Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transit Affordability topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City Council presses HRA and MTA on low Fair Fares take‑up and backs automatic‑enrollment push
Summary
At a joint hearing of the New York City Council’s committees on general welfare and transportation, members pressed HRA and the MTA over low Fair Fares enrollment, application friction and renewal drop‑off, and debated bills that would require automatic enrollment and ease replacement‑card rules. Dozens of riders urged broader eligibility and deeper subsidies.
The New York City Council held a joint oversight hearing on the Fair Fares program on March 31, 2026, pressing the Human Resources Administration (HRA/DSS) and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority on why so many eligible New Yorkers are not enrolled and how the city can make enrollment and retention simpler.
Council members repeatedly raised the program’s enrollment gap — roughly 40% of eligible New Yorkers are enrolled — and described everyday barriers that keep people from using the benefit. "I'm very disappointed that the commissioner did not come," the Council's Speaker Menon said, criticizing the administration’s absence and pressing HRA on outreach and operational issues. Chair Crystal Hudson emphasized the hearing’s legislative agenda, including Intro 248 (automatic enrollment), Intro 825 (replacement cards), and two resolutions addressing expanded eligibility and transfer rules.
Rebecca Chu, HRA chief program officer, said the agency administers Fair Fares and has reached roughly 379,000–380,000 participants, noting that about two‑thirds of current enrollments come through FastTrack paths for existing HRA clients. She described outreach efforts — a multilingual ad campaign budgeted at about $2 million, pop‑up events, partnerships with community‑based organizations, and QR‑code impressions and clicks — but stressed that substantial legal and privacy limits constrain automatic enrollment. "Informed consent and private client privacy remain critically important components of the benefits application process," Chu said, adding that many of the data sources that would be needed for wide auto‑enrollment are governed by state or federal rules and other stewards of government data.
Council members challenged HRA on several concrete operational points. They noted that the open‑enrollment application can require many pages of identity, residency and income documentation; that the application process can take applicants off the transit network while they wait for approval; and that renewal churn is a persistent problem — HRA reported that roughly half of participants do not renew annually. HRA said approvals typically average about four days and that around 1,500 applications were pending at the time of testimony.
On replacement cards, HRA testified that it mails Omni cards and provides a free first replacement; agency staff said they can accommodate additional replacements in extenuating circumstances and reported issuing nearly 95,000 replacement cards in FY25 and about 60,000 so far in FY26. Intro 825 would require HRA to issue one free duplicate and charge $15 for subsequent replacements; HRA asked to discuss operational details and fiscal impacts.
The MTA described steps it has taken to help Fair Fares users make the transition to Omni/tap‑and‑ride and to sign up in stations and online. John McCarthy, the MTA’s chief of policy and external relations, and Chief Customer Officer Sheneifa Ria said the agency operates 24/7 self‑serve kiosks at customer centers, mobile outreach vans, station transit talks, and digital advertising across thousands of screens. MTA officials said roughly 98–99% of Fair Fares users have transitioned to Omni and that monthly activity among enrolled users averages in the mid‑50s percent.
Independent Budget Office staff warned that while expanding eligibility or making the program free for certain households would increase affordability, both steps have material fiscal implications. IBO noted that higher‑income newly eligible households tend to use transit more frequently — especially commuting trips — and that automatic enrollment or broader eligibility would therefore raise program costs relative to current levels. IBO committed to producing cost estimates to inform the council’s decisions.
Dozens of advocates, labor representatives and New Yorkers offered public comment. Common demands included automatic enrollment for people already known to city systems, deeper subsidies (including proposals for free transit for households under 150% FPL), and increasing eligibility to 200%–300% of the federal poverty level so working‑class New Yorkers are not excluded. Many speakers described the practical harms of the current eligibility cliff and application barriers: missed medical appointments, criminalization for fare evasion, and the arithmetic of choosing between food, medicine or transit.
What’s next: Council members and agency staff agreed to follow up on data requests — including a borough breakdown of eligible vs. enrolled residents, counts of replacement cards processed, and more granular measures of outreach effectiveness — as the council considers Intro 248 and Intro 825 and negotiates budget priorities.
The hearing closed without a vote; council members urged continued work with HRA, the MTA and community groups to pursue automatic enrollment, improve the applicant experience, and model fiscal impacts for any expansion of eligibility or subsidy depth.
