On Tuesday October 20th, the Eno Center hosted its first webinar in the Transportation Affordability Series, exploring how transit provides riders with affordable transportation options. The aim of the Transportation Affordability Series is to answer how transportation policy can play a role in addressing the affordability crisis that has become a touchpoint of the 2026 midterm elections.

The transit affordability webinar featured Art Guzzetti, Vice President at the American Public Transportation Association; Danny Pearlstein, Policy and Communications Director at the Riders Alliance; and Liya Rechtman, Policy Director for Transportation & Infrastructure at the Office of the New York City Comptroller. The panelists explored how transit affordability is more than just a question about fare costs. Making transit an affordable option for riders requires focus on service reliability and experience, surrounding infrastructure and roadway usage, and transit-oriented development.

While increasing costs may incentivize modal shift from personal vehicles to transit, the affordability crisis is also impacting transit agencies which are facing or will face increased construction and fuel costs. The panelists emphasized the importance of certainty in federal funding for transit to maintain and expand service options. The panelists also highlighted how bipartisan efforts to address reform housing and permitting can positively impact transit affordability.

Transit Experience and Affordability

Guzzetti shared from APTA’s most recent report on transit affordability that access to a good transit option can save households $12,000 to $18,000. While transit by itself will not solve increasing costs of personal vehicle ownership and externalities of personal vehicle ownership, it does provide individuals with an option for more affordable and sustainable travel.

All of the panelists emphasized the importance of improving transit as an affordable transportation option through service reliability and experience. Pearlstein said funded and fast buses will improve the experience and outcomes for those reliant on bus transit and will make the bus a better option for those with modal choice. Rechtman shared that bus reliability is impacted by many factors. Congestion pricing has helped to improve bus reliability in NYC since it smooths traffic. Designated bus lanes and enforcement of bus lanes have also helped to improve bus ridership experience in New York City. Pearlstein also highlighted efforts in New York City to address choke points when riders transfer between buses and the subway.

Rechtman said that the choice to take transit exists in a bundle of goods provided by city services including streetlights, curb cuts, and stairs and elevators into and out of stations. If transit trips are not safe or accessible for riders, then they automatically are not affordable choices. Rechtman explained that for a transit dense area like New York City, all development is transit-oriented development and all fiscal infrastructure decisions impact transit.

Rural Transit and Transit Oriented Development

The panelists discussed how the benefits of transit options are not limited to dense, urban areas. Guzzetti shared that transportation costs are a higher percentage of household budgets in rural areas and in many minority communities. The higher walkability of a community and the more multimodal and mixed use a community is, the less transportation costs tend to be for households in that area. Affordable housing at transit hubs is important because the benefits of lower cost housing can be offset if the housing is in a setting where driving is required. Guzzetti highlighted a law in California passed to give transit workers priority in transit-oriented development because transit workers are being priced out in some of the cities where they work.

Rechtman said that there are many types of rural communities and lots of opportunities to build up rural downtowns, creating walkable spaces especially for elderly, low income, and student populations. She also highlighted work in California to provide rural and tribal micromobility and transit options and emphasized the continued need for the US to provide more shared transportation options such as piloted shared van programs. Rechtman also emphasized that designated bus lanes in dense urban areas should be viewed as a jumping off point for less dense areas where there is more road space.

Fare Costs

The panelists discussed how targeted subsidies for riders can provide benefits to the whole transit system. Guzzetti said policies around fare costs should be determined locally and highlighted a number of subsidized transit initiatives across the country including the LIFT program in DC for SNAP eligible residents, Seattle’s means tested program providing those at 200% of the poverty level to have $1 fares across the board, Metrolink in California enabling riders with EBT cards to swipe their cards for a discounted fares, and Pinellas County in Florida providing reimbursements for trips for those at 200% of the poverty level. He also highlighted fare capping as a mechanism to ensure that lower-income users who are paying as they go are not disproportionately paying more than transit users who purchase monthly passes.

Rechtman said fare policy is context sensitive and must be determined by the general fiscal health of the transit agency and whether there are negative externalities to having fares that might be adverse to the overall health of the system. In terms of agency fiscal health, transit agencies must look at the importance of fares for the general revenue of the system but most importantly for the operational budget. States and cities are primarily responsible for operational funding and can more easily finance on the capital than on the operational side.

