State pilots tap-to-pay fares, fair-capping and eligibility automation to boost transit equity

CalITP officials urged California’s equity advisory committee to back a push to modernize transit fares, arguing digital tap-to-pay systems and automated eligibility verification would expand access for low-income, underbanked and mobility-dependent riders.

CalITP project lead Jillian Gillette told the Interagency Transportation Equity Advisory Committee on May 13 in San Jose that relying on cash and legacy fareboxes has strong equity costs. “Paying with cash generally means that you’re very poor,” she said, noting that cash-only systems force riders to carry exact change, buy proprietary fare media, or forgo discounted passes that require an upfront purchase.

The core proposals CalITP presented were: expand ‘‘open payments’’ so riders can tap a debit or credit card (or phone) on board; use fair-capping so riders pay no more than a daily, weekly or monthly cap rather than buying a pass; and automate eligibility verification for mandated discounts (for seniors, Medicare card holders and people with disabilities) while minimizing agencies’ collection of personal data.

CalITP described operational pilots that illustrate the benefits. Michael Coleman, CIO for Monterey–Salinas Transit, described a COVID-era trial that installed retail-style tap-to-pay devices on buses. “People are tapping,” he said. Coleman said the agency observed reduced dwell time, automatic fare capping when the same card was used repeatedly, and a much lower per-transaction cost than maintaining aging cash fareboxes.

CalITP and transit staff stressed equity gains. The speakers noted that many Californians are unbanked or underbanked and that pass systems disadvantage riders who cannot pay large sums up front. The mobility-wallet approach being piloted with LA Metro and UC Davis would distribute subsidized funds (for example, for low-income residents who qualify through EBT/CalFresh) on a preloaded, transport-specific digital wallet usable across participating modes.

Privacy and inclusion questions were central to the committee’s discussion. Committee members asked whether automated verification would exclude undocumented residents or those who lack Social Security numbers. Gillette and CalITP staff said the system can accept a variety of identity providers and that California-issued IDs (including AB60 licenses issued without Social Security numbers) can be used in some verification flows. CalITP also described partnerships with recognized identity verifiers (login.gov, the VA, medicare.gov) and said the system is being designed so transit agencies do not store sensitive personal health information.

Funding and permanence drew repeated questions. CalITP staff said initial work was supported by federal grants and limited-term state budget authority and asked the committee to help identify legislative champions and funding pathways for long-term program continuity. Committee members suggested letters of support, connections to lawmakers, and further subcommittee work to identify measurable outcomes and funding needs.

Why it matters: Transit agencies across California face budget pressure and falling ridership. CalITP argued that modernizing how riders pay could increase ridership, lower operating costs, and make discounts accessible to the riders who need them most. In the Monterey pilot, staff reported meaningful rider uptake after tap-to-pay was enabled and significant savings compared with replacing end-of-life cash fareboxes.

What’s next: CalITP said it plans to continue rolling pilots and to seek budget continuity in the next state cycle. The EAC members asked staff to explore formal support options and consider a subcommittee briefing targeted at legislative and procurement implications.