Peer Cities Transit Report Summary September 2018 his report serves as a benchmark for our regional transit PEER & ASPIRATIONAL REGIONS Tsystem and how it compares to peer transit systems in Peer transit agency — a transit agency similar in size and landlocked terms of funding, ridership, service area and density. The geography to Kansas City’s primary transit agency, KCATA. These agencies majority of data was collected from the National Transit are color-coded in green throughout the report. Database, the 5-year American Community Survey and a Primary transit agency Urbanized area custom survey sent to the transit providers included in the report. It strives to provide insight into the factors that affect Capital Metro Transporation Authority (CapMetro) Austin transit agencies around the country. Charlotte Area Transit System (CATS) Charlotte Southwest Ohio Regional Transit Authority (SORTA) Cincinnati The Peer Cities Transit Research Report was first created in Central Ohio Transit Authority (COTA) Columbus 2011 to support work by Johnson County’s Transit Funding Indianapolis Public Transportation Corporation Indianapolis Task Force (START), as well as to aid in ongoing discussions (IndyGo) regarding the development of a strategy for regional transit Transit Authority of River City (TARC) Louisville investment in Kansas City. The report was updated in 2014 to serve as a resource for MARC’s transportation committees. Memphis Area Transit Authority (MATA) Memphis Milwaukee County Transit System (MCTS) Milwaukee Nashville Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) Nashville Metro Transit/Bi-State Development (Metro) St. Louis

! Minneapolis- Aspirational transit agency — an agency that generates the degree of St. Paul ! ridership, funding and transit-supportive culture that the Kansas City area Milwaukee would like to see in the future. These agencies are color-coded in blue ! ! Pittsburgh throughout the report. ! ! Columbus Indianapolis ! Denver Primary transit agency Urbanized area _^ ! ! Cincinnati Kansas City St. Louis Louisville Metropolitan Atlanta Authority Atlanta ! (MARTA) ! ! Nashville Charlotte Regional Transportation District (RTD) Denver Memphis ! Atlanta Metro Transit Minneapolis-St. Paul Authority of Allegheny County (Port Authority) Pittsburgh ! Austin Home transit agency — color-coded in red throughout the report. Kansas City Area Transit Authority (KCATA) Kansas City

2 Peer Transit Analysis Summary of Significant Findings

State and Local Spending Per Capita State Operating Funding Kansas City transit agencies spent $50.15 per capita in state and local In 2016, the Kansas City UZA received $2.5 million in state operating operating funds in 2016, ranking 12th out of 15 UZAs. This falls below both funding, ranking 10th out of 15 peer and aspirational UZAs. Kansas spent $1.9 peer and aspirational agency averages in this measure. Population of the million of this total, while Missouri spent $610,000. Kansas City’s total state urbanized area was used to figure the per capita rate. operating funding is well below the peer and aspirational UZA average of $49.4 million. Minneapolis, Pittsburgh and Milwaukee significantly drove up State and local operating funding per capita this average, with state operating funding levels at or above $80.6 million. 2016 National Transit Database, 2016 5-year American Community Survey

Pittsburgh 19.02 22.44 11.4 Total state operating funding 2016 National Transit Database Denver 0.1 141.1 141.9 Minneapolis-St. Paul 12.44 11.04 14.4 Minneapolis-St. Paul 41,,0 241,94,0 Austin 0.01 10.0 10.2 Pittsburgh Milwaukee 0,51,55 St. ouis .14 9.51 104.5 St. ouis 1,59,229 Charlotte 9.5 .41 .1 Charlotte 1,42,0 Milwaukee 5.05 1.0 4.5 Atlanta 1,405,10 Columbus 0.4 .2 .1 Indianapolis 10,95,240 Atlanta 2. .9 .5 Nashville ,0,211 ouisville 1.5 50.10 51. Memphis ,0,92 Nashville .4 4.14 50.1 Kansas City 2,54,5 Kansas City 1.2 4.5 50.15 ouisville 1,52,250 Cincinnati 0.5 41.2 42. 1,2,199 Peer average 2.4 Aspirational Cincinnati Indianapolis .91 21.94 2. average 12.12 Columbus ,199 Memphis .2 21.9 2.51 Denver 45,000 Austin ,41 State funding per capita ocal funding per capita

