Staff Report #2
October 19, 2026
To All Commissioners
Re: Ridership Growth Initiatives
Recommendation
That the report be RECEIVED for information.
Background
At the June 29, 2026 meeting, the Commission received a report detailing the 2025 ridership assessment (see Staff Report #3 dated June 29, 2026). In addition to approving the recommendation to proceed with a one-year pilot partnership with Transit App to provide real-time and detour information for customers, the Commission directed administration to:
- Explore special pass or group rate programs beyond Western and Fanshawe students to include other institutional employers (such as St. Joseph, University and Victoria Hospitals; Western and Fanshawe faculty and staff, the Western Fair, and London Airport); and large private sector employers (such as Canada Life, Dr. Oetker, and 3M); and
- Investigate special excursion services for selected high-attendance events, originating at locations with ample parking such as municipal lots, the Argyle, Masonville, White Oaks and Westmount malls with direct service to the event.
When consideration is given to initiatives that may increase ridership, an important starting point is the input from current customers which is gathered each year through the Voice of the Customer surveys. Current customers of the service provide critical insight into what the expectations of riders are, and the level to which they believe the service is meeting those expectations. As a recap, the following table summarizes the feedback received in the 2025 Voice of the Customer survey as it relates to conventional transit services.
2025 Voice of the Customer Service Priorities
| Service Characteristic | Importance Ranking | Satisfaction Level | Area of Improvement |
| On-time Performance | 34% | 46% | Service Improvement |
| Frequency of Service | 11% | 59% | Service Improvement |
| Coverage | 10% | 74% | Service Improvement |
| Travel Time | 7% | 65% | Service Improvement |
| Real time Timeliness Info | 7% | 49% | Customer Experience |
| Information re: Planned Service Changes | 7% | 62% | Customer Experience |
| Bus Stop Locations | 5% | 74% | Service Improvement |
Of interest, the top seven priorities as identified by LTC customers all directly relate to the customer experience while utilizing the service. As such, it is a safe assumption that the measures implemented to retain current ridership and grow ridership should focus on those priorities.
As discussed in the 2025 Ridership Assessment Report, service improvements and customer experience enhancements, coupled with affordability are key to increasing public transit ridership. The ridership decline in 2025 provided relief to a system that was experiencing significant crowding and schedule adherence issues which could not be adequately addressed within approved budget allocations. The reduced pressure on numerous routes resulting from the ridership decline provided for a more stable system as the starting point for the 2027 service plan and mitigated the need to redirect resources to address issues that had not been prioritized in the Five Year Service Plan. Continuing to address existing customer concerns and requests going forward will be critical to ensure the system is functioning at a level that is providing the existing customer base with a viable and reliable transit service.
The remainder of this report provides commentary on the two specific initiatives as directed by the Commission as well as other considerations that will improve the overall customer experience, which is a fundamental requirement of a transit system that grows and retains ridership.
Special Pass or Group Rates
Administration has held numerous discussions with employers regarding special programs for their employees. In the majority of cases, what is being sought is a discounted pass rate offered by LTC to employees who already take the bus, with no commitment that any increase in ridership will result from the program.
The option of employers contributing to the cost of a transit pass on behalf of employees results in CRA implications as this is considered a taxable benefit, with the amount of subsidy offered by the employer being subject to statutory deductions (income tax and CPP), and be included on the employee’s T4 as a taxable benefit which can ultimately result in the employee’s take home pay being lower. It also adds burden to employer payroll processing as this would have to be closely tracked for each employee and deductions taken accordingly, noting many transit riders opt out of a monthly pass during months where they have planned vacation, so it is not a consistent monthly transaction.
Many employers are seeking to implement a program similar to how they believe the tuition pass programs work, however every group that Administration has met with are not willing to make the program universal; they are just looking for LTC to offer a discounted pass to those employees that already ride the bus. Universal programs like the tuition pass program require that an entire group be required to participate, noting those that don’t make use of the service cross-subsidize those who use it frequently. These programs are designed, and pricing is established based on the criteria that the share of the ridership generated by the group is consistent with the share of revenue generated from the group. Applying this criteria to a group of participants who are all current transit riders would not result in any cross-subsidization and as such, no discount would apply.
The launch of the High School Pass Pilot program later this fall will also introduce an alternative fare concept based on the agreement in place between LTC and the City of London. In this arrangement, the City will be billed based on usage, with a monthly cap of the cost of a monthly pass. This pilot program will provide valuable insight into arrangements of this nature, and if it is deemed successful, may be another option that can be offered to other groups.
