Amendments to the Fair Fares NYC Program

Online comments: 8

• Parents to Improve School Transportation

  We are family advocates for school bus riders with and without disabilities.
  Under the current NYCPS regulations, being assigned to a yellow bus route precludes a student from receiving the twelve month OMNY benefit. Thus for instance, if a family of two adults and two yellow bus riders, who each lack Fair or Reduced Fare status, needs to go anywhere after school, on weekends, or when schools are closed, each and every round trip excursion is $24.
  Further, many students who did receive OMNY cards from their school in Fall 2025 had no transit subsidy from August 31, 2026 when those cards expired, to at least September 10 when classes resumed. This impacted traditional back to school activities such as haircuts, shopping for supplies, and attending orientation events.
  Increasing access to Fair Fares would partially address these hardships, while our organizations continue to fight for transit equity for all students. PIST supports the proposed change.

  Comment added September 26, 2026 9:27am

• Anonymous

  To: New York City Human Resources Administration
  Re: Proposed Amendments to Chapter 12 of Title 68 of the Rules of the City of New York Regarding the Fair Fares NYC Program, Reference Number HRA-47
  I am writing in strong support of the proposed amendments to the Fair Fares NYC program. As a City College of New York student interested in public service, public space, and environmental justice, I understand how transportation access affects whether New Yorkers can fully participate in the city. For students and working New Yorkers, public transportation is not simply a way to travel. It is what makes access to education, employment, healthcare, food, and other opportunities possible.
  HRA proposes two important changes: increasing Fair Fares income eligibility from 150 percent to 200 percent of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL), and expanding flexibility around re-enrollment. Specifically, proposed 68 RCNY 12-03(a)(3)(C) would raise the income limit to 200 percent FPL, while proposed 12-04(d) would allow participants who enrolled while receiving public assistance to remain enrolled without re-enrolling as long as they continue receiving public assistance and meet the applicable requirements. (Proposed Rule, pp. 3–4).
  I respectfully recommend that HRA: (1) adopt the 200 percent FPL eligibility expansion; (2) adopt the proposed exemption from re-enrollment for continuing public assistance recipients; and (3) continue simplifying enrollment and renewal procedures for all eligible New Yorkers.
  The proposed expansion recognizes that being above the federal poverty level does not necessarily mean transportation is affordable. HRA itself states that Fair Fares helps low-income New Yorkers manage transportation costs and improves access to jobs, education, healthcare, food, parks, and recreation. (Proposed Rule, p. 3).
  This is especially important in New York City, where residents depend heavily on public transportation to reach work, school, medical appointments, and essential services. The New York City Council estimates that expanding Fair Fares eligibility to 200 percent FPL would make approximately 340,000 additional New Yorkers eligible for the program. (New York City Council, 2026). This expansion would help address transportation costs for people who may not live below the poverty line but still face significant financial pressure from the cost of getting around the city.
  I also strongly support the proposed change to re-enrollment. HRA explains that it already has information necessary to verify continued eligibility for people receiving public assistance. Eliminating a separate re-enrollment requirement therefore reduces an unnecessary administrative burden for both participants and the agency. (Proposed Rule, p. 3).
  This principle should extend to the broader program. A transportation benefit is only effective when eligible residents can access and maintain it. Students, workers, and families may already be balancing employment, school, caregiving, and other responsibilities. Avoiding unnecessary paperwork can help ensure that people do not lose transportation assistance simply because of an administrative barrier.
  The proposed rule therefore represents more than an adjustment to an eligibility number. It is an opportunity to make transportation more accessible and reduce a barrier to participation in New York City’s economic, educational, and civic life. HRA’s stated purpose supports this goal by recognizing that improved transportation access can reduce income disparities and improve quality of life for low-income New Yorkers. (Proposed Rule, p. 3).
  I respectfully urge HRA to adopt the proposed amendments to Fair Fares. Specifically, HRA should (1) increase eligibility from 150 percent to 200 percent FPL, (2) eliminate re-enrollment requirements for eligible participants who continue receiving public assistance, and (3) continue reducing unnecessary administrative barriers throughout the program.
  Fair Fares is ultimately about more than the price of a subway or bus ride. Affordable transportation determines whether New Yorkers can reach education, employment, healthcare, food, and other opportunities throughout the city. Expanding eligibility and making continued participation easier would make New York City more accessible to the people who rely on public transportation every day.