• The average combined state and local per capita funding for peer UZAs, including Kansas City, is $62.74. • The average combined state and local per capita funding for aspirational Urbanized area or UZA — an incorporated area with a UZAs is $126.12. population of 50,000 or more as defined by the U.S. Census • Many UZAs receive the majority of their operating funding from local Bureau. The urbanized areas used for this report are from sources. The Minneapolis-St. Paul, Pittsburgh and Milwaukee UZAs all the 2010 Decennial Census. receive the majority of their operating funding from their respective states.

Mid-America Regional Council 3 Transit Funding in the Kansas City Metro Area Other models for sales taxation from peer and aspirational transit agencies are based on a combination of city and county sales taxes or service area Transit funding varies widely across the Kansas City region. In 2016, the sales taxes, including: contributing jurisdictions in the Kansas City region averaged $25.97 per capita on transit services. Locally, Kansas City, Missouri, had the highest • Austin: 1 percent sales tax on service area members. contribution with $114.31 in local investment per capita. North Kansas City, • Columbus, Ohio: 1/4 percent sales and use tax on voters in the COTA Missouri, contributed $98.63 in local investment per capita, while Kansas service area. City, Kansas, rounded out the top three with $30.99 in local investment per • St. Louis: one cent total sales tax in the City of St. Louis, Missouri, and 1 capita. The top three cities are unchanged from the previous version of this 1/4 cent sales tax in St. Louis County, Missouri. report. These top-ranking municipalities averaged more local per capita contributions than both peer and aspirational agencies, while jurisdictions • Atlanta: 1 1/2 percent in the City of Atlanta, Georgia, and 1 percent in totaling over 49 percent of the metro’s population (Independence, Lee’s Fulton, Clayton and DeKalb Counties in Georgia. Summit and Johnson County) fell significantly below the regional average. • Denver: 1 percent sales and use tax in the regional transportation district. Per capita investment by jurisdiction Comparison KCATA and 2016 National Transit Database KCATA (and the RideKC system as a whole) charges the second-lowest 140 fare rate of any primary transit agency. Only CapMetro in Austin charges less, at $1.25. 120 114.1 9. 100 Cost of single ride fare 0 0 .00 2.5 2.5 40 2.50 2.50 0.99 Jurisdictional average 25.9 2.50 2.25 20 2.20 9. 9.2 2 2 2 5.9 .0 1.9 1.5 1.05 0.95 2.00 0 1.0 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.50 iberty 1.50 Riverside ladstone Raytown Blue Springs 1.25 Independence ee’s Summit North Kansas City Kansas City, Missouri Kansas City, Kansas 1.00 Johnson County, Kansas

.50 Sales Taxes 0 Sales taxes are a common local funding method used by several large primary transit agencies. KCATA is funded in part by two sales taxes totaling 7/8 cent from the City of Kansas City, Missouri. Among primary agencies, RTD (Denver) MTA (Nashville) TARC (ouisville)MATA (Memphis)CTA (Columbus)Metro (St. ouis) CATS (Charlotte) MARTA (Atlanta) CapMetroKCATA (Austin) (Kansas City) SRTA (Cincinnati) MCTS (Milwaukee) this municipality-based transit tax structure is most similar to the City of Indyo (Indianapolis) Cincinnati, where SORTA receives a 0.3 percent income tax. Fare Rush our Fare Port Authority (Pittsburgh) Metro Transit (Minneapolis-St. Paul)

