City committee hears ridership rebound and user complaints over paratransit scheduling after software change

Taylor, transit staff for the City of Norman, told the City Council Community Planning and Transportation Committee on April 25 that fixed-route ridership rebounded strongly in March and that staff expects updated paratransit numbers next month after a new scheduling software is fine-tuned.

The update came as paratransit users brought detailed complaints about customer-service breakdowns, long on‑vehicle times and safety problems since Embark implemented the new scheduling system two months earlier. Chris Nanny, a paratransit user who said he chaired the CART advisory committee for 10 years, told the committee the new software has “wreaked havoc for us,” listing missed messages, rides dropped or delayed, and drivers under stress.

The memo and ridership reports attached to tonight's meeting show fixed‑route trips in March totaled 43,178, compared with 31,961 in March 2024. Taylor said weekday fixed‑route productivity rose to about 21 passenger trips per service hour, roughly a 15% increase over last March. Norman on Demand reported “just over 3,800” rides in March versus about 2,662 the prior March, a roughly 30% increase.

Why it matters: committee members and staff framed the ridership gains as positive but cautioned that service quality for paratransit customers — who depend on demand‑response service for medical appointments and work — showed operational problems that may violate federal expectations for the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) paratransit service and could require corrective steps.

Users described sustained problems since Embark’s new paratransit scheduling software rolled out in late February and March. “There’s all kinds of scheduling problems, hold times on the phone, multiple phone calls, calls not returned, missed messages, missed rides, pickups way outside of our pickup window,” Chris Nanny said. He and other users reported being on vehicles for up to an hour or more and said the system was inserting additional pickups mid‑route, prolonging trips.

Taylor said March was the first month the new software was implemented for Embark Plus and that staff expects revised paratransit figures next month after the vendor fine‑tunes the software. On the committee’s performance metrics, staff noted Norman required paratransit capacity denials were 0.85% year‑to‑date against a 0% target; Taylor said the federal rule requires jurisdictions to provide required trips and that 1% or less is “great,” though 0 remains the target.

On Norman on Demand funding, Taylor outlined a set of budget scenarios staff has analyzed: a 10‑month contract with Via to bridge the coming fiscal year could save about $95,000; an identified $48,000 duplicate charge was corrected; the University of Oklahoma has offered to increase its contribution by about $6,000 (from roughly $121,000 to about $127,000) for the coming year. Taken together with other expense reductions, Taylor said transit could be “just over $80,000 in the black,” while noting the margin is narrow and dependent on sales tax and other revenue.

Council members asked staff to return with additional detail. Council member Grant asked whether the fiscal year targets (for example, 312,000 YTD fixed‑route trips vs a 400,000 target) are adjusted after the fiscal period and how shortfalls affect planning; Taylor said staff uses forecasts in the annual budget process and will present FY‑26 assumptions during that cycle. Council members also requested fare‑generation scenarios for fixed route to be brought back for discussion.

Public comment focused on paratransit operations: Nanny detailed multiple rider safety and service complaints, including drivers rushed to meet on‑time performance, riders experiencing unsecured mobility devices and riders reporting missed medical appointments or shortened appointments. Nanny urged restoring local Norman scheduling personnel, reinstating a monthly passenger liaison/advisory committee, expanding subscription rides for regular service users, and allowing more older residents to qualify for Plus service on age alone.

Staff response and next steps: staff said they are taking notes, will continue to investigate the software issues with the contractor, will return with April paratransit numbers once the vendor supplies corrected reports, and will bring further budget and fare scenarios for committee consideration. The committee did not take a formal vote on any action tonight.

Local context: staff noted Norman voluntarily provides paratransit and demand‑response service across the entire city limit (the federally required area is three‑quarters of a mile from fixed routes). Committee members emphasized the city’s responsibility to keep federally required Zone 1 trips accessible while balancing budget constraints for extra citywide coverage.

The committee meeting closed this item with staff directed to continue negotiations with the contractor on both performance and budget scenarios and to report back to the committee with updated ridership and proposed fare/budget options.