  Thank you,

  Sources:
  New York City Human Resources Administration. Notice of Public Hearing and Opportunity to Comment on Proposed Amendments to Chapter 12 of Title 68 of the Rules of the City of New York Regarding the Fair Fares NYC Program, 2026.

  New York City Council. “Council Members Call for Expansion of Fair Fares to 200% of the Federal Poverty Level,” 2026.

  Comment attachment
  Public_Comment_Fair_Fares_Amendments_Arnab_Gomes.pdf

  Comment added October 6, 2026 8:23am

• Anonymous

  To New York Human Resources Administration Commissioner Erin Dalton,

  I am writing to express my support for the proposed amendment to the Fair Fares program.

  I’m a City College student who has to pay my own way through college and a former applicant to the Fair Fares program, so I’m glad that the administration is trending in the direction of alleviating some of the barriers through raising the income cap.

  I think students are likely to benefit from these changes, since at my school for instance, over 99% of students are commuters, over 30% living below the poverty line, and many more living within the 200% threshold. I think this amendment would make a real material difference in the lives of many of my classmates. The savings from transportation costs would allow families to allocate more money towards groceries—which is of particular importance since about 25% of CUNY students are food insecure.

  For these reasons, I’m strongly in favor of the proposed amendment to the Fair fares program.

  Thank you,

  Comment attachment
  Fellowship-Public-Comment.docx

  Comment added October 6, 2026 11:12pm

• Michael O'Connor

  Dear Administrator Scott French:
  Re: Proposed Amendments to the Fair Fares NYC Program, Reference Number HRA-47

  I am commenting to show my support for the proposed rule by the NYC HRA regarding changes to the Fair Fares NYC Program. Like my colleague who also submitted his public comment for this rule, I am also a student of the City College of New York and fellow for the Colin Powell Fellowship for Leadership and Public Service at CCNY.

  One of the critical themes of this rule, which mirrors what my colleagues and I learn in the Colin Powell Fellowship, is the concept of equity. The document for this rule illustrates two plans to better foster equity, but my argument is further branching out and exploring other ways to also increase equity in this topic. I do provide an example of that at a later point in my public comment. Amending the federal poverty level eligibility standard from 150 to 200% for this program is one way of enforcing equity in NYC (NYC HRA, 2026, p. 3). People who fall just above the threshold still cannot afford the MTA fare, especially when cost of living and inflation consistently rise, and also when political events affect the everyday citizen economically. I fully agree that adjusting eligibility thresholds provides equity so that more residents could get access to the same resources. The same idea applies to the other component of the rule, which would allow certain Fair Fares participants who enrolled while receiving qualifying public assistance to remain enrolled without separately re-enrolling, as long as they continue to receive qualifying public assistance and meet the applicable eligibility requirements (NYC HRA, 2026, pp. 3-4). A NYC lifestyle is a very fast-paced one. Many NYC residents have to keep up with documentation for various programs, health-related appointments, work-related stuff, personal affairs, etc. The people of NYC should not be penalized for a technicality or something logistical when our system has access to that same information already. Since the idea is equity, simplifying this process would grant more access and prevent false breaches of coverage.