She emphasized that there are some systems where fares or ridership are very low, making them only a small part of operating revenue. For transit agencies with lower ridership during off peaks, there can be benefits to low or free fares because bringing more people onto the train will create safer rider experience. She also emphasized the benefits of providing younger riders and those attending major events with subsidized fares to introduce them to transit usage. Disruptive life events such as attending college can influence behavior and choice throughout people’s lives, so subsidized fares at targeted populations can pay dividends for transit agencies.

For New York City, Pearlstein said bus fares are only a small percentage of the city’s overall budget and enforcement of fares has created negative externalities. In terms of the subway, Pearlstein spoke in support of providing free fare programs for extremely low-income riders because people experiencing homeless may use the subway as a public space of last resort and are reluctant to leave if they do not have fare money.

Modal Shift

Guzzetti highlighted local reports from San Antonio and New Mexico about mode transit towards transit usage due to increases in the cost of driving. However, Guzzetti said that a holistic approach to affordability is not celebrating an increase in gas prices as an automatic win for transit ridership but rather working to ensure the transit experience is an attractive and affordable option. Reducing fueling costs is still a part of a holistic approach to affordability since fueling cost increases also impact transit agencies. Since transit agencies sign long-term contracts, the current affordability crisis may not be hitting agencies as hard, but it is possible that in the future costs for transit agencies will increase.

Rechtman emphasized that drivers are likely not taking into account the overall costs of personal vehicle usage as insurance payments may be automated, maintenance costs are intermittent, in cities parking costs are a part of rent bills, and the high upfront cost of a car can become a sunk cost. Rechtman described both personal vehicle ownership and transit as a bundle of experience for users. Car ownership provides drivers with flexibility that they may not have with transit and making the transit experience safer, more comfortable, and more accessible is key to making it an affordable choice for riders.

Pearlstein added to this, saying that while congestion pricing makes drivers pay for some of the externalities of driving, it may feel like an attack on their lifestyle. He emphasized the importance of public education on the importance of transit, not only as an affordable choice but also as the sole option for many lower income populations to have mobility. He also emphasized the importance of developing multi-class coalitions and education around the quality-of-life improvements provided by strong transit options and service.

Future of Federal Funding for Transportation Affordability

For transit agencies, capital funding that enables service expansion and improvements is primarily funded through federal transportation dollars. The panelists highlighted wins from the last surface funding bill (the Infrastructure Investment Jobs Act) and emphasized the importance of continued funding certainty for transit agencies as the next reauthorization moves through Congress.

Rechtman raised concerns about the lack of advanced appropriations, especially for transit, in the short-term extension of the IIJA and that the draft reauthorization bill moved some transit funding out of advanced appropriations. Advanced appropriations provide transit agencies with funding certainty to ensure long-term financial stability and a shift away from advanced appropriations for transit will add to an existing environment of uncertainty (such as high construction costs, changing ridership, tariffs, fiscal cliffs, and inflation) for transit agencies. Guzzetti agreed, saying the value of money depends on certainty.

Guzzetti said the IIJA put transit in a good place with record capital programs in New York and Los Angeles, a robust BRT pipeline, and numerous projects completed or underway including in Phoenix, Seattle, and Metro North.

Pearlstein said the IIJA should be viewed as the floor for transit future transit funding. Both Rechtman and Pearlstein spoke in support of the House writing a new version of a surface reauthorization bill that prioritizes stable funding for transit and creates an enabling environment to support ridership with potential new leadership in the House.

While Guzzetti said improvements are needed to BUILD America 250 (the current version of surface transportation reauthorization out of the House T&I Committee), he emphasized that there are positive elements of the bill including advanced acquisition of property for transit agencies and procurement reforms for technology.

The panelists also drew connections between transit affordability and bipartisan efforts towards housing and permitting reform. Rechtman highlighted the importance of environmental permitting streamlining for transit projects to bring down costs for and expedite delivery of new. She also emphasized the value of enhancing transit access through transit-oriented development.

Conclusion

Access to transit can drastically reduce household transportation options. Ensuring access to transit through accessible design and land use decisions expands who can utilize transit and making transit safe and reliable ensures that it is a choice that more riders are willing to make. Certain and sustained federal funding can help transit agencies to address their own cost challenges and to better prepare and adapt to a changing transit usage landscape.

Next week, on October 29^th from 12 – 1 pm EST the Transportation Affordability Series will continue with a webinar on automotive affordability, exploring the implications of rising fueling and personal vehicle costs on drivers and on the US electric and non-electric vehicle industry.