Administration continues to hold discussions with employers who express interest in programs for their employees with the understanding that arrangements of this nature are not something that LTC is going to underwrite the cost of. As LTC looks to implement additional fare payment options going forward, all options under consideration will be screened to ensure they are capable of handling new and creative fare payment programs.
Special Excursion Services
London Transit has worked with various partners over the past number of years to coordinate access to events which include transit access to/from the event. Most recent partnerships include Western Fair which allowed anyone with a pre-purchased ticket to attend the fair to ride transit to and from the event free upon showing their fair ticket to the Operator. Similar arrangements have been made with Western University for congregation ceremonies in the downtown core and the London Knights for their Go-Green games, where a ticket to the game provides access to transit. In arrangements such as these, the partnership between the event coordinator and LTC typically sees the parties split the cost of the lost revenue. Arrangements such as this work well from a rider perspective as they ensure that riders from across the city with access to transit services can participate in the program.
Arrangements for a park and ride program for large events in the core requires partnerships with the owner of the parking facility and could be extended to include the event coordinator should they wish to be included as part of the program. Given an arrangement of this nature requires access to available parking spaces, these initiatives would be limited to owners of large parking facilities such as area shopping malls and private sector employers as identified in the Commission direction. The issue associated with a model of this nature is that the level of service provided to the select location plays a significant role. The three private employers included in the Commission direction (London airport, Dr. Oetker or 3M), are not currently served by nearby transit on weekends, and as such would not be viable options for arrangements of this nature.
To date, Administration has communicated with three area malls, one of which expressed no interest given ongoing challenges with parking availability, and two are seeking some form of compensation for patrons utilizing their parking lot while they utilize transit. Administration is continuing to work on setting up discussions with remaining potential partners; however it is anticipated that any party willing to participate in a partnership of this nature will be seeking some form of compensation.
The only way an arrangement such as this could be undertaken in a way that is cost neutral to London Transit would be to charge anyone wishing to leave their vehicle in a designated area a fee on top of the transit fare. The rate charged for parking would need to cover both the costs borne by LTC to utilize the space, as well as the cost of a resource to manage the parking lot and ensure anyone utilizing it has paid a fee.
Additional Commission direction is required with respect to how they envision initiatives of this nature to be funded noting there is no capacity in the approved 2027 operating budget for LTC to underwrite costs of this nature. Subsequent to receipt of this confirmation and any further direction, Administration will complete the assessment and report back to the Commission.
Construction Hours
As discussed in monthly Construction Update reports, the nature and extent of construction projects over the past number of years has significantly impacted transit services and the ability to maintain schedule adherence. In a best-case scenario, schedules would be altered to add additional travel time to affected routes during periods of construction which would result in improved schedule adherence; unfortunately, this approach requires service hours to be allocated to cover these required adjustments during periods of construction.
An approach that is utilized in other jurisdictions is to include the operating costs associated with the required incremental service hours in each construction project that is anticipated to have a significant impact on transit. This provides for a source of funding for the incremental hours which fluctuates to remain in step with the number and nature of construction projects scheduled for a given year, noting that in years where transit impacts related to construction are not anticipated, there would be no additional hours or budget required.
Administration believes this approach would provide the operating budget to adjust service during construction periods which in turn would provide for an enhanced customer experience given scheduled adherence would be greatly improved. As set out in the table earlier in this report, on-time reliability continues to be the top priority for transit riders and improvements in same will not only maintain existing ridership but also make the system more attractive to new riders.
Budget allocations
During the last multi-year budget, annual growth hours to address ongoing concerns and requests with the existing transit network were included in the base budget ask and requests for funding for service to new, unserved areas of the City were submitted through the Assessment Growth Business Case process.
Going forward, it will be imperative to continue to utilize this approach as the nature of the improvements made each year to the existing network do not meet the established guidelines and these are required in order to ensure that the current network continues to meet the expectations of riders.
Looking Forward
With respect to the 2028-2031 multi-year budget, Administration will reassess operating and capital budgets to ensure that appropriate request for additional service hours and related bus requirements, as well as other programs that will enhance the customer experience are included in the draft budgets presented to the Commission for approval. These improvements will be targeted at continuing to meet the demands of existing riders as well as attracting new riders.
Recommended by:
Katie Burns, Director of Planning
David Butler, Director of Operations – Conventional
Mike Gregor, Director of Finance
Concurred in by:
Kelly S. Paleczny, General Manager