  Expanding on the concept of equity and modifying processes to promote equity and access, I would like to share a personal experience that I had with the NYC MTA system. One day, I believe it was around the time when the metro card retired, I had to transfer from a regular MTA bus to one of the select buses. I do remember tapping the screen as my transfer. At one of the bus stops along the route there were MTA fare officers. I presented my credit card for them to check with their machine, as they were checking proof of fare payment, but for some reason their machine said that I did not pay. Now, I do recall tapping the OMNY screen in the select bus as my transfer. Although they issued me a ticket, I did not have to pay a fine because I haven’t received a ticket related to this agency within a three year span (fine waived); this is per MTA fare policy the agents told me that day. At the time, I didn’t try to raise the issue I had with the system and a possibility of an error because at the end of the day I did not owe anything, and also I had a memory of complaining about the Bx29 bus years ago and having to wait a really long time for a response. When I experienced this initially with the select bus OMNY screen, I did think of another logical possibility that maybe the issue could be related to delayed transaction processing for some credit cards. I am not 100% certain of the exact cause of the technological phenomenon that day, but just as delays and interruptions (when the information needed for eligibility is still true) with re-enrollment paperwork should not result in creating inequity for many New Yorkers who rely on this program, so too should the possibility of delayed digital transaction processing not harm New Yorkers with the possibility of attaining a false ticket. These two lenses share similarity as they relate to increasing equitable access to essential resources for New Yorkers, such as public transportation via the MTA.

  Since my experience with that, I have personally been petrified to even board a select bus. I simply did not trust the OMNY tap system, worrying about the possibility of it malfunctioning again the way I experienced it. I would always seek a different MTA route to avoid the select bus, even if it would take me longer to get from Point A to Point B. New Yorkers should not have to fear the select bus. Students and everyday workers should not have to fear the select bus. Since the retirement of the metro card, why hasn’t the outdoor Select Bus machines yet been modified?

  My recommendation is to install OMNY tap screens on the outdoor select bus machines (at the bus stops) that are able to generate paper ticket receipts as proof of payment. This change would remove the fear and the barrier towards the select bus, particularly for New Yorkers like me, and would create more equity similar to both components of this HRA potential rule.

  The New York City Comptroller’s Office released an article on April 10, 2025 titled “Behind Schedule: How New York City’s Bus System Slow Rolls Riders.” Towards the end of the section on “Fare Collection and Evasion,” it was disclosed that the handheld fare verification devices often experience technical failures (New York City Comptroller’s Office, 2025). This evidence supports my recommendation to additionally explore other ways to instill equity for the public of NYC by installing OMNY tap screens on the original outdoor select bus machines that are also able to generate paper ticket receipts as proof of payment for the select buses. Although I may never know the exact cause of what occurred during my personal experience, the Comptroller’s findings demonstrate that technical failures involving fare-verification devices have been documented. These documented technical failures demonstrate why additional safeguards for riders should be considered. Updating outdoor Select Bus machines to accept OMNY payments and generate paper receipts could provide riders with an additional form of proof of payment when questions about digital fare verification arise. When riders are expected to rely on digital fare verification, documented inconsistencies in detecting recent payments can create uncertainty for riders and potentially create barriers to accessing public transportation. My experience also raises the possibility that other New Yorkers may avoid Select Bus Service because of similar concerns, even when doing so requires taking a longer route. If $3.00 provides access to the fastest available route from Point A to Point B, but concerns created by a previous negative experience cause a rider to avoid that route and take a longer alternative, then equal availability does not necessarily translate into equitable access.

  In conclusion, I support HRA’s proposed changes to the Fair Fares NYC Program because expanding income eligibility and reducing unnecessary re-enrollment requirements can increase equitable access to public transportation while reducing administrative burdens. However, equity should also be considered in the experiences of actually using public transportation. My experience, together with documented technical issues involving fare-verification devices, demonstrates why additional safeguards should be explored. Providing riders with the option to receive paper proof of payment through updated outdoor Select Bus Service machines could be another step toward making public transportation more accessible and equitable for New Yorkers.

