well as “threatening service sustainability when additional funding is required.”
Mayor Marianne Meed Ward questioned the analysis that indicated that fare-free transit would benefit existing riders more than it would create new ones, saying that the city’s experience with seniors has been “quite the opposite.”
Fletcher responded by explaining that in their consultation with residents, LTRT found that quality of service is a common barrier and that the cost of the fare is not.
“There are certainly new riders attracted to the system when you make it free, but there are more new riders attracted to the system when you make it better,” Fletcher said.
The council approved an amendment to direct the director of transit to report back on the implementation of a monthly fare cap of $38 or 20 rides per month for youth by December 10, as well as the feasibility of a fare-free pilot project for youth in the 2025 summer (July and August) by February 10.