4 Peer Transit Analysis Fare Revenues Service Area Density Across all modes, KCATA generated the second-lowest fare revenue, $10.8 KCATA ranks 12th out of 15 in service area density at 1,730 persons per square million, and the second-lowest , 12 percent, of any mile. Rank in service area density did not correspond closely with rank in primary transit agency in 2016. The National Transit Database defines farebox ridership, as shown on page 7. recovery ratio as the proportion of operating expenses that are paid for by fare revenues. Only Memphis generated less fare revenue, and only Austin had a Service area density lower farebox recovery ratio. 2016 National Transit Database 4,500 Fare revenues 4,041 2016 National Transit Database 4,000 ,500 ,29 MARTA (Atlanta) 1,24,555 ,22 ,000 2,1 2,0 RTD (Denver) 1,11,10 2,22 2,500 2,44 2, 2,20 Port Authority (Pittsburgh) 101,,4 2,14 2,000 1,2 1,0 Metro Transit (Minneapolis-St. Paul) 9,9,42 1,59 1,500 1,55 1,24 Metro (St. ouis) 4,9,11 1,000 MCTS (Milwaukee) ,2,0

People per suare mile in service area mile in service People per suare 500 CATS (Charlotte) 0,, 0 SRTA (Cincinnati) 2,5,9 CapMetro (Austin) 2,552,51 RTD (Denver) CTA (Columbus) 19,525,95 CTA (Columbus) Metro (St. ouis)MARTA (Atlanta) MATA (Memphis)TARC (ouisville) CATS (Charlotte)MTA (Nashville) MCTS (Milwaukee) SRTA (Cincinnati) CapMetro (Austin) KCATA (Kansas City) TARC (ouisville) 12,29, Indyo (Indianapolis) Port Authority (Pittsburgh) MTA (Nashville) 11,2,5 Metro Transit (Minneapolis-St. Paul) Indyo (Indianapolis) 11,051,0 KCATA (Kansas City) 10,1,125 • Milwaukee has the highest service area density out of all primary agencies, MATA (Memphis) ,4,404 at 4,041 persons per square mile. It also ranks highly in terms of ridership (40.7 million trips), operating expense per bus trip ($3.32) and trips per Farebox recovery ratio revenue hour (30.4). The Milwaukee UZA has a public transit ridership to 2016 National Transit Database work rate of 4.1 percent, compared to the Kansas City UZA at 1.3 percent. 5 • Denver has the lowest service area density out of all primary agencies, 0 0 2 1,247 persons per square mile, yet experienced the second-highest 2 2 2 25 ridership, at 103.3 million trips. The Denver UZA has a 4.5 percent 25 2 public transit ridership to work rate, compared to the Kansas City 19 20 UZA at 1.3 percent. 1 1 1 1 1 15 12 11 10 5 Operating expenses — the expenses associated with the operation of the 0 transit agency, and classified by function or activity, and the goods and services purchased.