  Thank You,
  Michael O’Connor

  References
  New York City Human Resources Administration. (2026). Notice of Public
  Hearing and Opportunity to Comment on Proposed Amendments to
  Chapter 12 of Title 68 of the Rules of the City of New York Regarding
  the Fair Fares NYC Program.
  https://rules.cityofnewyork.us/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/HRA-
  Proposed-Amendment-of-Rules-Relating-to-Fair-Fares-With-
  Certifications-Final.pdf
  Office of the New York City Comptroller. (2025, April 10). Behind Schedule:
  How New York City’s bus system slow rolls riders.
  https://comptroller.nyc.gov/reports/behind-schedule-how-new-york-
  citys-bus-system-slow-rolls-riders/

  Comment added October 7, 2026 12:51am

• Anonymous

  Dear Commissioner Dalton:

  Re: Proposed Amendments to Chapter 12 of Title 68 of the Rules of the City of New York Regarding the Fair Fares NYC Program

  and I am a junior at the City College of New York’s. I am majoring in Economics as a Colin Powell Fellow. I am a first-generation college student from Queens. I have seen how the cost of getting around the city shapes New Yorkers’ access to opportunity. I submit this comment in my personal capacity to express my strong support for HRA’s proposed amendments to the Fair Fares NYC Program.

  HRA should raise the income eligibility standard from 150 percent to 200 percent of the Federal Poverty Level. Public transit is not a luxury in New York City. It is how working people get to their jobs, how students get to class, and how families are important locations. Households earning just above 150 percent of it still struggle to pay for their essentials and for transportation. For these households, a full-price fare is a recurring cost that over time will accumulate. A discount puts real money back into their budgets every month.

  As an economics student, I also see this expansion as a sound public investment. When more residents can afford to travel, they can reach better-paying jobs, stay in school, and take part in the city’s economy. The benefits extend beyond individual riders to their families and neighborhoods.

  I also support waiving the annual re-enrollment requirement for participants who enrolled while receiving Cash Assistance or SNAP. Requiring them to prove the same information again each year creates extra paperwork for both clients and staff. It also causes eligible people to lose their discount for purely administrative reasons. This change is a common-sense step toward a simpler, more efficient benefits system.

  For these reasons, I respectfully urge HRA to adopt the proposed amendments to the Fair Fares NYC Program.

  Thank you

  Comment added October 7, 2026 7:17pm

• Samir Lavingia

  Dear Commissioner Dalton:

  My name is Samir Lavingia and I am a life-long transit rider and advocate. The proposed rule will help New Yorkers meet their daily needs. The right to freedom must include the ability to get around, and this Fair Fares expansion will held the poorest New Yorkers get around the city.

  I also believe that we need to make it easier for New Yorkers to access their benefits and fully support waiving the annual re-enrollment requirement for participants who enrolled while receiving Cash Assistance or SNAP. It should be as easy as possible to get and keep benefits and this change will go a long way towards that goal.

  Thank you for your work on this issue, and I fully support the rule change.

  Comment added October 14, 2026 5:00pm

• Ryan V

  I applaud the proposed rule to expand Fair Fares eligibility to 200% of the Federal Poverty Level and waive the renewal requirement for program participants who enrolled while receiving public assistance and continue to receive public assistance. These are important and much-needed changes for expanding public transit access for those without the means to pay the full fare. However, I wanted to take this opportunity to raise two additional issues to HRA: (1) the fiscal cliff design of the current eligibility threshold and (2) the administrative burden of renewing eligibility annually. To help mitigate the effects of both of these issues, I urge HRA to go further in expanding the eligibility requirements for Fair Fares by lengthening the renewal period to once every two years. Peer cities such as Portland, San Francisco, and Seattle already employ two-year renewal windows for their transit affordability programs. New York City has long been a leader in innovative and inclusive policies and we should strive to incorporate the best practices of peer cities when it comes to transit affordability.

  While many individuals and organizations have pointed towards the need for expanding the eligibility threshold, less attention has been paid to the other underlying problem with the design of the threshold itself. In its current form, the eligibility threshold represents a fiscal cliff: those making even one dollar above the threshold would currently be ineligible for Fair Fares. This means that from one year to the next, an individual enrolled in Fair Fares may be punished for minimally improving their circumstances, even if their income gains are actually less than the value they would gain from Fair Fares. As an illustrative example, consider a scenario in which a Fair Fares enrollee pays the fare 10 times a week for 50 weeks in a year. Under the current fare of $3 per ride, Fair Fares would cover $750 per year in their transit expenses. As a result, the enrollee in this example would need to have earnings $750 above the eligibility threshold in order for their transit expenses to be cost-neutral without Fair Fares. We should not be designing our policies in a way that punishes people for minimally improving their circumstances.

  Additionally, enrollees who are not receiving other forms of assistance will still need to re-apply for Fair Fares annually. This represents an administrative burden for applicants who must provide proof of their eligibility each year as well as for HRA personnel that must re-verify this eligibility. It is unlikely that those who are eligible for Fair Fares in one year will be ineligible in the next: yearly wage growth for those in low- and middle- wage industries remains less than 1 percent according to the New School’s Center for New York City Affairs.

  As a result, to mitigate both the fiscal cliff effects of Fair Fairs as well as its administrative burdens, I urge HRA to consider shifting the renewal period to once every two years rather than annually. This will provide a meaningful buffer for those that have minimally improved their circumstances while simultaneously reducing the administrative costs of the program for both enrollees and HRA. Indeed, peer cities such as Portland, San Francisco, and Seattle already employ two-year renewal windows for their transit affordability programs; New York City would do well to follow their lead.

  Comment added October 18, 2026 9:29pm

• Lloyd Feng

  My name is Lloyd Feng, and I am the Associate State Director of Advocacy for AARP New York. I am testifying on behalf of our 750,000 members in New York City and the millions of older adults who call the five boroughs home.

  AARP New York strongly supports the proposed rule to expand Fair Fares eligibility from 150 percent to 200 percent of the federal poverty level and reduce unnecessary barriers to maintaining benefits.

  For older New Yorkers, affordable public transportation is essential to maintaining independence, accessing health care, and staying connected to their communities.

  Yet for too many older adults, even the cost of a subway or bus ride can be a financial burden.

  According to the Center for an Urban Future, the number of New Yorkers age 65 and older grew by 34 percent over the last decade, while the number of older adults living below the poverty line increased by nearly 50 percent.

  Many older adults live on fixed incomes and struggle to keep up with rising costs for housing, groceries, utilities, and health care. Every dollar counts, and transportation should not be another expense that forces them to make difficult choices.

  By expanding eligibility, more low-income New Yorkers will be able to access half-price subway, bus, and eligible Access-A-Ride trips, helping them get to medical appointments, purchase groceries, and remain active in their communities.

  We also support eliminating the re-enrollment requirement for Fair Fares participants who first enrolled while receiving Cash Assistance or SNAP and continue to receive public assistance, provided they continue to meet the program requirements. This would reduce unnecessary paperwork for people whose eligibility information the city already has. This is especially important for older adults who may face challenges navigating complicated paperwork or online systems.

  We also encourage the City to address an inequity in the Fair Fares program that affects older adults with disabilities who rely on Access-A-Ride service. As the Permanent Citizens Advisory Committee to the MTA has documented, Fair Fares participants who use Access-A-Ride lose their Fair Fares benefit when they turn 65, despite remaining income-eligible, and are then required to pay the full Access-A-Ride fare because the MTA’s Reduced Fare program does not apply to that service. This creates the unusual circumstance where some riders actually pay more for transportation after becoming seniors. Ensuring that income-eligible older adults can continue receiving Fair Fares discounts on Access-A-Ride beyond age 64 would promote affordability, equity, and mobility for older New Yorkers who depend on accessible transportation.

  A truly age-friendly city is one where older adults can afford to get where they need to go, remain active, and stay connected to the people and places that matter most.

  We urge HRA to adopt this proposed rule and make additional changes aimed at making public transportation more affordable and accessible for New Yorkers of all ages.

  Thank you.

  Comment added October 19, 2026 3:25pm