RTD (Denver) MARTA (Atlanta) CATS (Charlotte) Metro (St. ouis)MTA (Nashville) TARC (ouisville)CTA (Columbus)MATA (Memphis) SRTA (Cincinnati) MCTS (Milwaukee) KCATA (KansasCapMetro City) (Austin) Indyo (Indianapolis) Port Authority (Pittsburgh) Mid-America Regional Council 5 Metro Transit (Minneapolis-St. Paul) Level of Service • KCATA ranked 5th out of 11 peer agencies and 9th out of all primary agencies in terms of unlinked trips per vehicle revenue Out of all 15 primary transit agencies in 2016, KCATA ranked 12th in most hour at 18.0. vehicle revenue hours with 790,000 hours, and 11th in most vehicle revenue miles at 11.6 million miles. Unlinked passenger trips per vehicle revenue hour 2016 National Transit Database 45 Branding 40. 40 Of the UZAs compared, the Kansas City UZA is currently the only one to unify 5 .2 its regional transit agencies under one brand — RideKC. However, in May of 0 2018, the Georgia state government created the Atlanta-region Transit Link 2. 2.5 25 24.2 2.9 22. Authority (The ATL) to bring the metro area transit under one branding and 20 1. 1 1. 1. governing body. The branding will begin to take effect in 2019. 15. 15. 15. 15 1. Performance Measures 10 5 Primary transit agencies were ranked on two performance measures, applied 0 across all of an agency’s modes: • KCATA ranked 7th out of 11 peer agencies and 11th out of all primary RTD (Denver) agencies in terms of operating expense per passenger trip at $6.60. MARTA (Atlanta) CATS (Charlotte)Metro (St. ouis) MATA (Memphis)CTA (Columbus)TARC (ouisville)MTA (Nashville) MCTS (Milwaukee) SRTA (Cincinnati)KCATA (KansasCapMetro City) (Austin) Indyo (Indianapolis) Operating expense per unlinked passenger trip Port Authority (Pittsburgh) 2016 National Transit Database Metro Transit (Minneapolis-St. Paul) .9 .11 .21 Milwaukee was the only peer agency to outperform aspirational agencies in .51 .0 .2 5.94 .10 .2 both of the above performance measures. This is indicative of a system that is 5.4 5.04 both cost and service effective. 5 4.54 4.2 4 .1 .0 Relationships with Ride-hailing Services In a survey to the peer and aspirational agencies included in this report, no 2 respondent agency had established a formal agreement with a ride-hailing 1 service provider, such as Uber or Lyft. 0 Unlinked passenger trips — the number of who board public transportation RTD (Denver) MARTA (Atlanta)CATS (Charlotte) TARC (ouisville)Metro (St. ouis) MATA (Memphis) CTA (Columbus) MTA (Nashville) MCTS (Milwaukee) SRTA (Cincinnati) KCATA (Kansas City) CapMetro (Austin) vehicles. Passengers are counted each time they board vehicles no matter how many Indyo (Indianapolis) Port Authority (Pittsburgh) vehicles they use to from their origin to their destination.

Metro Transit (Minneapolis-St. Paul) Vehicle revenue hour — the number of hours vehicles are scheduled or actually travel while in revenue service. Vehicle revenue mile — distance vehicles are scheduled to or actually travel while in revenue service.

6 Peer Transit Analysis Aspirational Systems Ridership to Work A survey of our peer and aspriational transit agencies indicated that they The Kansas City UZA tied with the Memphis UZA for the second-lowest transit consider in Seattle, Tri-Met in Portland and RTD in Denver ridership-to-work rate at 1.3 percent. Out of the included UZAs, the Pittsburgh exemplary transit systems. UZA had the highest ridership-to-work rate at 7 percent. Ridership Percent of public transit ridership to work In 2016, KCATA delivered the seventh-highest transit system ridership out of 11 2016 5-year American Community Survey - peer primary agencies, and 11th out of all 15 agencies. Annual ridership is the number of passengers who board public transportation vehicles every year. Passengers are counted each time they board a vehicle, no matter how many vehicles they use to travel from their origin to their destination. 5. Annual ridership 5 4.5 2016 National Transit Database 4.1 MARTA (Atlanta) 1,,10 4 .4 .2 RTD (Denver) 10,40,9 2. 2.5 2.4 Metro Transit (Minneapolis-St. Paul) 2,24,19 2.2 2.2 2 1. Port Authority (Pittsburgh) ,2,51 1. 1. 1.2 Metro (St. ouis) 44,04,90 1 MCTS (Milwaukee) 40,09,50 0 CapMetro (Austin) 1,04,0 Austin Denver Atlanta St. ouis Pittsburgh Charlotte Cincinnati Columbus ouisville Nashville Memphis CATS (Charlotte) 2,24,940 Milwaukee Kansas City Indianapolis

CTA (Columbus) 1,2,15 Minneapolis-St. Paul SRTA (Cincinnati) 15,5,1 KCATA (Kansas City) 14,220,99 TARC (ouisville) 14,0,2 MTA (Nashville) 9,915,94 Indyo (Indianapolis) 9,494,4 MATA (Memphis) ,2,4

This summary report offers a look at significant findings. Visit marc.org/peertransit for a full report in early 2019.

Mid-America Regional Council 7 600 Broadway, Suite 200 • Kansas City, MO 64105-1659 Phone: 816-474-4270 • www.marc.org